title: The anthropologist as tribal advocate

authors: Hopa, Ngapare K

subjects: economic conditions

abstract: My colleague has outlined some of the major issues facing New Zealand and its indigenous Polynesians - the Maaori - who not so long ago were ranked among the most documented in the world and the country as THE laboratory of race relations.
The present disadvantaged and dependent status of Maaori people show how illusory that notion is and, for New Zealand anthropologists, the challenge it presents in helping Maaori to attain socio-economic sovereignty within the 'partnership' promised by the Treaty of Waitangi.
In the late 60s and since, a few 'radical' mostly 'native' anthropologists can be said to have risen to the challenge that Gough (1968) and others, laid down, but it cannot be said, even now, that the profession as a whole in New Zealand, has been responsive.
Perhaps it is still committed to the myth of scientific objectivity, or, after regarding themselves as champions of a powerless and marginal people, has not recovered from the accusation of impotency during the social ferment of the 70s and since. To be fair, there were a few individuals who were allied with the protest movement but whose contributions were not acknowledged. They rode out the storm however and have continued to contribute significantly to the Maaori cause.

text: The anthropologist as tribal advocate My colleague has outlined some of the major issues facing New Zealand and its indigenous Polynesians - the Maaori - who not so long ago were ranked among the most documented in the world and the country as THE laboratory of race relations.
The present disadvantaged and dependent status of Maaori people show how illusory that notion is and, for New Zealand anthropologists, the challenge it presents in helping Maaori to attain socio-economic sovereignty within the 'partnership' promised by the Treaty of Waitangi.
In the late 60s and since, a few 'radical' mostly 'native' anthropologists can be said to have risen to the challenge that Gough (1968) and others, laid down, but it cannot be said, even now, that the profession as a whole in New Zealand, has been responsive.
Perhaps it is still committed to the myth of scientific objectivity, or, after regarding themselves as champions of a powerless and marginal people, has not recovered from the accusation of impotency during the social ferment of the 70s and since. To be fair, there were a few individuals who were allied with the protest movement but whose contributions were not acknowledged. They rode out the storm however and have continued to contribute significantly to the Maaori cause.

year: 1988

title: Lavinia and Henry Dunbar Johnson

authors: Hart, Philip

abstract: Rawinia Manukau, of Ngati Tamatera, married Henry Dunbar Johnson in 1868, when aged 21. Johnson had been a storekeeper at Coromandel from 1863 onwards and after 1866 had the first store at the site of the future Paeroa. In both places, but particularly in the latter, there was always the fear of conflict with the local Maori population, despite his being protected by a rangatira. After spending time at the new Thames goldfield, from 1871 onwards he was a partner in another Paeroa store, being able to erect a house because a rangatira related to his wife wished her to settle there. Lavinia (as she was known to Pakeha) obtained interests in several blocks of land in Ohinemuri, and her husband also acquired some land for a farm. He prospected Karangahake mountain from 1866 onwards, despite Maori opposition, and in 1875 and the following year actively mined there, unprofitably; Lavinia was not involved with this field, but did acquire interests in two claims when the Te Aroha one opened.
A petty squabble with a Thames neighbour resulted in Lavinia telling the latter to go back to England – she was feisty in defending her heritage. Through his marriage and close contact with Maori, Johnson understood and admired the Maori language, leading to his being appointed a licensed interpreter in 1872. After being a leading pioneer of Paeroa, in 1879 he went to Wellington to work in the Native Office, leaving his wife and family behind for a while; after then she was employed by Pakeha as a nurse and midwife. 
In 1885 Johnson was appointed to oversee the development of Rotorua, where he attempted to have Maori children educated (as his own were) and had to cope with the aftermath of the 1886 Tarawera eruption. Retrenched in 1888, he farmed for a while on his wife’s land at Te Aroha West, becoming involved in local issues and local politics. During the 1890 he obtained more official positions, and from 1896 to 1906 was a land court judge.
The Johnson family was well integrated into the dominant culture, all his daughters marrying Pakeha apart from one who married a ‘half-caste’ who had been brought up as a Pakeha. Johnson was not a Pakeha Maori in the original sense, but was accepted by Maori when living in Paeroa and as a judge tried to be kind to poverty-stricken Maori, although in time he viewed Maori as becoming lazy compared with those he had lived amongst during his first two decades in New Zealand.

