Academic Research on UFO Witnesses and ET Contact Experiencers

Academic Research on UFO Witnesses and ET Contact Experiencers

Kathleen Marden

Introduction 

Almost twenty years ago, I embarked on a research initiative to investigate the history of academic inquiries into what was then termed "UFO abductees." There had been a substantial movement aimed at dispelling the notion that certain individuals had been taken aboard extraterrestrial ships and had experiences with non-human entities. Research psychologists were proposing various explanations for the emergence of these beliefs, including false memory syndrome, delusional thinking, sleep paralysis, deliberate fabrications, and a range of psychological disorders. Social scientists and UFO skeptics were bolstering the psychologists' conclusions while advocating a spectrum of theories designed to elucidate why some individuals hold beliefs that mainstream science has deemed improbable. I resolved to apply the analytical skills I had honed during my college years to scrutinize the existing research studies, searching for biases and variables that may have distorted the results of these investigations.

As a UFO investigator and the niece of Betty and Barney Hill, I have been privy to compelling evidence that convinces me that some UFO sightings and contact incidents are indeed genuine. Furthermore, I was aware of multiple government-funded investigations into UFO phenomena. These studies revealed that credible witnesses had encountered highly advanced, structured craft capable of performing feats that seemed impossible to numerous scientists, particularly those who staunchly adhered to Newtonian physics. When faced with these enigmatic aerial vehicles that defied understanding, they dismissed them as scientifically implausible.

In 1969, Dr. Edward Condon delivered his findings from the Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects to the National Academy of Sciences Review Panel. At the start of the study in 1967, he insisted that any favorable conclusion concerning the extraterrestrial hypothesis would necessitate either the presence of an extraterrestrial craft and/or the physical remains of a being evidently not from Earth, suitable for laboratory analysis. Photographic documentation, radar data, and eyewitness accounts from hundreds of credible individuals did not hold weight for him. He proclaimed that no UFO reports merited investigation by the scientific community. Additionally, he asserted, "It is safe to assume that no intelligent life outside our solar system has any possibility of visiting Earth in the next 10,000 years." [1]

Ultimately, Dr. Condon presented his politically influenced conclusions to the National Academy of Sciences, which subsequently advocated for funding directed toward social science and communication research focused on individuals who assert the existence of UFOs. He faced intense backlash from critics who alleged he was engaged in a cover-up, but the political machinery triumphed. (Refer to Stanton Friedman & Kathleen Marden, Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers, Chapter 5, pp. 91-108 for further details.)

This paper offers a thorough examination of the research undertaken in university environments, emphasizing the key discoveries and perspectives amassed by academic social scientists.

Status Inconsistency Theory 

 In the early 1970s, social scientists commenced the publication of scholarly articles focused on the unique personality traits and experiences commonly shared by UFO observers. The first known article by a social scientist was released by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in the November 6, 1970, edition of the esteemed peer-reviewed journal Science. The research paper, titled "Status Inconsistency Theory and Flying Saucer Sightings," authored by Donald I. Warren of the University of Michigan School of Social Work, provides statistical data and sociological theory to explain the heightened belief in extraterrestrial visits among certain individuals. Warren suggests that those who perceive a gap between their economic and/or professional status and their educational qualifications tend to feel frustrated, potentially leading them to report sightings of UFOs as a form of resistance against prevailing cultural norms. He posited that feelings of social inconsistency can trigger withdrawal, defeatism, and a retreat from mainstream society. 

According to Dr. Warren, this belief arises from a pervasive sense of disappointment stemming from an inability to achieve personal success, resulting in a rejection of the dominant societal values. As such, in Warren's view, UFO sightings serve merely as a reflection of marginalized social status and the resulting socioeconomic discontent.

 Warren's detailed empirical study on individuals who believe in UFOs was grounded in data derived from a 1966 Gallup poll that examined UFO beliefs alongside various factors such as educational attainment, economic conditions, and occupational status. The Gallup Poll surveyed 1,575 Americans, posing the question, "Have you, yourself, ever seen anything you thought was a flying saucer?" Notably, five percent of all respondents answered positively.

