Does personal relevance moderate communication effects? The example of risk communication about 5G-related electromagnetic fields.

Technological advancements, such as the introduction of 5G, offer opportunities but also raise concerns. Although no evidence suggests negative effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) within defined exposure limits, authorities responsible for risk communication provide precautionary advice to help citizens reduce personal exposure. However, previous research indicates that precautionary information can increase risk perception and decrease trust.

This cross-sectional study investigated effects of precautionary information on risk perception and trust in the context of 5G, using large general population samples in Germany and Greece. For the first time, personal relevance was examined as a potential moderating factor, using a novel approach to assess practical and thematic relevance. Participants were first surveyed on their relevance of the topic, then provided with basic information about “RF-EMF and health”, and, in the experimental group, with additional precautionary information. Different measures for risk perception and trust followed. We expected higher risk perception and lower trust for the experimental group, and assumed that at lower personal relevance, this effect would be stronger.

Contrary to expectations, precautionary information increased just one risk perception measure and only in Germany. The anticipated moderating effect of personal relevance was not found, but relevance itself significantly predicted risk perception, with higher relevance correlating with higher risk perception. Exploratory findings revealed higher risk perception among females compared to males and in Greece compared to Germany.

That there were only few effects of the precautionary information may be linked to the focus on actions to reduce personal exposure when using mobile devices. The results underline the importance of considering personal relevance and demographic factors in risk communication and highlight directions for future research.

Advances in technology, like 5G in mobile communications, bring both opportunities and concerns. There is no evidence that mobile phone radiation (electromagnetic fields) harms health when kept within safety limits. Nevertheless, authorities often give information on how they can reduce their exposure if they wish to do so (precautionary information). However, such information can sometimes make people more worried and less trusting.

In this study we tested whether providing precautionary information about mobile phone radiation and 5G affects how risky people think it is and how much they trust in authorities providing it. Participants came from Germany and Greece, and they took part in the study online. First, they were asked how much the topic “mobile phone radiation and health” mattered to them. Then, one group of participants received only general information on the topic and the other one received extra precautionary information. We then asked them for their perceptions of risk (for example, how worried they feel about the topic) and trust. We expected that people who read the precautionary information would perceive higher risk and experience less trust than people who read the basic information. Also, we expected that people who cared less about the topic might be more affected by the precautionary information.

Unexpectedly, we found that for the most part the group that read precautionary information did not perceive them as more risky or less trustworthy than the group that read basic information. People to whom the topic mattered more perceived it as riskier. However, there was no difference in how they perceived the precautionary information. The study also found that Greek participants compared to German ones and women compared to men perceived the topic as riskier.

In summary, precautionary information had little effect on risk perception or trust. Personal relevance and other individual differences, like gender and nationality, played a role in how people viewed the risks. This is important to consider for people who inform the public about risks and health-related topics.