Cited by 49Risk Perception and ManagementElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy

Mobile phone masts: protesting the scientific evidence

Open access
Drake, Frances·2006·Public Understanding of Science

Abstract

In the UK mobile phone ownership is high, however, there are conspicuous local protests against mobile phone masts. Protesters’ concerns often focus on the claimed ill health effects of mobile phone technology, which are frequently dismissed by industry and scientific experts. This paper provides an in-depth study into the attitudes and beliefs of one local protest. It considers to what extent health issues dominate the group’s concerns and how the campaigners have engaged with scientific knowledge to form their opinion. Surprisingly, mobile phone ownership was high within the protest group. This apparent paradox could be rationalized, however, by considering the location of the group and the ways in which the protesters used their mobile phone. Few believed that the precautionary approach had been fully applied to mobile phones. The campaign can be interpreted as one that questions the presumption that science and technology lead to increased economic performance and quality of life.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0963662506057246

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The 'base station myth' is a frequent topic in public media and could even trigger severe protests, reflecting health concerns of users about radiation safety.

    “The 'base station myth' is a frequent topic in public media and could even trigger severe protests [79], which reflects the health concerns of users about radiation safety.”

    From What should 6G be? (2020) · cites this paper as [79]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. apMobile (2004) 'Press Release: All Party Parliamentary Mobile Group to hold public inquiry on planning,' All Party Parliamentary Mobile Group (apMobile), London, URL (consulted June 2004): http://www.apmobile.org.uk
  2. EEMA (2001) ' EEMA Critical of UK Government over 3G License Auction ,' Press Release Monday 30 April 2001 URL (consulted June 2004): http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=66396
  3. Fox, K. (2001) ' Evolution, alienation and gossip: the role of mobile telecommunications in the 21 st century ,' Oxford: Social Issues Research Centre. URL (consulted October 2004) http://www.sirc.org/publick/gossip.shtml
  4. Hall, J. and Vredenburg, H. (2003) 'The challenges of sustainable development innovation,' MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(1): 61-68.
  5. Miller, S. (2001) 'Public understanding of science at the crossroads,' Public Understanding of Science , 10(2001): 115-20.
  6. NRPB (2004a) 'Mobile Telephony and Health: Background Information, UK National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB),' URL (consulted March 2004): http://www.nrpb.org/press/information\_sheets/mobile\_telephony/background\_info.ht m
  7. NRPB (2004c) 'Mobile Telephony and Health: Exposures from Base Stations, UK National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB),' URL (consulted March 2004): http://www.nrpb.org/press/information\_sheets/mobile\_telephony/ base\_stations.htm
  8. OST (2001) 'Science and the public: a review of science communication and public attitudes toward science in Britain, Office of Science and Technology and the Wellcome Trust,' Public Understanding of Science , 10(2001): 315-50.
  9. UNCED (1992) Principal 15, Final Declaration of the UN Conference on Environment and Development . Rio de Janeiro: UNCED.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Drake, F.
Affiliations
University of Leeds (GB)
Corresponding author
Drake, Frances
Venue
Public Understanding of Science
Published
2006-10
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
387-410
ISSN
  • 0963-6625 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6609
OpenAlex
W1964652550
Cited by
49
References
70
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
11.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Public Understanding of Science (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Cancer Institute
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Keywords
mobile phone masts, mobile phone ownership, public perception of science, precautionary principle

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