Iranian Journal of Sociology

Abstract The Present Study Aims to Familiarize Iranian Researchers with the Process Tracing Technique as the Most Important Method for Achieving within-Case Inference in Single-Case Research. It also Emphasizes Reconstruction, Testing, and Evaluation of the Causal Mechanisms of the Islamic Revolution of Iran. The Method of the Present Research is the Process Tracing Technique. The Findings Show that First, by Using the Process Tracing Guidelines for Explaining the Outcome, it is Possible to Redefine the Causal Mechanisms of the Islamic Revolution of Iran Based on a Systematic Definition and to Transparently Open the Black Box Between Factors (X) and Outcome (Y). Second, the Process Tracing Technique and Allow for Testing and Evaluation of each Part of the Causal Mechanisms of the Islamic Revolution of Iran Determines the Rate of Updating the Researcher's Degree of Confidence in Their Validity.

Abstract Validity issues in phenomenological research are what this article investigates. Phenomenology is an attempt to enrich the world as it is experienced, and for its method -a mere emphasis on pure "description"- an alternative has been found, "to interpret" the experience. Descriptive phenomenology ensures that descriptions reflect the phenomenon as it was first experienced by the participants. Interpretive phenomenology, however, wants to determine the meanings of the phenomenon just as they appear in the participant's mind. In descriptive phenomenology, validity issues have been investigated in different ways: (1) a fundamental description of the phenomenon must be able to correctly capture the essence that has been intuited; (2) experts can be used to judge phenomenological analysis; (3) return to participants. In interpretative phenomenology, what is important is whether the phenomenological interpretations of meaning structures are valid, and the themes and the insights inferenced from the descriptions are appropriate and novel?