MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591281942 · doi:10.1111/cars.12046

Assessing Variation in Tolerance in 23 Muslim‐Majority and Western Countries

2014· article· en· W1591281942 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamWorld Values SurveyDevelopment economicsEthnic groupInequalityDemocracyVariation (astronomy)Political scienceMultilevel modelDeveloping countryPoliticsEconomic inequalityDemographic economicsEuropean Social SurveySurvey data collectionSociologyEconomic growthEconomicsGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholars disagree over whether Islam hinders the development of liberal democracy in Muslim‐majority countries. We contribute to this debate by assessing the influence of Islam at the individual and national levels on ethnic, racial, and religious tolerance in 23 countries. Our analyses are based on a set of multilevel models fitted to World Values Survey data and national‐level contextual information from various sources. Our findings suggest that people living in Muslim‐majority countries tend to be less tolerant than are those living in Western countries. Although a significant part of this difference is attributable to variation in level of economic development and income inequality, Muslim countries remain less tolerant even after controlling for these factors. On the other hand, controlling for other individual‐level factors, nonpracticing Muslims in Western countries are more tolerant than are all others in both Muslim‐majority and Western countries. This finding challenges common claims about the effects of Islam as a religion on tolerance, suggesting that it is Islamic political regimes—not Islam itself—that pose problems for social tolerance. Les chercheurs ont des opinions divergentes à savoir si l'islam freine le développement d'une démocratie libérale dans les pays à majorité musulmane. Nous contribuons à ce débat en évaluant l'influence de l'islam aux niveaux individuel et national sur la tolérance ethnique, raciale et religieuse dans 23 pays. Nos analyses sont basées sur un ensemble de modèles à plusieurs niveaux ajustés en fonction des données du World Values Survey et de l'information contextuelle au niveau national ayant été obtenue auprès de diverses sources. Nos constatations suggèrent que les personnes vivant dans des pays à majorité musulmane ont tendance à être moins tolérantes que celles vivant dans les pays occidentaux. Bien qu'une grande partie de cette différence soit attribuable à la variation du niveau de développement économique et à l'inégalité de revenu, les pays musulmans demeurent moins tolérants, même après le contrôle de ces facteurs. En revanche, en contrôlant d'autres facteurs au niveau individuel, les musulmans non pratiquants des pays occidentaux sont plus tolérants que tous les autres des pays à majorité musulmane et des pays occidentaux. Cette constatation s'élève contre les allégations communes au sujet des effets de l'islam comme religion sur la tolérance, suggérant que ce sont les régimes politiques islamiques, et non pas l'islam en soi, qui posent des problèmes en ce qui a trait à la tolérance sociale.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it