Exploring the Myth of Mixed Marriages in India: Evidence from a Nation-wide Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marriages in India are essentially endogamous in nature. The influences of western education and socio-economic transformations have led to enormous change in the existing pattern of choosing one’s life partner and marriage practices in India. For the first time, this paper presents a comprehensive empirical assessment of the extent of mixed marriages by analyzing nationally representative data from the Indian Human Development Survey (IHDS, 2005). We consider mixed marriages in the following key aspects: Inter-caste marriage, Inter-religious marriage and Inter-economic group marriage (Inter-class marriage). The trend analyses reveal that the proportion of inter-caste and interreligious marriages has doubled in the last two and half decades. With the exception of interclass marriages, the absolute level of mixed marriages is still exceedingly small. Besides, there are substantial variations across the states. Regression analyses show a significant socioeconomic differential in the occurrence of mixed marriages. The study reveals that a very few women have the freedom to choose their spouse. These findings assume importance in the context of an increasing number of ‘honour killings’ in India in the recent years.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".