MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186051821 · doi:10.1080/00918369.2015.1116344

Investigating the Islamic Perspective on Homosexuality

2015· article· en· W2186051821 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

VenueJournal of Homosexuality · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomosexualityIslamPerspective (graphical)AffectionCelibacySexual orientationPsychologyMedical prescriptionMuslim communitySociologyGender studiesPsychoanalysisCriminologySocial psychologyMedicineLawPolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his 2006 article in the Journal of the Islamic Medical Association of North America (JIMA), Dr. Ahmed qualified the predominant psychiatric view on homosexuality by recourse to opinions prevalent within reparative therapy circles. Conservative Muslim thinkers, online counselors, and other professionals continue to hold opinions similar to those delineated by Dr. Ahmed in his journal article. We use his article as a focal point to critique the general opinions upheld by conservative Muslim thinkers by alluding to the harms associated with reparative therapy and by rejecting the unreasonable prescription of permanent celibacy. We critique Dr. Ahmed's association of homosexuality with mental health issues, fatal diseases, alcoholism, and illicit sexual intercourse. Investigating the Muslim tradition, we encourage conservative Muslim leaders to facilitate Muslim gays and lesbians in their legitimate human need for intimacy, affection, and companionship.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.313 · 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