Inductive = استقرایی
Deductive = استنتاجی

So your phrase means:
راهبرد تحقیق/پژوهش استقرایی، استنتاجی

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 18 mins (2008-10-25 17:17:47 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

For details, please see these links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning
http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Retroductive_reasoning

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 33 mins (2008-10-25 17:32:52 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Dear Ebrahim,
You are right, because actually the distinction between these terms is not quite obvious, especially, for example, regarding "Retroductive and inductive". Maybe the following comparison could help:

Deduction:
allows deriving b as a consequence of a. In other words, deduction is the process of deriving the consequences of what is assumed. Given the truth of the assumptions, a valid deduction guarantees the truth of the conclusion. A deductive statement is based on accepted truths, e.g. All bachelors are unmarried men. It is true by definition and is independent of sense experience.

Induction:
allows inferring a from multiple instantiations of b when a entails b. Induction is the process of inferring probable antecedents as a result of observing multiple consequents. An inductive statement requires perception for it to be true. For example, the statement 'it is snowing outside' is invalid until one looks or goes outside to see whether it is true or not. Induction requires sense experience.

Abduction:
allows inferring a as an explanation of b. Because of this, abduction allows the precondition a to be inferred from the consequence b. Deduction and abduction thus differ in the direction in which a rule like “a entails b” is used for inference. As such abduction is formally equivalent to the logical fallacy affirming the consequent or Post hoc ergo propter hoc, because there are multiple possible explanations for b.
Unlike deduction and in some sense induction, abduction can produce results that are incorrect within its formal system. However, it can still be useful as a heuristic, especially when something is known about the likelihood of different causes for b.

(a and b in the text above are the propositions in question)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 35 mins (2008-10-25 17:34:32 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Regarding the Persian equivalents, I am almost sure, because I have seen these terms (quoting the English term) in several credible contexts.