Vincenzo Cestari

Prof. Vincenzo Cestari


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2014 in Brain Research Bulletin
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUDCLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
DSDaniele Saraulli
Daniele Saraulli
MCMarco Costanzi
Marco Costanzi

19 May 2023 in Acta Psychologica
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ASAlessandro Santirocchi
Alessandro Santirocchi
PSPietro Spataro
Pietro Spataro
FAFederica Alessi
Federica Alessi
CRClelia Rossi-Arnaud
Clelia Rossi-Arnaud
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
In previous studies, anti-vaccination attitudes have been attributed either to far-right voters or to both far-left and far-right voters. The present study investigated the associations of political orientation with vaccine hesitancy and intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and the potential mediating roles of trust in science and belief in misinformation. A total of 750 Italian respondents completed an online questionnaire in the period between the second and the third wave of COVID-19 (from 9th March to 9th May 2021). The results showed that political orientation had both direct and indirect associations with vaccine hesitancy and vaccine intention, mediated by trust in science and belief in misinformation. Specifically, right-wing adherents were less trustful of scientists and believed in COVID-19-related misinformation more than left-wing adherents, and these two factors accounted for their higher vaccine hesitancy and reduced willingness to receive an anti-COVID-19 vaccination. Our findings are in line with the predictions of the mindsponge theory and suggest that communicative campaigns aimed at improving the rates of vaccine acceptance in right-wing adherents should be specifically focused on enhancing trust in science and reducing belief in misinformation.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Marco CostanziMarco Costanzi
Marco Costanzi
BCBeatrice Cianfanelli
Beatrice Cianfanelli
ASAlessandro Santirocchi
Alessandro Santirocchi
Stefano LasaponaraStefano Lasaponara
Stefano Lasaponara
PSPietro Spataro
Pietro Spataro
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
Intrusive memories are a common feature of many psychopathologies, and suppression-induced forgetting of unwanted memories appears as a critical ability to preserve mental health. In recent years, biological and cognitive studies converged in revealing that forgetting is due to active processes. Recent neurobiological studies provide evidence on the active role of main neurotransmitter systems in forgetting, suggesting that the brain actively works to suppress retrieval of unwanted memories. On the cognitive side, there is evidence that voluntary and involuntary processes (here termed “intentional” and “incidental” forgetting, respectively) contribute to active forgetting. In intentional forgetting, an inhibitory control mechanism suppresses awareness of unwanted memories at encoding or retrieval. In incidental forgetting, retrieval practice of some memories involuntarily suppresses the retrieval of other related memories. In this review we describe recent findings on deficits in active forgetting observed in psychopathologies, like post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, schizophrenia, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Moreover, we report studies in which the role of neurotransmitter systems, known to be involved in the pathogenesis of mental disorders, has been investigated in active forgetting paradigms. The possibility that biological and cognitive mechanisms of active forgetting could be considered as hallmarks of the early onset of psychopathologies is also discussed.

23 April 2017 in Memory
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUDCLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
PSPietro Spataro
Pietro Spataro
MCMarco Costanzi
Marco Costanzi
DSDaniele Saraulli
Daniele Saraulli
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
The present study examined predictions of the early-phase-elevated-attention hypothesis of the attentional boost effect (ABE), which suggests that transient increases in attention at encoding, as instantiated in the ABE paradigm, should enhance the recognition of neutral and positive items (whose encoding is mostly based on controlled processes), while having small or null effects on the recognition of negative items (whose encoding is primarily based on automatic processes). Participants were presented a sequence of negative, neutral and positive stimuli (pictures in Experiment 1, words in Experiment 2) associated to target (red) squares, distractor (green) squares or no squares (baseline condition). They were told to attend to the pictures/words and simultaneously press the spacebar of the computer when a red square appeared. In a later recognition task, stimuli associated to target squares were recognised better than stimuli associated to distractor squares, replicating the standard ABE. More importantly, we also found that: (a) the memory enhancement following target detection occurred with all types of stimuli (neutral, negative and positive) and (b) the advantage of negative stimuli over neutral stimuli was intact in the DA condition. These findings suggest that the encoding of negative stimuli depends on both controlled (attention-dependent) and automatic (attention-independent) processes.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ASAlessandro Santirocchi
Alessandro Santirocchi
PSPietro Spataro
Pietro Spataro
Marco CostanziMarco Costanzi
Marco Costanzi
FDFabrizio Doricchi
Fabrizio Doricchi
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUDCLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
COVID-19 vaccines are the most promising means of limiting the pandemic. The present study aims at determining the roles of several psychological variables in predicting vaccination intention in Italy. An online questionnaire was disseminated between 9 March and 9 May 2021. The sample included 971 participants. Results showed that most of the participants were willing to vaccinate. Acceptance rates were correlated with age, marital status, and area of residence. Intention to be vaccinated was positively correlated with perceived risk, pro-sociality, fear of COVID-19, use of preventive behaviors, and trust in government, in science, and in medical professionals. Intention to be vaccinated was negatively associated with belief in misinformation. The degree of acceptance is likely to be a result of the campaign tailored to address people’s negative attitudes towards vaccines. Trust in government and trust in science were among the strongest psychological predictors of vaccination intention. Fear of COVID-19, but not perceived risk, was associated with increased vaccine uptake, suggesting that the affective component of risk perception was more important than the cognitive component in predicting participants’ behaviors. Belief in misinformation was associated with reduced vaccination intention. Future studies will take into consideration these variables, to better understand the multifaceted process underlying vaccination intention.

1 February 2020 in Acta Psychologica
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUDCLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
CLELIA ROSSI ARNAUD
PSPietro Spataro
Pietro Spataro
DBDivya Bhatia
Divya Bhatia
FDFabrizio Doricchi
Fabrizio Doricchi
SMSerena Mastroberardino
Serena Mastroberardino
VCVincenzo Cestari
Vincenzo Cestari
Previous studies showed that collaborative remembering can reduce false memories through a process of mutual error checking, although conclusions were limited by the nature of the memory tasks (very few errors). The present experiments extend these findings to eyewitness memory by using a paradigm designed to increase the frequency of memory errors. Collaborative and nominal pairs viewed a video-clip illustrating a bank robbery, provided an immediate free recall, were forced to confabulate answers to false-event questions, and, after a short- (1 h: Experiment 1) or a long-term delay (1 week: Experiment 2), were administered a yes/no recognition task in which the misleading statements either matched the questions presented in the confabulation phase (answered questions) or not (control questions). Collaborative pairs recalled fewer correct details in the immediate free recall task, replicating the negative effects of collaborative inhibition. Most importantly, in the final recognition test, collaborative pairs were less likely to provide false assents to misleading statements, regardless of whether they had provided a response to the related false-event questions 1 h or 1 week earlier. Our results suggest that collaboration can increase the eyewitnesses' tendency to check the accuracy of others' responses and reject false memories through discussion.