MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063791501 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n3p184

Religious Tolerance in Malaysia: A Comparative Study between the Different Religious Groups

2015· article· en· W2063791501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd Arip Kasmo, Abur Hamdi Usman, Mohamad Taha, Ahmad Rafizi Salleh, Jamsari Alias

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentPsychologyHinduismTest (biology)Likert scaleSocial psychologySignificant differenceSocial scienceSociologyStatisticsTheologyMathematicsLawPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports a study conducted on 2400 respondents in Malaysia on their tolerance and mutual respect to each other religion. The study is important in order to map the religious tolerance in Malaysia and the findings can be used to plan future action by related authorities. The respondents, males and females of different ethnics, from the age 18 to 45 years old were obtained randomly from all over the country. The respondents were given booklets of questionnaire containing statements provided with responses in the form of Likert type scale i.e. 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Not sure, 4. Disagree, and 5. Strongly disagree. The booklets were collected and the raw data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), to obtain the mean responses, the percentages of the responses. The mean responses were tested using the t-test to know if the difference of mean were significant or not. One data of the responses for the statements “I am prepared to do away with some of the teaching of my religion for the sake of national unity” was analyzed. The findings of the study indicate that the 61.7% of the respondents rejected the statement. On the basis of the religion of the respondents, the rejection of the statements were Muslim 72.1%, Buddhists 35.55, Hindu 33.3% and the Christian 43.2%. There were significant difference between the means response of the respondent base on the religion and the difference of mean were significant. T-test analysis shows that there were significant different between the mean response of the Muslim respondents with the other religious groups.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.551
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicAsian Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207