The Perception of the Muslims in Malaysia on the Belief of Afterlife
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The belief of Afterlife is one of the fundamental of Islamic belief system. The wellbeing in this world will reflectour future in the Hereafter. Knowing the level of Muslim’s perception on the Afterlife could illustrate that theMalaysian Muslims are still upholding the Islamic teachings and traditions. This paper reports on the findings ofa study on Malaysian’s Muslims perception towards the metaphysical dimension of the Islamic belief system,specifically the Afterlife. 640 respondents, males and females (aged 18 to 55 years old) participated in the study.They were randomly selected from all over Malaysia and were given a booklet of questionnaire, containingstatements about the Islamic belief system including the belief in the Afterlife. Each statement was provided withfive choices in the form of Likert type scale ranging from 1 to 5. The booklets of questionnaire were collectedand the responses were analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) to obtain the meansresponses and also the percentages of the responses. The means differences were tested using the t-test alsoone-way ANOVA. The study discovered that Malaysian 99.4% of the respondents believed the afterlife. Only0.6% of the respondents either not sure or did not believe the afterlife.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".