HG 295.70-295.80 Thin Section

This sample contains two different domains; a coarse grained domain with well dispersed clasts, and a fine grained domain that potentially contains organics. The coarser grained domain contains comet structures, lineations and minor rotation without a central grain.

HG 338.70-338.80

Dark greyish-brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large in size. Clasts are sub-angular to sub-rounded in shape. Fine grained domains can be seen scattered throughout the sample. The sample also contains comet structures, lineations, and minor amounts of rotation structures within the coarser domain.

384.85-385.0 DE # 11

Mainly coarse grained with a separate fine grained clay domain occurring throughout the sample. The coarse grained domain contains clasts that range from small to medium in size. The clast shape ranges from angular to sub-angular. Grain crushing is abundant in this sample, along with lineations, and minor amounts of rotation.

HG 393.60-393.85

Brown sediment with clasts that range from small to large. The clast shape ranges from angular to sub-rounded. Lineations and water escape structures are present. Grain crushing and minor amounts of rotation are also present.

HG 120.30-120.40

Brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large in size. The clast shape ranges from sub-angular to sub-rounded. Lineations are common throughout this sample. Comet structures and minor amounts of rotation structures can also be seen.

HG 149.0-149.10

Brown sediment with organic matter present throughout. Clasts range from small to medium in size and angular to sub-rounded in shape. Lineations are common throughout the sample, with some grain stacking and minor amounts of rotation.

HG 173.0-173.10

Brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to medium in size. Clast shape ranges from angular to sub-rounded. Lineations are abundant throughout the sample. Grain crushing, grain stacking and minor amounts of rotation are also present throughout.

GI

Dark brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large. Clast shape ranges from angular to rounded. Rotation structures are abundant in this sample and mainly occur around medium sized and large aggregates. Comet structures can also be seen throughout the sample. Lineations and minor amounts of grain crushing can also be seen.

J.R AI-4

Brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large in size. The grain shape ranges from angular to sub-rounded. Necking structures and lineations can commonly be seen throughout the sample. Rotation structures and minor amounts of grain crushing/stacking are also present.

WB-3b

Dark brown sediment with well dispersed clasts. The clasts range from small to large in size and sub-angular to sub-rounded in shape. The sample is abundant in rotation structures and lineations. It also contains comet structures and minor amounts of grain stacking.

WB-I

Dark brown sediment with two domains. One domain is fine grained, while the other is coarser grained. Clasts range from small to large, and sub-angular to sub-rounded in shape. The coarser domain contains lineations, comet structures and minor amounts of rotation structures. The fine grained domain is abundant with water escape structures. This sample also contains a few different areas of clay rich sediment.

11 PTA007

Dark brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large in size. Grain shape ranges from angular to rounded. Lineations can commonly be seen throughout the sample. Many clasts are fractured and/or weathered. Necking structures, some rotation structures, and minor amounts of grain crushing can also be seen.

Mo05

Brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to medium in size. Clast shape ranges from angular to rounded. Rotation structures and grain crushing can be seen throughout the sample. Lineations and minor amounts of grain stacking can also be seen.

1493 BH17 NP 2014

Brown sediment with clasts ranging from small to large. Clast shape ranges from angular to rounded. Lineations and comet structures are abundant throughout this sample. It also contains rotation structures and minor amounts of grain crushing.

Psychopathy and self-monitoring : additive and interactive effects on self-presentation tactics /

The purpose of this study was to determine the relative contributions of psychopathy and self-monitoring to the prediction of self-presentation tactics (behaviours that individuals use to manipulate their self-image). Psychopathy is composed of two main factors: Factor 1, which includes manipulativeness and shallow affect, and Factor 2, which includes irresponsibility and anti-social behaviours. Self-monitoring is a personality trait that distinguishes between those who adapt their behaviour to fit different social situations (high self-monitors) and those who behave as they feel regardless of social expectations (low selfmonitors). It was hypothesized that self-monitoring would moderate the relationship between psychopathy and self-presentation tactics. One hundred and forty-nine university students completed the Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974), the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale - Version III (Paulhus et aI., in press), the Self-Presentation Tactics scale (Lee, S., et aI., 1999), the HEXACO-PI (a measure ofthe six major factors of personality; Lee, K., & Ashton, 2004), and six scenarios that were created as a supplementary measure of the selfpresentation tactics. Results of the hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that self-monitoring did moderate the relationship between psychopathy and three of the selfpresentation tactics: apologies, disclaimers, and exemplification. Further, significant interactions were observed between Factor 1 and self-monitoring on apologies and the defensive tactics subscale, between Factor 2 and self-monitoring on self-handicapping, and between Factor 1 and Factor 2 on exemplification. Contrary to expectations, the main effect of self-monitoring was significant for the prediction of nine tactics, while psychopathy was significant for the prediction of seven tactics. This indicates that the role of these two personality traits in the explanation of self-presentation tactics tends to be additive in nature rather than interactive. In addition. Factor 2 alone did not account for a significant amount of variance in any of the tactics, while Factor 1 significantly predicted nine tactics. Results are discussed with regard to implications and possible directions for future research.