MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154786771 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n14p215

Muslim Women’s Memoirs: Disclosing Violence or Reproducing Islamophobia?

2014· article· en· W2154786771 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Esmaeil Zeiny Jelodar, Noraini Md. Yusof, Ruzy Suliza Hashim

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamophobiaMemoirOppressionIslamGender studiesNarrativeSociologyState (computer science)PoliticsPolitical scienceLawHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an upshot of 9/11, the literary market in the West saw a proliferation in writings by and about Muslim women. Many of these works are memoirs which focus on Islam, a patriarchal society, and the state’s oppression on women. These Muslim women memoirists take the western readers into a journey of unseen and unheard events of their private lives which is apparently of great interest for the westerners. Some of these memoirs, which reveal the atrocities and hardships of living in a Muslim society under oppressive Islamic regimes, are fraught with stereotypes and generalizations. Utilizing Gillian Whitlock’s theory of ‘soft weapons’ and studying the concept of Islam in Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis: The Story of a Childhood (2003), we argue that some of these Muslim life narratives are manipulated to meet political demands of the West through creating Islamophobia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.025
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207