Models of eye-movement control distinguish between different control levels, ranging from automatic (bottom-up, stimulus-driven selection) and automatized (based on well-learned routines) to voluntary (top-down, goal-driven selection, e.g., based on instructions). However, one type of voluntary control has yet only been examined in the manual and not in the oculomotor domain, namely free-choice selection among arbitrary targets, that is, targets that are of equal interest from both a bottom-up and topdown processing perspective. Here, we ask which features of targets (identity-or location-related) are used to determine such oculomotor free-choice behavior. In two experiments, participants executed a saccade to one of four peripheral targets in three different choice conditions: unconstrained free choice, constrained free choice based on target identity (color), and constrained free choice based on target location. The analysis of choice frequencies revealed that unconstrained free-choice selection closely resembled constrained choice based on target location. The results suggest that free-choice oculomotor control is mainly guided by spatial (location-based) target characteristics. We explain these results by assuming that participants tend to avoid less parsimonious recoding of target-identity representations into spatial codes, the latter being a necessary prerequisite to configure oculomotor commands.

Support is a valuable resource for ensuring employee health in the workplace. However, research on health-specific support behavior (i.e., support specifically targeting concrete health aspects) has only concentrated on either leader behavior (e.g., healthy leadership styles) or support provided by employees for specific health issues (e.g., healthy eating or smoking cessation). Although the importance of employee health has been well established, the examination of a wider range of potential health-specific support behaviors from employees provided for their colleagues and leaders has been neglected. To understand employee health-specific support behavior, we adapted an existing health-oriented leadership questionnaire to cover support for colleagues (PeerCare) and their leaders (LeaderCare). Capturing the employee perspective with a sample of 347 employees, the results confirmed a delineation of health-oriented scales (factor, convergent, and discriminant validity). By testing health-specific support behavior processes at work, the positive effects of PeerCare on general health were demonstrated. Contrary to expectations, existing health effects are outweighed when leaders provide health-specific support behavior to their employees (StaffCare). However, the results imply that the health-specific support behavior practices of different actors reinforce each other: the effects of StaffCare and PeerCare enhance each other, and StaffCare has a strong influence on LeaderCare. Remarkably, SelfCare has a key role in this process. The open questions and implications regarding the effects of the different health-specific support behavior measurements are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract