A Quranic interpretation of the influence of objective evidence on behavior; Objectivity Acceptance as a Descriptive Model of Human Behavior

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 (Corresponding Author), Assistant professor of management of Research Institute of Hawzah and University,

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic University, Research Institute of Hawzah and University,

Abstract

The lack of "Descriptive Models of Human Behavior" (DMHB) is one the oldest anomalies in behavioral sciences, especially Organizational Behavior Management. On one side, various sciences demand this kind of behavior model; on the other side, modeling the behavior is as problematic as understanding human internal situations and environmental complexity. DMHBs are significant because they have multi-disciplinary usage (economics, ergonomics, social psychology, management, etc.), and DMHBs are the necessary foundations for developing prescriptive techniques in controlling and directing human behavior. In this paper, we developed a new model of human behaviors. Objectivity acceptance explains the causes of some kinds of human decisions and behaviors. This model recognized and explained through deep studies of Quran and the scientific literature of DMHB. In this research, Quran is the source of ideas to find DMHB; moreover the guide of explaining DMHB. This paper tried to explain the model in a scientific standard structure as the "Ideal Type of DMHB". In addition, its relation to other renowned theories was discussed. The basic methodology and all the steps of this research in preparing, organizing text, studying, documentation, coding, abstraction, and conclusions were based on qualitative content analysis. Therefore, the "validity" and "trustworthiness" of research are obtained by three criteria "credibility", "dependability", and "transferability".

Keywords

References

  1. قرآن کریم

    1. شومیکر، پاملا. جی. (1387)، نظریه‌‌سازی در علوم اجتماعی، مترجم: م. عبداللهی، تهران: انتشارات جامعه شناسان.
    2. طباطبایى‏، سیدمحمدحسین (1417ق)، المیزان فى تفسیرالقرآن‏، قم‏: دفتر انتشارات اسلامى جامعۀ مدرسین حوزۀ علمیه قم‏.
    3. طباطبایى، سیدمحمدحسین (1374ش)، ترجمه تفسیرالمیزان‏‏، مترجم: س. موسوى‌ همدانى‏، قم‏: دفتر انتشارات اسلامى جامعۀ مدرسین حوزه حوزۀ علمیه قم‏.
    4. ‌عبدالهی‌نیسیانی، علی (1387)، «روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی تطبیق‌یافته به‌‌ منظور تحقیق در متن قرآن کریم»، آموزه‌های قرآنی، دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی، ش28.
    5. لسانی‌فشارکی، محمدعلی و حسین مرادی‌زنجانی (1391)، روش تحقیق موضوعی در قرآن کریم، قم: بوستان کتاب.
    6. مصطفوی، حسن (1430ق)، التحقیق فى کلمات ‌القرآن‌الکریم‏ (نسخه 4)، لبنان−بیروت: دارالکتب العلمیة−مرکز نشر آثار علامه‌مصطفوی‏.
    7. نیومن، لاورنس (1389)، شیوه‎های پژوهش اجتماعی، رویکردهای کمّی و کیفی، مترجم: ح. دانایی‌فرد و س. ح. کاظمی، تهران: نشر مهربان.
    8. Abdollahi Neisiani, A. (2010), Anti-Rartional Decision Making. AJBM (African Journal Of Business Manangement) , 4 (8) , 1652-1653.
    9. Abdollahi Neisiani, A & Rezaeian, A. (2020), Ideal type of behavioral models in management researches; a theory building approach. Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences , 3(S3), pp. 1143-1156.
    10. Baran, S. J. , & Davis, D. K. (1995), Mass communication theory; foundations, ferment, and future (4th ed. ). Wadsworth Pub. Co.
    11. Carlile, P. R. , & Christensen, C. M. (2005 , February), The Cycles of Theory Building in Management Research. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 05-057.
    12. Chandan, J. (2005), Organizational Behaviour (3rd ed. ). Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
    13. Festinger, L. (1957), A Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    14. Festinger, L. (1959), Some attitudinal consequences of forced decisions. Acta Psychologica, 15, 389-390. doi:10. 1016/s0001-6918 (59) 80203-1
    15. Festinger, L. (Ed. ). (1964), Conflict, decision, and dissonance (Vol. 3). Stanford University Press.
    16. Griffin, R. W. , & Moorhead, G. (1986), Organizational behavior. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
    17. Hersey, P. , & Blanchard, K. H. (1977), Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing Human Resources (third ed. ). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
    18. Kaplan, A. (1964), The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral sciences. San Francisco: Chandler.
    19. Nadler, D. , & Tushman, M. (1980), A model for diagnosing organizational behavior. Organizational Dynamics, 9 (2) , 35-51. doi:10. 1016/0090-2616 (80) 90039-x.
    20. Olguín, D. O. , Gloor, P. A. , & Pentland, A. (2009). Capturing Individual and Group Behavior with Wearable Sensors. AAAI Spring Symposium: Human Behavior Modeling, 68-74.
    21. Robbins, S. , & Judge, T. (2013), Organizational behavior (15th ed. ). Boston: Pearson.
    22. Severin, W. J. , & Tankard, J. W. (1997), Communication theories: Origins, Methods, and uses in the mass media (4th ed. ). New York: Longman.
    23. Tsai, C. , & McGill, A. (2011), No Pain, No Gain? How Fluency and Construal Level Affect Consumer Confidence. The Journal Of Consumer Research, 37 (5) , 807-821. doi:10. 1086/655855.
    24. Spurk, D., Abele, A., & Volmer, J. (2014), The career satisfaction scale in context: A test for measurement invariance across four occupational groups. Journal of Career Assessment, 10, 1-19.
    25. Tversky, A. , & Kahneman, D. (1974), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.Science, 185 (4157), 1124-1131. doi:10. 1126/science. 185. 4157. 1124.
    26. Zhang, Y. , & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009), Qualitative analysis of content. In B. Wildemuth (Ed.), Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science ( 308-319). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

     

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics