Hypothesis One: That cultural outsider (French) readers are more influenced than cultural insider (New Zealander) readers by Utu<\/em>\u2019s geographically- and culturally-situated elements<\/h5>\n

My null hypothesis\u2013\u2013H_{0<\/sub>1\u2013\u2013is that cultural outsider and insider readers were similarly influenced by Utu<\/em>\u2019s geographically- and culturally-situated elements, such as political, anthropological, historical, and social depictions. I tested this in two ways: by looking at the degree of correlation between pre- and post-reading responses for each cohort, then by comparing pre- and post-reading responses at the individual reader level.<\/p>\n}

Degree of correlation between pre- and post-reading responses<\/em><\/p>\n

My research design involved non-independent observations since I measured participant responses to the same questions on two different occasions. However, the degree of correlation between these pre- and post-reading responses differed between the two cohorts; while a paired sample t-test showed that the pre- and post-reading responses to only two (S3, S20) of the twenty-seven questions were statistically significantly positively correlated for French readers, this was true of sixteen questions asked of New Zealanders. This provides evidence to reject H_{0<\/sub>1 since it shows that New Zealanders were more likely than French readers to give similar pre- and post-reading responses, indicating that reading Utu<\/em> had not changed their opinions.<\/p>\n}

Change in pre- and post-reading responses<\/em><\/p>\n

I ran Wilcoxon signed ranks test for related samples to compare responses before and after reading\u00a0Utu<\/em> for French and New Zealand respondents. Table 3 shows the number of statements for which the pre- and post-reading results showed a statistically significant difference for each cohort, as well as whether this difference was a change towards the opinion depicted by F\u00e9rey in\u00a0Utu<\/em>. Given that the pre- and post-reading opinions of French respondents was statistically significantly different for twenty statements\u2013\u2013compared to only seven for New Zealand respondents \u2013 this provides further support to reject H_{0<\/sub>1 and accept H1, that cultural outsider (French) readers were more influenced than cultural insider (New Zealand) readers by\u00a0Utu<\/em>\u2019s geographically- and culturally-situated content.<\/p>\n}

Table 3: Summary of results from Wilcoxon signed ranks tests on pre- and post-reading responses to twenty-seven statements by French and New Zealand readers<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

<\/td>\n	French<\/td>\n	New Zealand<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Statistically significant difference and mean impinged on scale\u2019s mid\u2011point<\/td>\n	1: \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018agree\u2019 \n3: \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018don\u2019t know\u2019 \n6: \u2018don\u2019t know\u2019 to \u2018agree\u2019<\/td>\n	3: \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018don\u2019t know\u2019<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Statistically significant difference but mean did not cross scale\u2019s mid-point<\/td>\n	10<\/td>\n	4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
No statistically significant difference<\/td>\n	7<\/td>\n	20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n Yet even New Zealanders were not left entirely unmoved by reading\u00a0Utu<\/em>. Their opinions about three statements changed from \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018don\u2019t know,\u2019 a change in the appropriate direction in two cases: S5 properly recognises that \u201cany M\u0101ori person may submit a claim to the Waitangi tribunal\u201d (\u201cMaking a Claim\u201d) and S7 reflects current thought about nineteenth-century M\u0101ori cannibalism (at least pre-1815, Barber 242), although scholars disagree over the reasons, from meeting spiritual (Barber 280) to physical needs (Salmond 142). However, New Zealanders were wrong to change from \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018don\u2019t know\u2019 for S4 since\u00a0kohanga reo<\/em> are M\u0101ori language preschools, not secondary schools. F\u00e9rey has his half-M\u0101ori heroine, Hana Witkaire, attend one throughout high school as a way of showing her embracing her M\u0101ori heritage; his depiction was sufficiently forceful to overcome New Zealanders\u2019 prior knowledge.<\/p>\n Table 3 also shows that F\u00e9rey\u2019s influence is not monolithic: French (and New Zealand) readers changed their opinions about some elements but not others, leading to my next hypothesis, examining which aspects are more persuasive.<\/p>\n Hypothesis Two: That cultural outsider (French) readers are differently influenced by certain aspects of New Zealand and\/or M\u0101ori culture<\/h5>\n From the results in Table 3, I can immediately reject my null hypothesis: H0<\/sub>2\u2013\u2013that cultural outsider readers are similarly influenced by all the different aspects of New Zealand and\/or M\u0101ori culture portrayed by F\u00e9rey in Utu<\/em>. The more interesting question is whether there are commonalities between the cultural aspects of Utu<\/em> that are (not) persuasive, because this might shed light on which cultural elements are (not) influential. To investigate this I looked at French responses and compared the seven statements grouped in Table 3\u2019s top row\u2013\u2013statistically significant difference and a change from \u2018disagree\u2019 to \u2018agree\u2019: S3, S4, S7, S15, S17, S23, and S16\u2013\u2013with the seven in the table\u2019s bottom row\u2013\u2013no statistically significant difference: S1, S14, S18, S19, S20, S21, and S27\u2013\u2013to try to identify factors that could account for these differences.<\/p>\n I classified each statement by whether it deals with a contemporary or historical issue; with a specifically M\u0101ori or generally New Zealand topic; whether F\u00e9rey mentions it once or several times; as well as whether it is voiced by the narrator, by a protagonist or by an antagonist. However, none of these groupings fully and completely accounts for the changes in French responses. I found only one feature that partially correlates with French responses: for all seven of the statements for which their responses showed no statistically significant difference before and after reading, New Zealand respondents also showed no statistically significant difference in their opinions, suggesting an absence, rather than source, of influence. Therefore, although I accept H2, I am unable to extrapolate from my results to predict the type of cultural information that will or will not influence cultural outsider readers\u2019 opinions.<\/p>\n Although I cannot claim an overall schema for what type of information is culturally persuasive, it is informative to look at the seven statements that swayed French readers. While for three of them\u2013\u2013S4, S15, and S17\u2013\u2013it was unlikely that French participants would possess relevant prior knowledge before reading Utu<\/em>, for the remaining four\u2013\u2013S3, S7, S23, and S26\u2013\u2013they could have \u2018guessed\u2019 that they should agree by either drawing analogies with France or from general knowledge. First, S3, in which F\u00e9rey depicts South Auckland as the banlieue<\/em>, a concept familiar to French people, meaning the low socio-economic, high crime area on a city\u2019s outskirts, but one French participants rejected before reading Utu<\/em>, perhaps believing New Zealand too quiet a country or Auckland too small a city to have such areas. The second, S7, treats nineteenth-century M\u0101ori cannibalism, depicted by Jules Verne in Les Enfants du Capitaine Grant<\/em> (1868), which F\u00e9rey claims as a formative childhood text (Angelier). The third, S23, is about M\u0101ori in prison. Given that indigenous peoples are over-represented in many countries\u2019 prison populations, French participants could have guessed the answer by association. That they did not may signal a French exception due to republican ideals of equality, which forbid the collecting and\/or reporting of statistics based on racial or ethnic origin (Schnapper 133). Finally, S26, shrunken heads. The New Zealand Government is making a concerted effort to have all k\u014diwi tangata<\/em> (ancestral remains) held by museums outside New Zealand returned to M\u0101ori care (Hole 5). In January 2012, the French government held a ceremony at Quai Branly, the ethnographic museum in Paris, to return twenty such heads (Mortaigne), which was reported in French newspapers and on television.<\/p>\n Hypothesis Three: That the perceived source of the geographically- and culturally-situated information influences reception<\/h5>\n Despite the mixed outcome of H2, I wanted to further explore one factor by testing a third null hypothesis: H0<\/sub>3\u2013\u2013that readers are equally influenced by geographically- and culturally-situated information regardless of perceived source. In this I was aided by F\u00e9rey\u2019s creation of an antagonist called Melrose, whom F\u00e9rey intends the reader to detest. Even before we meet Melrose, he is described as an extremely right-wing, racist, multi-millionaire businessman who writes self-published history books about New Zealand that have become bestsellers (French 59-60; English 51-52). A lengthy anti-M\u0101ori, neoliberal diatribe by Melrose (159-60; 133-34) is the source of seven of my twenty-seven statements. Looking at pre- and post-reading responses to these seven \u2018Melrose\u2019 statements shows that French participants changed their opinion from disagree (pre-reading) to agree (post-reading) for three of them (S7, S15, S17), disagreed less strongly with one of them (S16), and did not change their opinion for another three (S14, S18, S19). Therefore, I could not reject H0<\/sub>3 but instead looked within these seven statements to develop two null sub-hypotheses (H0<\/sub>3a-b) for two subgroups of information:<\/p>\n H0<\/sub>3a Readers are equally influenced by historical or contemporary information conveyed via Melrose.