Intermarried Couples: Transnationalism, and Racialized Experiences in Denmark and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite an increase in interracial or mixed marriages (intermarriages) globally, the experiences of couples in such marriages are generally under-researched, particularly within psychology. Using a cultural psychological framework and qualitative methods, this paper studies the psychosocial experiences of couples in intermarriages. It focuses on four South Asians in ethnically intermarriages in two settings: two Indian-origin men married to native Danish women in Denmark, and two Indian-origin women married to Euro-American men in Canada. Data from in-depth interviews were subjected to a thematic analysis yielding an array of themes, of which this paper presents the two most dominant themes across the two contexts: ‘transnationalism’ and ‘racialized experiences in social situations’. The results demonstrate that the participants lived transnational lives to varying degrees depending on their gender, socio-economic status and age, which in turn intersected with variables such as the nature of the transnational relationships they were attempting to sustain, and their own motivations and agency in maintaining these ties. While in some cases participants maintained a high level of contact with India through visits and digital technology, others kept up limited ongoing contact with the country of origin. Furthermore, varying racialized experiences emerged from the narratives, with differences in how these experiences were interpreted. While some participants recognized them as racial discrimination, others chose to rationalize these experiences in various ways. After offering an account of these results, the paper reflects briefly on the implications of these findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".