In his analysis, Warren made the controversial choice to exclude all female and Black male respondents, operating under the assumption that these groups were historically marginalized. He categorized the remaining white male participants into three distinct groups: mildly status consistent, moderately status inconsistent, and sharply status inconsistent.

Through his statistical examinations, Warren discovered that white males who were moderately and sharply status inconsistent—characterized by low income yet possessing moderate to high levels of educational attainment—were significantly more inclined to claim they had witnessed at least one object identified as a flying saucer, which was the dominant term for unidentified extraterrestrial vehicles at that time. He noted that individuals achieving the highest educational levels while having the least income or occupational status formed the cohort most likely to report sightings of flying saucers in the survey. 

This statement sparked considerable controversy among some of his colleagues. They contended that had Warren taken into account the perspectives of female and African American respondents, his hypothesis would likely have been invalidated; this is due to the fact that a greater number of status-consistent individuals than status-inconsistent ones reported UFO sightings. Furthermore, he overlooked the various age demographics of white males in his analysis. It is clear that male college students and retired men represent two demographics that would fall under the category of status inconsistency. These individuals frequently engage in part-time jobs that do not align with their education and professional skills, yet they are either gearing up for promising careers or are enjoying retirement after having held positions synonymous with status consistency.

The March 12, 1971, edition of Science featured several letters to the editor that challenged Warren's findings. G.L. Cowgill, hailing from the Anthropology Department at Brandeis University, asserted that Warren's study lacked statistically significant proof backing his claims, and he also pointed out that the robust job market of the time would have enabled highly educated men to secure the positions they sought.

In the same section, Peter Dubno (New York University Graduate School of Business Administration) presented a compelling refutation of Warren's conclusions. He identified a significant variable that Warren had overlooked. Dubno argued that men from rural areas who experience status inconsistency are more inclined to report sightings than those from urban settings. Thus, living in rural areas shows a stronger correlation with flying saucer sightings than does status inconsistency. Furthermore, individuals from rural regions are more likely to feel status inconsistent compared to their urban counterparts, and this tendency is a conscious choice rather than a consequence of professional ambitions.

In 1979, Phillis Fox (Cal. State) endeavored to replicate Warren's findings on Status Inconsistency Theory but was unsuccessful. It is particularly noteworthy that, despite robust critiques of Warren's theory, staunch skeptics continue to cite status inconsistency as a contributing factor in UFO sighting reports.

Although a handful of scholarly articles by social scientists were published in prominent peer-reviewed journals throughout the 1970s—such as "Supernatural Beliefs of Graduate Students" Nature, 1971, "Physical Fairyland," Nature, 1972, and "Social Intelligence about Anomalies: The Case of UFOs in Social Studies of Science," 1977—academic research into UFO witnesses didn't begin to gather significant traction until the mid-1980s.

In 1984, Troy Zimmer (Cal. State) penned "Social Psychological Correlates of Possible UFO Sightings" in The Journal of Social Psychology. His inquiries focused on whether student volunteers or acquaintances had ever encountered a UFO, their level of interest in UFO phenomena, and their interaction with UFO-related media. Zimmer surveyed 475 undergraduates, 77 of whom claimed to have seen what they believed was a UFO, while 398 reported they had never had such an encounter.

Furthermore, Zimmer gathered insights on individuals' beliefs about the occult, as well as their perspectives on a malevolent worldview, cultural disconnection, and personal welfare. In a distinct line of inquiry, he explored how UFO observers measured up in terms of overall happiness and social integration, especially in comparison with non-observers.

Zimmer found that a belief in UFOs does not indicate social or psychological maladjustment. Those who believed were no more inclined than their counterparts to experience distress, cultural alienation, or cynicism. His findings showed that UFO observers were comparable to non-observers regarding their sense of cultural estrangement, philosophical outlook, and personal health. The sole distinction between the two cohorts was that UFO believers were slightly more prone to suspect that the US Government is concealing evidence of UFOs and to hold beliefs in the occult. Additionally, belief in UFOs was positively associated with the notion that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe.

In 1985, the journal Deviant Behavior featured Troy Zimmer's article titled "Belief in UFOs as Alternative Reality, Cultural Rejection or Disturbed Psyche." In his exploration, Zimmer highlighted an intriguing observation from Phillis Fox's discussions (as previously noted) on small community surveys regarding beliefs about the extraterrestrial origin of certain UFOs. Fox's research indicated that engagement with UFO-themed media (such as comic books, science fiction films, magazine pieces, etc.) did not correspond with an inclination to believe in UFOs or alien spacecraft.

It is intriguing that despite these discoveries, the portrayal of UFO science fiction in the media has frequently been suggested as a reason why certain individuals cultivate the misconception that UFOs and abductions by extraterrestrials are genuine occurrences. Clearly, it appears that some skeptics refuse to consider evidence that challenges their deeply rooted convictions.

UFO Abduction Reports Surge

Several notable UFO abduction cases from the 1970s—such as those involving Calvin Parker, Charlie Hickson, Travis Walton, Mona Stafford, Louise Smith, and Elaine Thomas—significantly redirected academic research from merely observing UFOs to examining the psycho-social dynamics surrounding the belief in alien abduction. It is crucial to recognize that many of these early abduction accounts came with substantial evidence, including both physical and circumstantial proof, credible eyewitness testimonies, additional witnesses to the unidentified craft, normal performance on psychological assessments, successful polygraph tests, and unique correlating details that were known only to leading investigators in the UFO abduction field. Unfortunately, psychologists at that time either overlooked or dismissed this evidence. This resulted in an increase in accusations from staunch skeptics, who labeled abduction investigators as unscrupulous advocates of UFO and extraterrestrial lore.

This led to a growing witch-hunt throughout the 1980s and 1990s. As reports surfaced from individuals claiming they were taken from their homes under the cover of night, anti-UFO skeptics quickly moved to promote conventional dismissive theories. Despite many experiencers being awake during the initial moments of their encounters, the narrative primarily centered on those who were asleep when the contact event began. Authoritative skeptics insisted that even though some individuals were adamant about being awake while extraterrestrials entered their space, they had simply misinterpreted their state of consciousness. Perceptual difficulties became a catchphrase among skeptics addressing reports they deemed unacceptable. The elusive nature of nighttime bedroom abductions, coupled with disbelief from academics in psychology, spurred an increase in research concerning anomalous sleep states, dreams, fantasy experiences, dissociative disorders, and issues with memory processing.

Moreover, skeptical psychologists and staunch critics, many of whom lacked formal qualifications in psychology, produced pseudo-scholarly writings proposing numerous theories to explain "UFO abduction" as a psychological anomaly. Almost universally, they dismissed substantial evidence such as sightings of the crafts and/or the non-humans, unusual lights appearing in the experiencers' residences, peculiar patterned marks on their bodies, unexplained burns and eye irritation, instances of missing time, conscious recollections of parts of the experience, waking up inexplicably locked out of one's own home, vegetative remnants found on bedding or lodged in windows, and post-event traumatic stress. Instead, they asserted that various psychological anomalies led individuals to develop a flawed belief in the reality of UFOs and alien abductions. Vocal anti-UFO/ET proponents boldly declared that extraterrestrial visitation is "impossible" and hence, no UFO or extraterrestrial being has ever come to our planet or engaged with humans.

As the evidence began to accumulate, significant mental health issues, hypnotic suggestion, sleep disturbances, deviant states, and a diverse array of personality characteristics were proposed as reasons for why certain individuals feel they have been abducted. At times, biased researchers displayed remarkable creativity in their efforts to undermine the validity of extraterrestrial contact. The academic community seldom scrutinized the substantial body of scientific data suggesting that some instances of "abductions" by alien entities might indeed hold truth. This subject had developed into a deeply entrenched taboo, with severe repercussions including ostracism from colleagues in the field.

