What is the effect of alarmist media and radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure on salivary cortisol and non-specific symptoms?

Authors: Verrender A, Wallace NK, Loughran SP, Wallace C, Beange J, Croft RJ

Year: 2025

Category: Epidemiology

Journal: Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being

Institution: Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA)

DOI: 10.1111/aphw.70044

URL: https://iaap-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/aphw.70044

Abstract

Overview

This study investigates whether alarmist media and exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) affect salivary cortisol levels and non-specific symptoms. The research is motivated by ongoing debates about the health risks of electromagnetic fields and concerns raised by alarmist media reports.

Study Design

  • 144 participants were randomly assigned to view either an alarmist or control video.
  • After viewing, participants took part in an open-label provocation trial with or without RF-EMF exposure.
  • Assessments included personality, RF-EMF risk perception (pre- and post-video), non-specific symptoms, and salivary cortisol levels.

Findings

  • Participants who were aware they were being exposed to RF-EMF reported more symptoms than those aware they were not being exposed.
  • There was no replicated effect of viewing alarmist media or open RF-EMF exposure on salivary cortisol levels.
  • Neither alarmist media viewing nor RF-EMF exposure alone caused changes in physiological stress as measured by salivary cortisol.

Conclusion

The study suggests that the perception and belief of exposure to RF-EMF play a more significant role in reported symptoms than physiological responses, like cortisol changes. This highlights the importance of psychological factors—including nocebo effects—in health complaints attributed to electromagnetic fields, supporting an association between EMF awareness and perceived health risk.

RF-EMF salivary cortisol nocebo effect alarmist media symptom perception risk perception physiological response
← Back to Stats