Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is There a Connection Between Electrosensitivity and Electrosensibility? A Replication Study

  • Published:
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Among people with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF), a better than random detection ability for a 50-Hz 0.5-mT magnetic field (MF) and a propensity to experience more symptoms than controls was reported in a previous study.

Purpose

The current study aimed to replicate and clarify these results using a modified experimental design.

Method

Participants of the provocation experiment were 49 individuals with self-reported IEI-EMF and 57 controls. They completed the questionnaires (symptom expectations, Somatosensory Amplification Scale—SSAS, radiation subscale of the Modern Health Worries Scale—MHWS Radiation) and attempted to detect the presence of the MF directed to their right arm in 20 subsequent 1-min sessions. Symptom reports were registered after each session.

Results

Individuals with IEI-EMF as opposed to the control group showed a higher than random detection performance (d′ index of signal detection theory), while no difference in their bias (β index) toward the presence of the MF was found. Predictors of reported symptoms were self-reported IEI-EMF and believed as opposed to actual presence of the MF. People with IEI-EMF reported significantly more symptoms particularly in the believed presence of the MF. IEI-EMF was closely related to MHWS Radiation and SSAS scores.

Conclusion

People with IEI-EMF might be able to detect the presence of the MF to a small extent; however, their symptom reports are connected to perceived exposure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Petrie KJ, Sivertsen B, Hysing M, Broadbent E, Moss-Morris R, Eriksen HR. Thoroughly modern worries: the relationship of worries about modernity to reported symptoms, health and medical care utilization. J Psychosom Res. 2001;51:395–401.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bailer J, Bahr V, Stübinger C, Witthöft M. Moderne Gesundheitssorgen und ihre Beziehung zu umweltbezogenen Beschwerden. Z Klin Psychol Psychother. 2008;37:61–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaptein AA, Helder DI, Kleijn WC, Rief W, Moss-Morris R, Petrie KJ. Modern health worries in medical students. J Psychosom Res. 2005;58:453–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Köteles F, Bárány E, Varsányi P, Bárdos G. Are modern health worries associated with somatosensory amplification, environmental attribution style, and commitment to complementary and alternative medicine? Scand J Psychol. 2012;53:144–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Spangenberg L, Zenger M, Rief W, Braehler E, Glaesmer H. Assessing modern health worries: dimensionality and factorial invariance across age and sex of the Modern Health Worries Scale in a general population sample. J Health Psychol. 2013;1359105313488980.

  6. ICNIRP. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1Hz-100kHz). Health Phys. 2010;99:818–36.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leitgeb N. Comparative health risk assessment of electromagnetic fields. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2011;161:251–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. WHO. Fact Sheet No. 296: Electromagnetic fields and public health [Internet]. World Health Organization; 2005. Source: http://www.emfandhealth.com/WHO_EMSensitivity.pdf

  9. Röösli M. Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure and non-specific symptoms of ill health: a systematic review. Environ Res. 2008;107:277–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rubin GJ, Nieto-Hernandez R, Wessely S. Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (formerly ‘electromagnetic hypersensitivity’): an updated systematic review of provocation studies. Bioelectromagnetics. 2010;31:1–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rubin GJ, Das Munshi J, Wessely S. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a systematic review of provocation studies. Psychosom Med. 2005;67:224–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Seitz H, Stinner D, Eikmann T, Herr C, Röösli M. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and subjective health complaints associated with electromagnetic fields of mobile phone communication—a literature review published between 2000 and 2004. Sci Total Environ. 2005;349:45–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Witthöft M, Rubin GJ. Are media warnings about the adverse health effects of modern life self-fulfilling? An experimental study on idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF). J Psychosom Res. 2013;74:206–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frick U, Kharraz A, Hauser S, Wiegand R, Rehm J, von Kovatsits U. Comparison perception of singular transcranial magnetic stimuli by subjectively electrosensitive subjects and general population controls. Bioelectromagnetics. 2005;26:287–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Landgrebe M, Frick U, Hauser S, Langguth B, Rosner R, Hajak G. Cognitive and neurobiological alterations in electromagnetic hypersensitive patients: results of a case-control study. Psychol Med. 2008;38:1781–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rubin GJ, Hahn G, Everitt BS, Cleare AJ, Wessely S. Are some people sensitive to mobile phone signals? Within participants double blind randomised provocation study. BMJ. 2006;332:886–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Szemerszky R, Köteles F, Lihi R, Bárdos G. Polluted places or polluted minds? An experimental sham-exposure study on background psychological factors of symptom formation in ‘Idiophatic Environmental Intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields’. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2010;213:387–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Frick U, Rehm J, Eichhammer P. Risk perception, somatization, and self report of complaints related to electromagnetic fields—a randomized survey study. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2002;205:353–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Köteles F, Szemerszky R, Gubányi M, Körmendi J, Szekrényesi C, Lloyd R. Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) and electrosensibility (ES) – are they connected? Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2013;216:362–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rubin GJ, Cleare AJ, Wessely S. Psychological factors associated with self-reported sensitivity to mobile phones. J Psychosom Res. 2008;64:1–9. discussion 11–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Oftedal G, Vistnes AI, Rygge K. Skin symptoms after the reduction of electric fields from visual display units. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1995;21:335–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rea WJ, Pan Y, Fenyves EJ, Sujisawa I, Samadi N, Ross GH. Electromagnetic field sensitivity. J Biol. 1991;10:241–56.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zwamborn APM, Vossen S, van Leersum B, Ouwens M, Makel W. Effects of global communication system radio-frequency on well being and cognitive functions of human subjects with and without subjective symptoms. The Hague: Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO); 2003.