text: Lavinia and Henry Dunbar Johnson Rawinia Manukau, of Ngati Tamatera, married Henry Dunbar Johnson in 1868, when aged 21. Johnson had been a storekeeper at Coromandel from 1863 onwards and after 1866 had the first store at the site of the future Paeroa. In both places, but particularly in the latter, there was always the fear of conflict with the local Maori population, despite his being protected by a rangatira. After spending time at the new Thames goldfield, from 1871 onwards he was a partner in another Paeroa store, being able to erect a house because a rangatira related to his wife wished her to settle there. Lavinia (as she was known to Pakeha) obtained interests in several blocks of land in Ohinemuri, and her husband also acquired some land for a farm. He prospected Karangahake mountain from 1866 onwards, despite Maori opposition, and in 1875 and the following year actively mined there, unprofitably; Lavinia was not involved with this field, but did acquire interests in two claims when the Te Aroha one opened.
A petty squabble with a Thames neighbour resulted in Lavinia telling the latter to go back to England – she was feisty in defending her heritage. Through his marriage and close contact with Maori, Johnson understood and admired the Maori language, leading to his being appointed a licensed interpreter in 1872. After being a leading pioneer of Paeroa, in 1879 he went to Wellington to work in the Native Office, leaving his wife and family behind for a while; after then she was employed by Pakeha as a nurse and midwife. 
In 1885 Johnson was appointed to oversee the development of Rotorua, where he attempted to have Maori children educated (as his own were) and had to cope with the aftermath of the 1886 Tarawera eruption. Retrenched in 1888, he farmed for a while on his wife’s land at Te Aroha West, becoming involved in local issues and local politics. During the 1890 he obtained more official positions, and from 1896 to 1906 was a land court judge.
The Johnson family was well integrated into the dominant culture, all his daughters marrying Pakeha apart from one who married a ‘half-caste’ who had been brought up as a Pakeha. Johnson was not a Pakeha Maori in the original sense, but was accepted by Maori when living in Paeroa and as a judge tried to be kind to poverty-stricken Maori, although in time he viewed Maori as becoming lazy compared with those he had lived amongst during his first two decades in New Zealand.

year: 2016

title: Suboptimal Choice Behaviour across Different Reinforcement Probabilities

authors: Yang, Le

abstract: Six adult roosters’ choice behaviour was investigated across a series of five experimental conditions and a series of replication of the same five experimental conditions. Stagner and Zentall (2010) found that pigeons prefer to choose an alternative with highly reliable discriminative stimuli but with less food reward over an alternative with non-discriminative stimuli but with more food reward. The current research systematically changed the probability of reinforcement associated with the discriminative stimulus through a series of experimental conditions. Experimental sessions were completed with six adult roosters. The experimental procedure was based on Stagner and Zentall’s (2010) experiment in which the suboptimal alternative with discriminative stimuli was associated with 100% reinforcement on 20% of the trials, and non-reinforcement on 80% of the trials; the optimal alternative with non-discriminative stimuli was associated with both 50% reinforcement on all trials. This research modified the probabilities of reinforcement associated with the discriminative alternative. In the first experimental condition, the probability of getting access to reinforcement was the same (50%) for each discriminative stimulus, thus, what was seen for the first time was that both alternatives were associated with non-discriminative stimuli. To insure reliability, a replication of the conditions was done after the first five experimental conditions were completed. The results showed that four of the roosters had suboptimal choice behaviour in the first five experimental conditions; however, only two of them maintained such suboptimal behaviour in the replication conditions. This result does not support the idea that the suboptimal choice behaviour with strong discriminative stimuli is a robust effect.

text: Suboptimal Choice Behaviour across Different Reinforcement Probabilities Six adult roosters’ choice behaviour was investigated across a series of five experimental conditions and a series of replication of the same five experimental conditions. Stagner and Zentall (2010) found that pigeons prefer to choose an alternative with highly reliable discriminative stimuli but with less food reward over an alternative with non-discriminative stimuli but with more food reward. The current research systematically changed the probability of reinforcement associated with the discriminative stimulus through a series of experimental conditions. Experimental sessions were completed with six adult roosters. The experimental procedure was based on Stagner and Zentall’s (2010) experiment in which the suboptimal alternative with discriminative stimuli was associated with 100% reinforcement on 20% of the trials, and non-reinforcement on 80% of the trials; the optimal alternative with non-discriminative stimuli was associated with both 50% reinforcement on all trials. This research modified the probabilities of reinforcement associated with the discriminative alternative. In the first experimental condition, the probability of getting access to reinforcement was the same (50%) for each discriminative stimulus, thus, what was seen for the first time was that both alternatives were associated with non-discriminative stimuli. To insure reliability, a replication of the conditions was done after the first five experimental conditions were completed. The results showed that four of the roosters had suboptimal choice behaviour in the first five experimental conditions; however, only two of them maintained such suboptimal behaviour in the replication conditions. This result does not support the idea that the suboptimal choice behaviour with strong discriminative stimuli is a robust effect.

year: 2015