“Choose One!”: Challenges of Inter-Ethnic Marriages in Malaysia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fact that inter-ethnic marriage has been practiced in Malaysia since pre-colonial times is well known and recorded in its history. While there is a modest rise in number of people who choose to marry spouses from different ethnic group in the country, the practice itself has been generally portrayed as a problematic and wanting especially in the Peninsular Malaysia. Popular writings and mass media play a significant role in stereotyping the phenomenon as a current modern (read: western)-influenced trend in contemporary society, as well as its potential to create tensions between the spouses due to their differences in ethnic background and culture. Based on our qualitative study conducted in 2011 on 50 respondents with first-hand experience in inter-ethnic marriages, this paper argues that sources of conflict faced by the couples are not originated from spouses themselves. Instead, they were initiated by various external sources which stem from overwhelming dominance of authority-defined social reality in the organisation of social differences according to rigid ethnic lines in the society. As a result, positive effects of inter-ethnic marriages on maintaining social cohesion in the society, as reflected from first-hand experiences of spouses and progeny of inter-ethnic marriages, are affectively eclipsed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it