  24. Göthe CJ, Molin C, Nilsson CG. The environmental somatization syndrome. Psychosomatics. 1995;36:1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Staudenmayer H, Binkley KE, Leznoff A, Phillips S. Idiopathic environmental intolerance: part 2: a causation analysis applying Bradford Hill’s criteria to the psychogenic theory. Toxicol Rev. 2003;22:247–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Leitgeb N, Schröttner J. Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. Bioelectromagnetics. 2003;24:387–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Köteles F, Szemerszky R, Freyler A, Bárdos G. Somatosensory amplification as a possible source of subjective symptoms behind modern health worries. Scand J Psychol. 2011;52:174–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Barsky AJ, Wyshak G, Klerman GL. The Somatosensory Amplification Scale and its relationship to hypochondriasis. J Psy Res. 1990;24:323–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Köteles F, Gémes H, Papp G, Túróczi P, Pásztor A, Freyler A. A Szomatoszenzoros Amplifikáció Skála (SSAS) magyar változatának validálása. Mentálhigiéné és Pszichoszomatika. 2009;10:321–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Preece AW, Kaune W, Grainger P, Preece S, Golding J. Magnetic fields from domestic appliances in the UK. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. NIEHS. Questions and answers about EMF electric and magnetic fields associated with the use of electric power (DOE/EE-0040). Washington DC: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  32. MacMillan NA, Creelman CD. Detection theory: a user’s guide. 2nd ed. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF. Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA. 2002;287:622–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Barsky AJ, Rogers MP. When are medication side effects due to the nocebo phenomenon? — reply. JAMA. 2002;287:2502–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Köteles F, Bárdos G. What makes us sicker? An experimental study of non-specific adverse drug effects. Clin Exp Med J. 2011;5:203–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Röösli M, Hug K. Wireless communication fields and non-specific symptoms of ill health: a literature review. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2011;161:240–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. ICNIRP. Exposure to static and low frequency electromagnetic fields, biological effects and health consequences (0-100 kHz). München: International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kirschvink JL, Kobayashi-Kirschvink A, Diaz-Ricci JC, Kirschvink SJ. Magnetite in human tissues: a mechanism for the biological effects of weak ELF magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 1992;Suppl 1:101–13.

  39. WHO. Extremely low frequency fields. Environmental Health Criteria [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007. Source: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/Complet_DEC_2007.pdf

  40. Köteles F, Simor P. Modern health worries, somatosensory amplification and subjective symptoms: a longitudinal study. Int J Behav Med. 2013;20:38–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bailer J, Witthöft M, Rist F. Modern health worries and idiopathic environmental intolerance. J Psychosom Res. 2008;65:425–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Köteles F, Simor P. Modern health worries, somatosensory amplification, health anxiety, and well-being. A cross-sectional Study. Eur J Mental Health. 2014;9:20–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Hungarian National Scientific Research Fund (OTKA K 76880, K 109549) and by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. The authors would like to thank Prof. Wolfgang Schwartz for his help and valuable comments on signal detection calculations and György Thuróczy for his comments on the exact description of the physical characteristics of the experimental equipment.

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.

Ethical Statement

The authors state that all procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Promotion and Sport Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary

    Renáta Szemerszky, Mónika Gubányi, Dorottya Árvai, Zsuzsanna Dömötör & Ferenc Köteles

Authors
  1. Renáta Szemerszky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mónika Gubányi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dorottya Árvai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zsuzsanna Dömötör
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ferenc Köteles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferenc Köteles.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Szemerszky, R., Gubányi, M., Árvai, D. et al. Is There a Connection Between Electrosensitivity and Electrosensibility? A Replication Study. Int.J. Behav. Med. 22, 755–763 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-015-9477-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-015-9477-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation