The Motives and Obstacles in Iranian Women’s Participation in Political Life of the Country
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article deals with the overview of the main obstacles in the Iranian women’s participation in the country’s political life originating from the national, cultural, social and economic aspects of Iranian society. Much attention is paid to the factors that motivate both Iranian women and men to participate in politics, as well as the problems that Iranian women face while struggling for their place in the parliament. The peculiarities of the political parties’ activities, the financial aspect of the candidates allowing them to take part in election campaigns, distrust of women in Iranian society (in terms of their public role), the lack of electoral quotas for women are defined as the main factors of their non-participation in the elections. However, Iranian women’s motivation, on the one hand, and the country’s political system, on the other hand, play a significant role, because they are key internal and external factors to be taken into account. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1978, the situation with women’s rights in the country improved supported by the Government’s constitutional establishment of equal rights of men and women in political life of Iran. However, other spheres remained unchanged due to strong religious influence. Only in the 1990s the rights of Iranian women to participate in the country’s politics were addressed by domestic and foreign scholars, though their studies do not provide an in-depth analysis of the problems of Iranian women concerned about the participation in political life of the present-day Iran and their solution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".