Indoor working and living environments are increasingly exposed to low-frequency noise sources. The wellknown relationship between noise conditions and effects on human health requires the development of a proper procedure to evaluate the stress due to acoustical factors. For this purpose, an experiment, based on Soft Metrology principles, was designed to measure the changes of cognitive and physiological parameters (response time and heart rate) on a sample of 25 male and female volunteers, aged 19-29 years, exposed to three types of noise in a hemi-anechoic room. Participants were involved in a cognitive task (Stroop effect) for 10 min in four different conditions: silence, stochastic broadband multi-tonal noise (BBN), stochastic lowfrequency multi-tonal noise (LFN1), and low-frequency stationary noise with regular amplitude modulation (LFN2). All sounds were reproduced by two loudspeakers at equivalent sound pressure level of 93 dB. Results showed that in noise conditions, subjects reduced their response times. This is an evidence of growing stress, according to arousal theory. In particular, LFN1 and LFN2 produced cognitive stress comparable to stochastic broadband multi-tonal noise. Furthermore, subdividing the subjects in extroverts and introverts through the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised psychological test, it was shown that LFN1 and LFN2 produced higher stress effects than stochastic broadband multi-tonal noise on the cognitive performances and a physiological stress comparable to stochastic broadband multi-tonal noise in introverts, whereas no effects were observed in extroverts, as hypothesized by Eysenck. This result highlights the necessity in the future to consider the personality parameter as a key factor in the evaluation of the effects of noise on humans.

A widely accepted definition of human comfort does not exist, but several metrics have been developed to quantify how much users appreciate environments, objects or interfaces. For visual comfort one of the most widely accepted approach is “that comfort is not discomfort”, because it is easier to provide quantitative and qualitative evaluation of visual discomfort parameters rather than comfort parameters that we don’t have a definition of. This paper presents the available suggestions and the results of a European research project about the visual comfort with LED lighting

The aim of the interdisciplinary research was to facilitate the understanding of a specific topic passing by different disciplinary perspectives. Soft metrology is the perfect example of a scientific field that needs that sort of approach. Seeking to provide a reproducible basis for qualifying and quantifying what are essentially 'soft' measurements (subject to human perception and interpretation) is a particularly challenging scientific endeavour. This chapter presents a theoretical overview of main concepts around soft metrology and, in the second instance, proposes a mathematical model for the measurement of a soft measurand through a dedicated index (IPER-influence on performance index).

Radiation on the dining table Zero tolerance to bacterial contamination means considering the acceptance of "radiation on the table". The process of food irradiation has been extensively studied, nevertheless its use remains a matter of some controversy. Despite unanimous agreement within the medical community of the safety of this procedure, occasional concerns arise from the consumers. A common consumer misconception is that irradiation may turn the food "radioactive". A significant number of scientific studies on the topic were analyzed. We found no scientific study demonstrating that consumption of irradiated food might pose a risk to consumers. All studies conclude that food irradiation at the appropriate dose required to reduce contamination is safe and does not affect its nutritional value. In order to emphasize the issue we discuss the potential benefit vs harm of irradiation of food contaminated with E. coli 0157: H7. The association of this bacteria with severe disease and death has been clearly established in contrast with the lack of a demonstrated risk due to meat irradiation. We conclude that the risks of food irradiation remains "unknown" simply because, after four decades of research, none has been identified. In contrast to the risks of acquiring a food transmitted bacterial disease, the risk of irradiation is negligible.