<\/p>\n Looking at data for the first null hypothesis\u2013\u2013H0<\/sub>3a\u2013\u2013shows that French readers were less willing to change their opinions about contemporary society\u2013\u2013about whether M\u0101ori today are drunkards (S18), warriors (S16) or poor parents (S19)\u2013\u2013than about historical issues such as nineteenth century cannibalism (S7) or exterminating nineteenth-century enemies (S15, S17). Therefore I rejected the null hypothesis H0<\/sub>3a and accepted hypothesis H3a \u201cthat readers are more influenced by historical than contemporary information conveyed via Melrose.\u201c Turning to the second null hypothesis\u2013\u2013H0<\/sub>3b\u2013\u2013shows that French participants were more willing to change their opinion about statements treating \u2018facts\u2019 (S7, S15, S17) rather than \u2018attitudes\u2019 (S14, S16, S18, S19), thus I rejected the null hypothesis for H0<\/sub>3b and accepted hypothesis H3b\u00a0\u201cthat readers are more influenced by facts than attitudes conveyed via Melrose.\u201d<\/p>\n Given F\u00e9rey\u2019s left-wing politics, he might be dismayed that his readers accepted anything from Melrose. However, I have three possible explanations for why French readers are susceptible to factual and historical information despite the perceived source. Firstly, by the time readers came across these statements F\u00e9rey seems to have convinced them of his expertise in all matters M\u0101ori and New Zealand, meaning that information presented as \u2018facts\u2019\u2013\u2013even from Melrose\u2013\u2013seemed credible. Secondly, it may be due to increasing memory externalisation. Search engines provide access to a universal archive so why should these student participants memorise dates of the Kings and Queens of France, or details of the Land Wars, when the answer is only a search away and mental effort can instead be directed towards following the latest celebrity gossip? This is perhaps especially true for \u2018facts\u2019 that readers feel they will never be required to regurgitate, such as those offered during leisure reading of crime fiction. Finally, in establishing Melrose, F\u00e9rey may have done himself a disservice by labouring the point that Melrose self-published his bestselling history books, since the world has moved on to publishing phenomena such as Fifty Shades of Grey<\/em> (James), which began as a self-published e-book before being picked up by Random House (Knox 54). While this might be anathema for established authors, popular fiction readers now seem not to regard \u2018self-publishing\u2019 as automatically equating to \u2018lower quality\u2019 (Fay). Thus (student) readers today may equate \u2018(fictional) author of history books\u2019 with \u2018credible source of historical facts.\u2019<\/p>\n Hypothesis Four: That French readers change their attitudes to New Zealand and New Zealanders based on their reading of a novel set in that country<\/h5>\n Having looked at the micro-effects\u2013\u2013how readers reacted to the world portrayed within F\u00e9rey\u2019s novel\u2013\u2013I turn now to the macro-picture: did Utu<\/em> influence French readers\u2019 attitudes towards New Zealand and New Zealanders in general? Both before and after reading Utu<\/em> I asked French participants to respond to eight attitudinal statements (see Table 2) that explore their general attitudes to the country and its citizens rather than about the specific issues raised in Utu<\/em> about geography, politics, anthropology, history or society. My null hypothesis\u2013\u2013H0<\/sub>4\u2013\u2013is \u201cthat French readers\u2019 attitudes to New Zealand and New Zealanders are unaffected by reading Utu<\/em>.\u201d I found a statistically significant change in mean response to A2, A4 and A7 (at the 0.05 level) as well as A3 and A8 (0.1 level) so I rejected H0<\/sub>4 and accepted H4: \u201cthat French readers change their attitudes to New Zealand and New Zealanders based on their reading of a novel set in that country.