MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201087824 · doi:10.1111/issj.12296

An assessment of the structural relationship between determinants and implications of caste‐based endogamy in Pakistan

2021· article· en· W3201087824 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Rizwan Safdar, Asim Nasar, Muhammad Akram, Farhan Navid Yousaf

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Social Science Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Sexual Relationships
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndogamyCasteExogamySocioeconomicsGeographyDemographic economicsDemographySociologyPopulationEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aims to examine the socio‐economic determinants and implications of caste‐based endogamy in Punjab, the largest province of Pakistan. It also measures the structural relationship between determinants and implications of endogamy. For this cross‐sectional study, 488 respondents were randomly selected from three Punjab province districts with inclusion criteria of being married within their caste. A path modelling and multigroup analysis were conducted using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS‐SEM). This study has found that social pressure, casteism, and fear of exogamy failure significantly influence mate selection in Punjab, which has socio‐economic implications. Social pressure and perceived easiness of endogamy less likely contribute towards economic implications. Similarly, casteism indicated a non‐significant influence on social implications. Overall, male and female respondents shared views on endogamy influencing determinants causing socio‐economic implications. This study concludes that caste‐based endogamy has a stronghold in the cultural patterns of Punjab, Pakistan, which restricts economic mobility, deepens the marginalisation of those from lower castes, and promotes casteism at community and institutional levels. This is one of the initial studies in Pakistani Punjab assessing the structural relationship between endogamy determinants and their social and economic implications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.400 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Social Science JournalSame topicMarriage and Sexual RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207