Francesco Di Nocera

Prof. Dr. Francesco Di Nocera

Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Lazio, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

29Years (1998-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2007 in Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera
MCMarco Camilli
Marco Camilli
MTMichela Terenzi
Michela Terenzi
Based on previous research showing the usefulness of spatial statistics in detecting randomness in the distribution of eye fixations, this study investigated the ocular behavior of professional pilots engaged in a simulated flight. The distribution of eye fixations was used as an indirect index of mental workload: Eye movements were recorded during the different phases (departure to landing) of a simulated flight and were analyzed using spatial statistics algorithms. Results showed sensitivity of spatial dispersion indices to variations in mental workload: higher during departure and landing, lower during climb and descend, and the lowest during the cruise phase. This finding provides additional evidence of the utility of fixations distribution as a real-time measure of mental workload and, consequently, as a trigger for adaptive automation.

1 March 2000 in Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera
FFFabio Ferlazzo
Fabio Ferlazzo

1 May 2008 in Behavior Research Methods
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MCMarco Camilli
Marco Camilli
RNRoberto Nacchia
Roberto Nacchia
MTMichela Terenzi
Michela Terenzi
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera

30 November 2023 in Information
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera
GTGiorgia Tempestini
Giorgia Tempestini
MOMatteo Orsini
Matteo Orsini
Usable security involves designing security measures that accommodate users’ needs and behaviors. Balancing usability and security poses challenges: the more secure the systems, the less usable they will be. On the contrary, more usable systems will be less secure. Numerous studies have addressed this balance. These studies, spanning psychology and computer science/engineering, contribute diverse perspectives, necessitating a systematic review to understand strategies and findings in this area. This systematic literature review examined articles on usable security from 2005 to 2022. A total of 55 research studies were selected after evaluation. The studies have been broadly categorized into four main clusters, each addressing different aspects: (1) usability of authentication methods, (2) helping security developers improve usability, (3) design strategies for influencing user security behavior, and (4) formal models for usable security evaluation. Based on this review, we report that the field’s current state reveals a certain immaturity, with studies tending toward system comparisons rather than establishing robust design guidelines based on a thorough analysis of user behavior. A common theoretical and methodological background is one of the main areas for improvement in this area of research. Moreover, the absence of requirements for Usable security in almost all development contexts greatly discourages implementing good practices since the earlier stages of development.

1 January 2007 in Experimental Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FFFabio Ferlazzo
Fabio Ferlazzo
SLSabrina Lucido
Sabrina Lucido
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera
SFSabrina Fagioli
Sabrina Fagioli
SSStefano Sdoia
Stefano Sdoia
Humans are fundamentally limited in processing information from the outside world. This is particularly evident in the attentional blink (AB), the impaired ability to identify the second of two targets presented in close succession. We report findings from three experiments showing that the AB is significantly reduced when observers are set to achieve one single goal (reporting combinations of the two targets) instead of separate goals (reporting the two targets). This finding raises questions about the nature of AB, and suggests that processes involved in goal-switching must be taken into account by theories of the AB phenomenon.

1 January 2003 in The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Alessandro CouyoumdjianAlessandro Couyoumdjian
Alessandro Couyoumdjian
Francesco Di NoceraFrancesco Di Nocera
Francesco Di Nocera
FFFabio Ferlazzo
Fabio Ferlazzo
The aim of this study was to explore whether the attentional system, as far as an endogenous orienting is concerned, allocates resources along the sagittal plane and whether such a process is affected by, and is likely to be based on, different functional representations of 3D space in the brain. Several models make a main action-based distinction between representations of peripersonal space and of those extrapersonal space. Accordingly, if attention has to move from one representation to another, it should be possible to observe a decrease in performance during such a transition. To test this hypothesis three experiments were run in which participants performed a cued detection task. Cue stimuli were informative and were centrally located around the fixation point. Target stimuli were displayed at four different depth planes. In the first experiment, assuming that the border between the peripersonal space and the extrapersonal space was at 1 m from the observer, half the target stimuli were located in the peripersonal space and half in the extrapersonal space. The fixation point was located at 1 m from the observer. In the second experiment, the fixation point was moved at 2 m from the observer in order to rule out the possible effects of ocular motor programming. In the third experiment, in order to rule out effects related to the spatial layout of target stimuli (i.e., centre of mass effect) two target stimuli were located in the peripersonal space and six in the extrapersonal space. In all the experiments, besides a validity effect, we observed greater reaction times when attention shift was across spatial representations than when it was within the same representation. The implications for action-oriented models of attention are discussed.