\u201d However, in all five cases the mean responses moved in the opposite direction to that which might be desired by Tourism New Zealand: after reading Utu<\/em>, French participants thought New Zealand less safe to visit (A2), that visitors would be more likely to be victims of crime (A4, A7), and that New Zealanders are less friendly and likeable (A3, A8).[3]<\/a><\/p>\n I did not find a statistically significant change for A1: \u201cI will visit New Zealand within the next three years,\u201d with participants disagreeing slightly both before and after reading. Just as Bayard argues that it is unnecessary to experience places first-hand in order to write about them, readers can also be content with literary, rather than physical, voyaging. To Bayard\u2019s physical and psychological inconveniences of travel (13), one can add the high cost in time and money a trip to New Zealand involves, making it unimaginable for most university students.<\/p>\n 3. Conclusion<\/h4>\n I have provided empirical evidence that a novel\u2019s geographically and culturally-situated elements differently influence cultural insider and outsider readers, with the latter more likely to change their opinions than the former. Moreover, for every statement that showed a statistically significant difference between pre- and post-reading means, readers\u2019 opinions moved towards the image portrayed by F\u00e9rey in Utu<\/em>, not only for outsider French readers but also for New Zealanders, even when F\u00e9rey\u2019s cultural claim was incorrect.<\/p>\n Furthermore, for cultural outsiders this influence extends beyond Utu<\/em>\u2019s final page to opinions about the country depicted. At first sight, readers\u2019 negative attitudes to F\u00e9rey\u2019s dark depictions might seem bad news for New Zealand given that tourism represents 8.5% of its GDP (Statistics New Zealand 9). However, there are two reasons why Utu<\/em> may in fact be beneficial. First, New Zealand markets itself to thrill seekers through international advertising campaigns with images of adventurous activities such as bungy-jumping and white-water rafting set amid its rugged landscape; such potential tourists are unlikely to be deterred by (fictional) cannibalism. Second, most of F\u00e9rey\u2019s French readers never intended travelling beyond the novel\u2019s covers but nonetheless closed it with a new perspective on the country and its people. Perversely, it matters not that this perspective is negative; the simple fact of having read a novel about little-known New Zealand boosts the country\u2019s intangible reputation within the French imaginary. To support this claim, I turn to Berger, Sorensen and Rasmussen, who show that \u201cWhereas a negative review [in the New York Times<\/em>] decreased purchase likelihood of a book that was already well known, it increased purchase likelihood for a previously unknown book\u201d (824). By analogy, Utu<\/em>\u2019s negative \u2018review\u2019 of previously unknown New Zealand helps the country\u2019s name recognition; any publicity is good publicity.<\/p>\n Acknowledgements<\/h4>\n I would like to thank Emeritus Professor Ian Carter for enrolling study participants at the University of Auckland as well as two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. This research was supported financially by the University of Auckland Faculty of Arts Doctoral Research Fund. Approval for this study was given by the University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee (2011\/417).<\/p>\n Endnotes<\/h4>\n [1]<\/a> I refer to the \u2018French\u2019 and \u2018New Zealand\u2019 cohorts in this article although both contain members who were neither born in nor citizens of those countries. I received too few post-reading questionnaires to find statistically significant differences between sub-groups within each cohort, for example between the nineteen New Zealand-born versus five non-New Zealand born post-reading respondents comprising the \u2018New Zealand\u2019 cohort.<\/p>\n I aimed to enrol 120 in each group, a number arrived at from a priori sample sizes (G*Power v.3.1.3, Faul et al.) calculated from the results of a pilot study and allowing for predicted response rates, (Scott et al. 6; Kaplowitz, Hadlock and Levine; Baruch and Holtom; Nair and Adams 295; Sax, Gilmartin and Bryant 417; Deutskens et al. 29), the establishment of a gift\/obligation relationship (Smart 389), the requirement to read a long, violent noir novel and my repeated measures design (Gardner 107-09) as well as two logistical issues: funding and the number of enrolled students.