Precautionary advice about mobile phones: public understandings and intended responses

Abstract

There is a widespread academic and policy debate about public responses to precaution in public health campaigns. This paper explores these issues in relation to the precautionary stance adopted in the UK around the regulation of mobile telecommunications. The aim of the paper is to examine the nature of attitudes to precaution, and the way in which these, along with other relevant variables, relate to the intention to adopt relevant behaviours. The results from an experimental study (n = 173) indicate that people distinguish between two dimensions of precaution: firstly in relation to its value or necessity per se and secondly as anchored to notions of governance. The two variables differentially relate to other variables including trust and uncertainty, and are predictive of intended behaviour change indirectly, through worry about mobile phone risks. Precautionary advice was generally interpreted as causing concern rather than providing reassurance. The results suggest that precaution may be considered a valuable stance but this does not mean that it is seen as good governance or that it will reduce concern. Whilst the discourse of precaution is aimed at reducing concern, it appears that the uptake of relevant behaviours is largely triggered by worry.

Keywords:

• public health information provision
• precaution
• uncertainty
• risk communication
• trust
• mobile phones

Notes

1. These leaflets were updated in 2005 and are available from http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4123979.

2. The SAR value is a measure of the amount of energy from radio waves absorbed by the body when using a mobile phone.

3. Two dimensions of the scenario were manipulated: the rationale for adopting precautionary approach to the management of mobile phone health risks (scientific uncertainty versus public concern) and the context in which precaution was presented (mobile phone risks versus mobile phone risks and benefits). There were no significant main or interaction effects of the manipulations upon any of the precaution variables or on any of the other variables in the final model. Of course, the information provided does form the context within which all of the final measures were completed. A copy of the text can be obtained from the first author.