A system overview of the Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS)

The AVIRIS instrument has been designed to do high spectral resolution remote sensing of the Earth. Utilizing both silicon and indium antimonide line array detectors, AVIRIS covers the spectral region from 0.41 to 2.45 microns in 10-nm bands. It was designed to fly aboard NASA's U-2 and ER-2 aircraft, where it will simulate the performance of future spacecraft instrumentation. Flying at an altitude of 20 km, it has an instantaneous field of view of 20 m and views a swath over 10 km wide. With an ability to record 40 minutes of data, it can, during a single flight, capture 500 km of flight line

Narcissistic Self-Enhancement

Self-enhancement encompasses motives and self-directed effort to increase the positivity of one’s self-concept or public image. Self-enhancement concerns are often distinguished from orientations toward self-assessment—seeking either diagnostic self-related information (flattering or otherwise), and self-verification—seeking confirmation of existing self-views (e.g., Sedikides,1993; Swann, 1990). Distinctions are also typically drawn between self- enhancement and self-improvement motives. Although identifying and addressing one’s personal shortcomings could improve long-term self-enhancement prospects, the self-enhancement label is usually reserved for circumstances in which priority is placed on enhancing the status of one’s present self rather than one’s future self (e.g., Taylor, Neter, & Wayment, 1995). Self-enhancement striving is undeniably common (e.g., Sedikides, Gaertner, & Toguchi, 2003), but some individuals self- enhance more than others, and people have different self-enhancement goals and use different tactics to achieve them. Narcissism is arguably the personality construct (and pathological disorder) most fundamentally defined by chronic pursuit of self-enhancement

Social Autonomy ≠ Social Empowerment: The Social Self-Restriction Model

This paper introduces the social self-restriction (SSR) model, which highlights a drawback associated with the increasingly accessible privilege of social autonomy. Social autonomy enables individuals to connect with preferred social partners and avoid undesirable others. The benefits of social autonomy are undeniable; however, the SSR model makes the novel assertion that people tend to exercise social autonomy in ways that ultimately constrain their potential for social empowerment—a higher-order form of personal freedom. Attaining the ideal of high social empowerment requires both high social autonomy and high social adaptability. People with high social adaptability can feel reasonably comfortable and act competently in social environments they did not choose to inhabit. Unfortunately, people with high social autonomy are unlikely to possess high social adaptability. We propose that social autonomy undermines social adaptability by tempting people to avoid social challenges and socialize selectively with similar others in familiar contexts, a habit that limits social skill development, promotes social intolerance, and distorts social perceptions. In essence, we argue that social autonomy allows people to live in their social comfort zones, at the cost of restricting their social range. Our discussion of the SSR model incorporates evidence and perspectives from a broad range of academic disciplines, and includes consideration of opportunities for future research

Reflected Appraisal through a 21st-Century Looking Glass

The concept of reflected appraisal—also known as reflected self-appraisal or the looking-glass self—refers to the processes by which people\u27s self-views are influenced by their perceptions of how others view them. Reflected appraisal is reflected in the metaphor that people use others as a mirror (i.e., looking glass) for judging themselves, and also in the sense that others\u27 judgments are reflected in self-judgments. The concept refers simultaneously to person A\u27s self-appraisal and person A\u27s appraisal of person B\u27s appraisal of person A. These appraisals exert reciprocal influence: Self-views affect judgments of others\u27 views, and judgments of others\u27 views affect self-views. In short, reflected appraisal can be viewed as a cycle of mutually influential judgments

Grandiose Narcissism Predicts Willingness to Behave Badly, Without Proportional Tolerance for Others’ Bad Behavior

Narcissists characteristically behave badly; our study investigated how they respond to experiencing others’ bad behavior. After completing the Narcissistic Personality Inventory, a measure of grandiose narcissism, participants reported their willingness to engage in different inconsiderate or unethical common behaviors. Then they reported how bothered they would feel in response to experiencing each of the same bad behaviors—perpetrated by someone else. Participants overall reported feeling bothered by others’ bad behavior, but narcissism was unrelated to intolerance judgments. Narcissists are often highly reactive when their inflated self-views are challenged, but our study suggests that narcissists are not uniquely bothered by everyday minor offenses. However, when viewed from a different angle, narcissists’ level of intolerance could be interpreted as unjustly high, because they reported more willingness to engage in behavior that could bother others, yet did not show proportional tolerance for others’ bothersome behavior

When People Evaluate Others, the Level of Others’ Narcissism Matters Less to Evaluators Who are Narcissistic

Prior studies have documented how people in general respond to others’ narcissism, but existing research offers few clues about whether and how evaluator narcissism influences judgments of traits associated with narcissism. Participants completed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and then evaluated hypothetical target persons. Target narcissism was conveyed through a single trait description (Study 1), a list of traits (Study 2), or Facebook content (Study 3). Narcissistic qualities were reliably viewed unfavorably, but narcissistic participants were comparatively less bothered by target narcissism and less positive in their judgments of targets without narcissistic qualities. In each study, symptoms of the presence or absence of narcissism had less impact on the social judgments of participants who were narcissistic

