نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
استادیار و مشاور علمی سازمان اسناد و کتابخانه ملی ایران. تهران، ایران.
عنوان مقاله [English]
Objective: The aim of this research is the critique of the hypertext elements of 42 Juridical and legal academic theses with the subject of "transplantation of human organs". The hypertextual elements of these academic theses such as title, abstract, structure and chapters are investigated in two ways: the degree of compliance of each with the research method and their duplication.
Methodology: The research method is descriptive-analytic and with a check-list tool. Statistical population of the research were chosen through the websites of the National Library and archives, and Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology (IranDoc) regarding academic theses in the field of jurisprudence and the basics of Islamic law and University Law Sub-fields with the subject "transplantation of human organs".
Findings: The topic of "organ transplantation" in 90 percent of theses is the main issue and is the same. Nearly 40 percent of theses contain 6 elements of a structured abstract. Only 5 percent of the theses correspond to the number and content of the five chapters based on the research method. 15 percent have 5 sections and content is near to the content of the five sections, and 67.5 percent of the theses are less than or greater than 5 sections. In content, 57.5 percent of the thesis were not introduced in any section, general, and research process. In 65 percent of them, there is no reference to the background research and 50 percent are without a suggestion.
Conclusion: According to the research findings, the results are "thesis creators (including author students, supervisors and advisors and university departments) did not pay much attention to the non-duplication of the academic theses topic and there was no comprehensive control and monitoring system to prevent duplication of the topic"; "each thesis abstract has a style tailored to the author's taste, meaning that most authors did not know at all what should be included in the abstract"; "in terms of content, in more than half of the theses in no chapter, generalities and research process are introduced and therefore the creator has not specified what policy he follows in his/her research"; "most of the theses do not mention the background of the research, that is, the author has not done any research in the research done to avoid duplication of work and presentation of purely duplicate content"; and "half of theses did not offer any recommendation. In other words, the author has not been able to provide practical suggestions in the subject of his/her research according to the obtained results.