Cited by 68Electromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesSleep and Wakefulness Research

Individual differences in the effects of mobile phone exposure on human sleep: Rethinking the problem

Open access
Loughran, Sarah P., McKenzie, Raymond J., Jackson, Melinda L., Howard, Mark E., Croft, Rodney J.·2012·Bioelectromagnetics

Abstract

Mobile phone exposure-related effects on the human electroencephalogram (EEG) have been shown during both waking and sleep states, albeit with slight differences in the frequency affected. This discrepancy, combined with studies that failed to find effects, has led many to conclude that no consistent effects exist. We hypothesised that these differences might partly be due to individual variability in response, and that mobile phone emissions may in fact have large but differential effects on human brain activity. Twenty volunteers from our previous study underwent an adaptation night followed by two experimental nights in which they were randomly exposed to two conditions (Active and Sham), followed by a full-night sleep episode. The EEG spectral power was increased in the sleep spindle frequency range in the first 30 min of non-rapid eye movement (non-REM) sleep following Active exposure. This increase was more prominent in the participants that showed an increase in the original study. These results confirm previous findings of mobile phone-like emissions affecting the EEG during non-REM sleep. Importantly, this low-level effect was also shown to be sensitive to individual variability. Furthermore, this indicates that previous negative results are not strong evidence for a lack of an effect and, given the far-reaching implications of mobile phone research, we may need to rethink the interpretation of results and the manner in which research is conducted in this field.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bem.20691

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Loughran, S. P., McKenzie, R. J., Jackson, M. L., Howard, M. E., & Croft, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Washington State University Spokane (US)
  • Austin Hospital (AU)
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
Corresponding author
Croft, Rodney J.
Venue
Bioelectromagnetics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-08-03
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
86-93
ISSN
  • 0197-8462 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-186X
OpenAlex
W1966995152
Cited by
68
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioelectromagnetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
mobile phone exposure, sleep, individual differences, EEG, sleep spindles, NREM sleep, EEG spectral power, electromagnetic field effects, sham exposure
MeSH terms
Adult, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Radio Waves, Sleep, Cell Phone, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review