How Judgments Change Following Comparison of Current and Prior Information

Although much observed judgment change is superficial and occurs without considering prior information, other forms of change also occur. Comparison between prior and new information about an issue may trigger change by influencing either or both the perceived strength and direction of the new information. In four experiments, participants formed and reported initial judgments of a policy based on favorable written information about it. Later, these participants read a second passage containing strong favorable or unfavorable information on the policy. Compared to control conditions, subtle and direct prompts to compare the initial and new information led to more judgment change in the direction of a second passage perceived to be strong. Mediation analyses indicated that comparison yielded greater perceived strength of the second passage, which in turn correlated positively with judgment change. Moreover, self-reports of comparison mediated the judgment change resulting from comparison prompts

Using Priming to Study Social Categorization

Do people spontaneously categorize stereotypically masculine and stereotypically feminine trait and job labels according to gender? The present experiment provided a methodologically stringent test of automatic gender-based categorization using a modification of a semantic priming methodology. Subjects processing goals were manipulated by asking questions about primes that either did or did not require semantic processing. Results provide support for a spontaneous gender-based categorization of trait labels regardless of the processing goals. However, semantic processing goals appear to be necessary for a spontaneous gender-based categorization of job labels

Comparison between the 5-day cosynch and 7-day estradiol-based protocols for synchronization of ovulation and timed artificial insemination in suckled BOS taurus BEEF cows

The objective was to compare pregnancy per AI and follicular dynamic in suckled Bos taurus beef cows treated with either a 7-day progesterone + estradiol-based protocol or a 5-day progesterone CoSynch protocol for timed artificial insemination (TAI) during four breeding seasons. We hypothesized that estrous cycle status, days postpartum (DPP), fat depth and plasma progesterone concentration differentially modify the effect of treatments. Every year, 9 days before initiation of each breeding season, cows were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Cows in the 7-d P + E group (n = 428) received a progesterone intravaginal device (DIB) and estradiol benzoate on Day −9. On Day −2 the device was removed, and cows received cloprostenol and estradiol cypionate. Forty-eight hours later (Day 0) cows received TAI. Cows in the 5-d P + CoS group (n = 428) received a DIB, and GnRH on Day −8. On Day −3, the device was removed, and cows received cloprostenol. A second dose of cloprostenol was given on Day −2. Cows received GnRH and TAI 72 h after device removal (Day 0). On Day −9, estrous cycle status was determined. In a subset of cows (n = 79) the size of the dominant follicle was determined between Days −2 and 0. In another subset of cows (n = 340), DPP, fat depth (mm) and plasma progesterone concentration (ng/mL) were evaluated on Day −9. Pregnancy per AI was determined 30 d after TAI. Pregnancy per AI was greater for cows in the 5-d P + CoS group than for cows in the 7-d P + E group (50.9% vs. 41.3%, P = 0.01) and was also greater in cyclic than in anestrus cows (54.3% vs. 33.2%, P < 0.0001). There was also a significant effect of breeding season (P = 0.0002) and sire (P = 0.03), and an interaction between treatment group and breeding season (P = 0.03). The dominant follicle was larger (P < 0.0001) in cows in the 5-d P + CoS group than the 7-d P + E group (10.7 ± 0.29 mm vs. 9.0 ± 0.28 mm). Pregnancy per AI was greater in cows with ≥55 DPP (47.0% vs. 29.6%, P = 0.001), fat depth ≥0.50 mm (44.7% vs. 29.7%), and with plasma progesterone concentration ≥1 ng/mL (47.2% vs. 28.7%, P = 0.01). In cows with plasma progesterone ≥1 ng/mL on Day −9, pregnancy per AI was greater in the 5-d P + CoS group (60.5%) than in the 7-d P + E group (34.9%), but there was no difference between treatment groups in cows with plasma progesterone < 1 ng/mL (P = 0.07). In conclusion, the 5-d P + CoS protocol resulted in greater size of the dominant follicle and pregnancy per AI in suckled Bos taurus beef cows subjected to TAI.Fil: Bilbao, María Guillermina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Confluencia; ArgentinaFil: Zapata, Luis Oscar. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias; ArgentinaFil: Romero Harry, H.. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional La Pampa-San Luis. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; ArgentinaFil: Perez Wallace, S.. Zoetis SRL; ArgentinaFil: Farcey, Maria Florencia. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias; ArgentinaFil: Gelid, Lucas Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional La Pampa-San Luis. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; ArgentinaFil: Palomares, R. A.. University of Georgia. College of Veterinary Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Ferrer, M. S.. University of Georgia. College of Veterinary Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Bartolome, Julian. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias; Argentin