In light of a history marked by research bias, the rigorous examination of UFO abductees/ET contact experiencers has yielded no evidence of heightened psychological disorders within this unique demographic. Factors such as race, religion, marital status, educational attainment, and scientific literacy did not impact their identification as UFO abductees/contact experiencers. The only notable distinction was a heightened incidence of childhood trauma.

The inability of academic psychologists to pinpoint significant psychological disorders in UFO abductees/contact experiencers has sparked interest among some experimental psychologists, leading them to pursue alternative psychological frameworks, particularly regarding the origins of false personal beliefs. Various experimental studies have sought to identify personality traits that differentiate UFO abduction/contact experiencers from those who do not share these experiences. These studies have proposed several potential factors, including boundary deficit disorder, susceptibility to fantasy, sleep-induced hallucinations, false memory syndrome, and absorption of cultural myths, among others.

Fantasy Prone Personality and Dissociative States     

Personality disorders are characterized by enduring patterns of cognition, emotion, and behavior that deviate significantly from cultural expectations, leading to substantial distress and challenges in social functioning. These disorders can be extremely resistant to change. Individuals affected may display a range of negative behaviors, including hostility, neediness, deceitfulness, delusions, or antisocial tendencies. Those with personality disorders often carry these traits with them throughout their lives, although the specific symptoms and their intensity can vary over time.

In this section, we will delve into various personality disorders and examine research findings related to self-identified "abductees," along with additional psychological theories surrounding UFO abduction and contact with extraterrestrials.

In 1981, a collaboration between hypnosis critic Theodore X. Barber and Sheryl C. Wilson from Cushing Hospital in Framingham, Massachusetts, led to an insightful study aimed at enhancing the understanding of hypnotic suggestibility. They identified a segment of the adult population, roughly 4%, who predominantly engages in magical thinking, demonstrating a unique ability to intertwine fantasies with actual experiences. Their findings were derived from a series of interviews and an assessment tool designed for measuring hypnotic suggestibility, which included 27 female daydreamers who proved to be excellent hypnotic subjects and 25 who did not show this trait. The researchers proposed that 65% of those prone to fantasy occasionally blur the lines between their imagined daydreams and the real world, particularly when their fantasies involve intimate conversations with loved ones.

Research indicated that the fantasy-inclined women in their study often participated in imaginative play with dolls and stuffed animals during their childhood, pretending these toys were alive. At times, they envisioned themselves as different characters. The most vivid daydreamers noted that their profound focus on these imaginings originated from feelings of loneliness or boredom when they were young. Many shared experiences of having imaginary companions or a belief in fairies and guardian angels. Wilson and Barber introduced the term "fantasy-prone personality" to encapsulate a collection of traits common among these women.

A child development expert might argue that engaging in fantasy play is a typical behavior for young children. This type of play is supported by societal norms and promoted by caregivers. Nevertheless, almost all children eventually grow up and learn to distinguish between the realms of fantasy and reality.

While fantasy play is a prevalent aspect of early childhood, research by Wilson and Barber reveals that individuals prone to fantasy often maintain this vivid daydreaming into adulthood. Those who are fantasy-prone frequently share experiences or beliefs related to having psychic powers, experiencing out-of-body sensations, and channeling healing energies to others; phenomena that the researchers labeled as impossible. However, recent scientific evidence suggests that such abilities may indeed be real and achievable for certain gifted individuals.

To explore this phenomenon, Wilson and Barber created the "Inventory of Childhood Memories and Imaginings," a 52-item questionnaire designed to assess hypnotic suggestibility. Over time, psychologists began to utilize this tool as a means to measure fantasy proneness among individuals claiming UFO abduction or contact experiences. *(Subsequent research indicates that hypnotic suggestibility is better represented as one's capacity to focus, concentrate, and accept hypnotic suggestions.)

Consequently, the paranormal occurrences frequently reported by those who claim to have been abducted by UFOs or who have had contact with aliens are often dismissed by skeptics as mere indicators of a tendency toward fantasy. To accept the Wilson/Barber scale as a valid measure of such fantasy proneness among these individuals, one must first hold a prior belief that both UFO abduction and psi phenomena are impossible, despite a substantial body of evidence that suggests otherwise. (Refer to Chapter 12 in Science Was Wrong by Stanton Friedman & Kathleen Marden for an analysis of psi meta-study findings).