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results showed that pre- and post-reading responses to the twenty-seven statements for both French and New Zealand participants and to the eight attitudinal statements for the French participants were not normally distributed. Therefore I used non-parametric statistical tests throughout this analysis (Black 550\u2013551). Unless otherwise stated, statistically significant difference is at the 0.05 level.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> A3 and A8, as well as having a lower statistical significance, are problematic because the results may have been influenced by my actions as a researcher. Participants completed the pre-reading survey immediately after I had spoken to them and had given them a free copy of the novel, perhaps leading them to believe that I, and by extension, other New Zealanders are friendly and likeable, and moving the pre-reading mean to a more positive value. However, after having read a violent novel\u2013\u2013and the effect of meeting me having worn off\u2013\u2013participants reported lower scores, perhaps representing a truer opinion.<\/p>\n Works Cited<\/h4>\n \u201cAmerican Requiem [Interview with Caryl F\u00e9rey].\u201d Mauvais genres<\/em>. France Culture. 28 Apr 2012. Radio.<\/p>\n Auruskeviciene, Vilte, et al. \u201cChange of Attitudes and Country Image after Hosting Major Sport Events.\u201d\u00a0Inzinerine Ekonomika – Engineering Economics<\/em> 21.1 (2010): 53-59. Print.<\/p>\n Barber, Ian. \u201cArchaeology, Ethnography, and the Record of Maori Cannibalism before 1815: A Critical Review.\u201d\u00a0Journal of the Polynesian Society<\/em> 101.3 (1992): 241-92. Print.<\/p>\n Barker, Martin, and Ernest Mathijs. \u201cResearching World Audiences: The Experience of a Complex Methodology.\u201d\u00a0Participations<\/em> 9.2 (2012): 664-89. Print.<\/p>\n Baruch, Yehuda, and Brooks C. Holtom. \u201cSurvey Response Rate Levels and Trends in Organizational Research.\u201d\u00a0Human Relations<\/em> 61.8 (2008): 1139-60. Print.<\/p>\n Bayard, Pierre. Comment Parler Des Lieux O\u00f9 L’on N’a Pas \u00c9t\u00e9?<\/em> Paris: Les \u00c9ditions de Minuit, 2012. Print.<\/p>\n Berger, Jonah, Alan T. Sorensen, and Scott J. Rasmussen. \u201cPositive Effects of Negative Publicity: When Negative Reviews Increase Sales.\u201d\u00a0Marketing Science<\/em> 29.5 (2010): 815-27. Print.<\/p>\n Black, Thomas R. Doing Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences: An Integrated Approach to Research Design, Measurement and Statistics<\/em>. London: Sage, 1999. Print.<\/p>\n Carroll, Joseph, et al. \u201cGraphing Jane Austen: Agonistic Structure in British Novels of the Nineteenth Century.\u201d\u00a0Scientific Study of Literature<\/em> 2.1 (2012): 1-24. Print.<\/p>\n Carter, Ellen, and Deborah Walker-Morrison. \u201cCannibalistic M\u0101ori Behead Rupert Murdoch: (Mis)Representations of Antipodean Otherness in Caryl F\u00e9rey’s ‘M\u0101ori Thrillers’.\u201d\u00a0The Foreign in International Crime Writing: Transcultural Representations<\/em>. Eds. Anderson, Jean, Carolina Miranda and Barbara Pezzotti. London: Continuum, 2012. 9-21. Print.<\/p>\n Childress, C. Clayton, and Noah E. Friedkin. \u201cCultural Reception and Production: The Social Construction of Meaning in Book Clubs.\u201d\u00a0American Sociological Review<\/em> 77.1 (2012): 45-68. Print.<\/p>\n Crofts, Stephen. \u201cCross-Cultural Reception Studies: Culturally Variant Readings of Crocodile Dundee.\u201d\u00a0Continuum<\/em> 6.1 (1992): 213-27. Print.<\/p>\n Deutskens, Elisabeth, et al. \u201cResponse Rate and Response Quality of Internet-Based Surveys: An Experimental Study.\u201d\u00a0Marketing Letters<\/em> 15.1 (2004): 21-36. Print.<\/p>\n Faul, Franz, et al. \u201cStatistical Power Analyses Using G*Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses.\u201d\u00a0Behavior Research Methods<\/em> 41.4 (2009): 1149-60. Print.<\/p>\n Fay, Sarah. \u201cAfter ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’, What’s Next for Self-Publishing?\u201d.\u00a0 The Atlantic<\/em>. 2 Apr. 2012. 4 July 2012. <http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/entertainment\/archive\/2012\/04\/after-fifty-shades-of-grey-whats-next-for-self-publishing\/255338\/.>.<\/p>\n F\u00e9rey, Caryl. Utu<\/em>. Paris: Gallimard, 2004. Print.<\/p>\n F\u00e9rey, Caryl. Utu<\/em>. Paris: Gallimard, 2008. Print.<\/p>\n F\u00e9rey, Caryl. Utu<\/em>. Trans. Curtis, Howard. New York, NY: Europa, 2011. Print.<\/p>\n F\u00e9rey, Caryl. Zulu<\/em>. Paris: Gallimard, 2008. Print.<\/p>\n Gardner, Robert C. Psychological Statistics Using SPSS for Windows<\/em>. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001. Print.<\/p>\n George, Richard. \u201cVisitor Perceptions of Crime-Safety and Attitudes Towards Risk: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, Cape Town.\u201d\u00a0Tourism Management<\/em> 31.6 (2010): 806-15. Print.