MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414764671 · doi:10.5539/ass.v21n5p96

Bridging Horizons: Malaysian Perspectives on Opportunities and Barriers in Academic, Cultural, Sports, and Economic Cooperation with Iran

2025· article· en· W4414764671 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haliza Abdul Rahman, Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, Haslinda Abdullah, Rusli Abdullah, Habib Reza Arzani, Nor Aini Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Sanctions and International Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft powerPerceptionIdeologyBridging (networking)TourismCultural heritagePower (physics)IslamSurvey data collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines Malaysians’ perceptions of Iran across higher education, culture, sports, tourism, and economic collaboration, integrating social constructivism, soft power diplomacy, and commitment-trust theory to explore opportunities and challenges in bilateral relations. Using survey data from a diverse Malaysian sample, findings reveal strong interest in cultural engagement, educational exchange, and sports collaboration, alongside positive perceptions of Iranian products and economic potential. Awareness gaps, ideological differences, and limited visibility, however, constrain deeper engagement. Younger and urban respondents showed greater openness, indicating demographic opportunities for targeted initiatives. The study highlights the need for strategic, phased interventions, including scholarships, cultural programs, sports exchanges, tourism promotion, and trust-based economic partnerships, to foster sustainable Malaysia–Iran relations. Policy recommendations emphasize leveraging shared Islamic and cultural heritage to strengthen mutual understanding, collaboration, and long-term socio-economic ties.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicEconomic Sanctions and International RelationsFrench-language works237,207