20,163 research outputs found
Shapiro, Karl : Elliston lecture number 9 : the greatest living author; April 9th, 1959
No full textDescription on Reel Box: Reel #1 Speed: 3 3/4
Elliston Poet 1959 - Karl Shapiro
Lecture #9 - April 9, 1959
"The Greatest Living Author"Contents:
Track 01 The Greatest Living Author [complete]Digital Projects SAN: Folder and disc location for wav file: 20120222/Box2/Disc 5. Folder and disc location for mp3 file: 20120222/Box2/Disc
Goldblum, Natan -- 1967-69 -- Correspondence, Individual -- letter, 1967-08-14
No full textLetter from Shapiro, B. to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1967-08-14.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
Art Forum - Shapiro, Jeff
No full text2 May 2002. -- Side A: Presentation -- Side B: Question and answer session
B. Z. Shapiro and M.Z.Shapiro
No full text. Let B+ ae GLn (R) denote the subgroup of upper triangular n \Theta n- matrices with positive entries on the main diagonal. A matrix M 2 B+ is called totally positive if the determinants of all its minors not containing a row or column lying completely under the main diagonal are positive. We give a simple determinantal equation for the boundary of all positive upper triangular matrices in B+ . (November 15, 1993) Let \Delta i denote the determinant of the i \Theta i-minor of a matrix M 2 B+ ae GLn (R) consisting of the first i rows and the last i columns. Consider a hypersurface H in B+ given by the equation H : f\Delta 1 \Theta \Delta \Delta \Delta \Theta \Delta n\Gamma1 = 0g and the semigroup B p consisting of all totally positive matrices in B+ . Definition. A matrix M 2 GLn (R) (M 2 B+ resp.) is called totally nonnegative if all determinants of all its minors are nonnegative. The main result of this note is the following 1. Theorem. If some totally nonnegative upper tri..
Transforming Power Relationships: Leadership, Risk, and Hope. IHS Political Science Series No. 135, May 2013
No full textChronic communal conflicts resemble the prisoner’s dilemma. Both communities prefer peace to war. But neither trusts the other, viewing the other’s gain as its own loss, so
potentially shared interests often go unrealized.
Achieving positive-sum outcomes from apparently zero-sum struggles requires a kind of riskembracing leadership. To succeed leaders must: a) see power relations as potentially
positive-sum; b) strengthen negotiating adversaries instead of weakening them; and c) demonstrate hope for a positive future and take great personal risks to achieve it.
Such leadership is exemplified by Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk in the South African democratic transition. To illuminate the strategic dilemmas Mandela and de Klerk faced, we examine the work of Robert Axelrod, Thomas Schelling, and Josep Colomer, who highlight important dimensions of the problem but underplay the role of risk-embracing leadership. Finally we discuss leadership successes and failures in the Northern Ireland settlement and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Moods in everyday situations: Effects of menstrual cycle, work, and personality
No full textObjective: This study examined women’s moods on work and off days during different phases of the menstrual cycle. Method: Self-reports of the moods angry, happy, sad, stressed, tired, and anxious were obtained on two work and two off days during the luteal and follicular phases of the menstrual cycle in 203 nurses. Individual differences in anger expression, anxiety, and hostility were assessed. Results: Ratings of anxious, stressed, and tired were higher and happy and sad were lower on the workday than the off day. Menstrual cycle phase was associated with mood differences depending on the day (work, off work) and individual differences in personality traits. Conclusions: The experience of moods in everyday life is affected by overall levels of stress and phase of the menstrual cycle. The findings suggest the need to refine sociopsychobiological and clinical models of mood regulation and of risk for disease
The Role of Procedural Controls in OSHA's Ergonomics Rulemaking
No full textFew, if any, regulations over the past decade have received the publicity or engendered the controversy of OSHA’s ergonomics regulation. Some may see the ergonomics rule as the paradigmatic instance of procedural hurdles holding up and eventually destroying a regulation. The purpose of this article is to examine the role that procedure played in the ergonomics rulemaking. To draw lessons from the ergonomics rulemaking I have conducted analyses of the four publicly available versions and conducted interviews with seven high ranking officials at OSHA and the Small Business Administration. I find that of the procedural hurdles faced by OSHA, the notice and comment requirement had the largest impact on the final rule. OMB review and requirements to conduct a cost benefit analysis served largely as a fire alarm to political overseers and the required small business panel had largely symbolic effects. The more traditional control of Congressional budgetary oversight had the greatest effect by delaying the rule for three years which eventually doomed OSHA’s attempts to regulate.Peer reviewe
Defragmenting the Regulatory Process
No full textThe regulatory process is often criticized for being cumbersome and slow, much like a computer whose hard drive is fragmented by files no longer used or useful. Like such a computer, the regulatory process contains many requirement of dubious utility. These include the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and numerous executive orders. While other parts of the regulatory process such as notice and comment and cost-benefit analysis have received much more academic attention, these other parts of the process deserve examination as well. This paper argues that such an examination will reveal that these statutes and executive orders add little of value to the regulatory process while consuming agency resources. An improved requirement for cost-benefit analysis with distributional analysis could easily replace virtually all of these requirements and improve regulations while reducing the time needed to promulgate regulations.Peer reviewe
An Evaluation of the Bush Administration Reforms to the Regulatory Process
No full textThe Bush Administration has implemented more reforms to the regulatory process than any of its predecessors. These reforms are often stereotyped as anti-regulatory. This article examines the reforms as a whole and asks which interests have been empowered by the Bush Administration regulatory reforms. I believe this method is a more effective way of assessing the impact of the reforms. I find that in addition to adding potential costs to the regulatory process, the reforms are likely to empower powerful interest groups and the presidency. Whether the impact of these reforms is pro-regulation or anti-regulation will depend on how a future administration more dedicated to regulatory protections uses them. I also lay out a research agenda to better empirically assess the impact of these regulatory reforms.Peer reviewed"Issue published online: 11 APR 2007. Article first published online: 11 APR 2007"--Publisher website
Does the amount of participation matter? Public comments, agency responses and the time to finalize a regulation
No full textThe notice and comment rulemaking process is a fundamental part of how agencies write regulations. While this process is starting to receive more empirical attention, the question of how the number of comments that an agency receives affects its decision-making process has received little examination. This paper uses Boolean analysis to examine nine rules from two agencies at the Department of Health and Human Services and evaluates the impact of a high volume of comments on agency changes to proposed rules and the time an agency takes to finalize a proposed rule. These nine cases suggest that agencies are most likely to change their proposals when they receive a high volume of comments on highly complex rules that are not very politically salient. Highly complex rules are also likely to take a long time to finalize when there are many public comments however it is often other factors that cause a long delay between proposed and final rules.Peer reviewedThe final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11077-007-9051-
- …