<\/p>\n Hal\u00e1sz, L\u00e1szl\u00f3, Mick Short, and \u00c1gnes Varga. \u201cA Cross-Cultural Study of Fictional and Non-Fictional Text Understanding.\u201d\u00a0Poetics<\/em> 30.3 (2002): 195-219. Print.<\/p>\n Hole, Brian. \u201cPlaythings for the Foe: The Repatriation of Human Remains in New Zealand.\u201d\u00a0Public Archaeology<\/em> 6.1 (2007): 5-27. Print.<\/p>\n James, E.L. Fifty Shades of Grey<\/em>. London: Arrow, 2012. Print.<\/p>\n Kaplowitz, Michael D., Timothy D. Hadlock, and Ralph Levine. \u201cA Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates.\u201d\u00a0Public Opinion Quarterly<\/em> 68.1 (2004): 94-101. Print.<\/p>\n Knox, Malcolm. \u201cRandy House.\u201d\u00a0The Monthly<\/em> Apr. 2012: 54-55. Print.<\/p>\n \u201cMaking a Claim.\u201d\u00a0Waitangi Tribunal. <\/em>Wellington, n.d. 14 Nov 2012. <http:\/\/www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz\/claims\/making_claim.asp>.<\/p>\n Mortaigne, V\u00e9ronique. \u201cLa Force Vitale Des Maori Submerge Le Quai Branly.\u201d\u00a0Le Monde<\/em> 11 Oct 2011. Print.<\/p>\n Nair, Chenicheri Sid, and Phillip Adams. \u201cSurvey Platform: A Factor Influencing Online Survey Delivery and Response Rate.\u201d\u00a0Quality in Higher Education<\/em> 15.3 (2009): 291-96. Print.<\/p>\n Richardson, Alan. \u201cStudies in Literature and Cognition: A Field Map.\u201d\u00a0The Work of Fiction: Cognition, Culture, and Complexity<\/em>. Eds. Richardson, Alan and Ellen Spolsky. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004. 1-30. Print.<\/p>\n Salmond, Anne. Trial of the Cannibal Dog: The Remarkable Story of Captain Cook’s Encounters in the South Seas<\/em>. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. Print.<\/p>\n Sax, Linda J., Shannon K. Gilmartin, and Alyssa N. Bryant. \u201cAssessing Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Web and Paper Surveys.\u201d\u00a0Research in Higher Education<\/em> 44.4 (2003): 409-32. Print.<\/p>\n Schnapper, Dominique. \u201cLes Enjeux D\u00e9mocratiques De La Statistique Ethnique.\u201d\u00a0Revue Fran\u00e7aise de Sociologie<\/em> 49.1 (2008): 133-39. Print.<\/p>\n Scott, Anthony, et al. \u201cA Randomised Trial and Economic Evaluation of the Effect of Response Mode on a Response Rate, Response Bias, and Item Non-Response in a Survey of Doctors.\u201d\u00a0BMC Medical Research Methodology<\/em> 11 (2011): 126 pp.\u00a0 <http:\/\/www.biomedcentral.com.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz\/1471-2288\/11\/126>.<\/p>\n Smart, Alan. \u201cGifts, Bribes, and Guanxi: A Reconsideration of Bourdieu’s Social Capital.\u201d\u00a0Cultural Anthropology<\/em> 8.3 (1993): 388-408. Print.<\/p>\n Statistics New Zealand. Tourism Satellite Account: 2012<\/em>. Wellington: Statistics New Zealand, 2012. Print.<\/p>\n Verne, Jules. Les Enfants Du Capitaine Grant<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Hetzel, 1868. Print.<\/p>\n \n This article is licensed under a\u00a0\u00a0Creative Commons 3.0 License<\/a> although certain works referenced herein may be separately licensed, or the author has exercised their right to fair dealing\u00a0under the\u00a0Canadian\u00a0Copyright Act<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" 5-1 | Table of Contents\u00a0| http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.17742\/IMAGE.periph.5-1.5 | Carter PDF Ellen Carter | University of Auckland Imagining Place: An Empirical Study of How Cultural Outsiders and Insiders Receive Fictional Representations of Place in Caryl F\u00e9rey\u2019s Utu French crime writer Caryl F\u00e9rey (b. 1967) spent only five months in New Zealand before publishing a novel set there: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4062,"featured_media":5697,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[107,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-perceived-peripherality-and-places-images-5-1","category-article","wpautop"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/utu-cover-e1401602403812.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p707hj-1m6","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5214","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/4062"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5214"}],"version-history":[{"count":26,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5214\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8638,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5214\/revisions\/8638"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/5697"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5214"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5214"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imaginations.space\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5214"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}