درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The main purpose of this study is to identify and rank the criteria for evaluating the performance of Azad University faculty members using the Analysis Network Process method. The research method is mixed. The sample size of the qualitative section was 15 managers of departments who were purposefully selected by theoretical sampling strategy. Data collection was a semi-structured interview. The data obtained from the analyzed interviews were coded using the Grounded theory. Its validity and reliability were checked and confirmed using the results of three-way consensus. Data analysis was performed in three stages of open, axial, and selective coding. In open coding, concepts and cues were extracted from the interviews. In the selective coding stage, three categories (training, research, consulting services) were compressed and considered as the main dimensions of performance evaluation, and then four sub-components were conceptualized for each dimension. A total of twelve categories were conceptualized and then the dimensions and components were ranked using super design software. The sample size was a quantitative section of 30 faculty members who were randomly selected and the tool for collecting quantitative findings was a researcher-made questionnaire. It was an Analysis Network Process. Findings showed: The factors of consulting services, research and education are in order of priority. In education, respectively, components of teaching quality, spiritual competence, psychological competence and managerial competence, in research, respectively, components of communication competence, competence of new technologies, competence of innovation and creativity, entrepreneurship and cognitive competence. Intercultural competence, foreign relations competence, and the most and least important in the group that experts can use the above dimensions and components in evaluating the performance of faculty members.

The purpose of the present research was to examine the effectiveness of meta-cognitive strategies training on the cognitive failure in patients with general anxiety disorder (GAD). This quasi-experimental design consisted of two groups, with pre-test/ posttest and the control group. Considering the experimental nature of the research and also, with regards to the drop in the number of 30 people (15 in each group), patients with generalized anxiety disorder (DSM-5) were selected according to the available criteria and were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups according to entry requirements. In both groups, the scale of Broadbent et al. Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) was carried out. Then, the experimental group underwent metacognitive strategies in 10 sessions of 90 minutes and the control group did not receive any training. At the end, the same questionnaire was administered in both groups. The results of the two groups were evaluated in two stages using relevant statistical tests. Multivariate covariance analysis showed that meta-cognitive strategies training significantly reduces cognitive failure and its subscales (distraction, memory defects and inadvertent errors) in patients with general anxiety disorder (P<0/05); there was no significant difference between meta-cognitive strategies training with the subscale of not remembering names (P>0/05). Despite the differences in the scores of cognitive failures in the group studied, it is recommended to use metacognitive strategies to reduce the symptoms of cognitive impairment in patients with generalized anxiety disorder.