In 1989, George Ganaway, a psychiatrist at Emory University and an expert in dissociative disorders, explored the intriguing intersection of media influence and psychological vulnerability. He posited that television shows, movies, and literature, coupled with the persuasive techniques of hypnotists, could lead susceptible individuals to genuinely believe they have experienced alien abductions, even in the absence of such events. As a result, these individuals may unconsciously fabricate detailed memories of extraterrestrial encounters to fill gaps in their amnesia. Ganaway speculated that those suffering from dissociative identity disorder could develop these fantastical narratives of alien contact as a coping mechanism to shield themselves from painful recollections of traumatic experiences. 

The Omega Project Research Initiatives

The Omega Projects comprised a series of psychological surveys aimed at individuals who reported abductions and various UFO encounters. Kenneth Ring and Christopher J. Rosing from the University of Connecticut spearheaded the initial studies in 1990. Their most significant study involved 264 participants, categorized into four distinct groups: 1. the abductee group, 2. the near-death experiencers group, 3. a control group consisting of individuals with a mere interest in UFOs, and 4. another control group focusing on those intrigued by near-death experiences. Participants underwent a comprehensive set of personality assessments designed to evaluate the psychological traits that might predispose certain individuals to experiencing UFO "abductions" and to draw comparisons with those who have undergone near-death experiences (NDE).

The findings revealed intriguing similarities between UFO encounters and NDEs; members of both groups reported enhanced psychic awareness, a sense of altruism, and an elevated level of spirituality stemming from their experiences. It was noted that both experiencer groups did not demonstrate a higher propensity for fantasy compared to the control groups. Furthermore, individuals from both the abductee and NDE categories described having an early sensitivity to psychic phenomena, non-physical entities, and alternate realities—indicating an ability to perceive different planes of existence or beings that remain unnoticed by others. The researchers refrained from viewing these occurrences as indicative of fantasy proneness.

Both experiencer groups reported a significantly higher incidence of childhood abuse and trauma compared to the control groups. Additionally, there was a noted rise in serious illness during their formative years. The researchers identified an increased tendency toward dissociation as a coping strategy within both experiencer groups, particularly pronounced in the UFO abductee cohort. They posited that experiences of childhood abuse (suffering) may have led these children to develop a psychological defense mechanism that involves separating from the source of their distress and attuning to alternate realities. The hypothesis regarding these alternate realities provides a protective barrier, allowing traumatized children to distance themselves from the abuse they endure.

The Omega Project researchers concluded their findings with the following remark: "Our overall sample seems to view UFOs and NDEs in a favorable light, and we believe that these phenomena may offer significant benefits for humanity which we are only beginning to comprehend today… However, the data gathered from the Omega Project, particularly insights into beliefs and values, strongly indicate that these experiences also carry a robust motivation for fostering various healthy and beneficial changes. Psychiatric classifications should not overshadow the transformative potential of these experiencers; we contend that the positive perspectives many respondents associate with their experiences may suggest that any traumatic consequences are overshadowed by their long-term transformative opportunities." [2]  

 The Omega Study's UFO experiencer and NDE groups noted a considerably higher frequency of malfunctions in electrical equipment following their experiences. This phenomenon has long been recognized as an indicator of alien abduction or ET contact. It was significantly highlighted in the Marden-Stoner Commonalities Study as well as the latest MUFON ERT Experiencer Survey. Participants from both groups reported anomalies in electronic devices, such as lights flickering when they pass underneath and issues with watches, computers, store scanners, and time clocks malfunctioning exclusively for them.

Drs. Ring and Rosing have conducted two notable studies within the Omega Project framework, but this paper will focus solely on the first. For further details, readers are encouraged to conduct an online inquiry or consult their published books and articles. 

In 2010, Dr. Robert LeLieuvre, Lester Valez, and Michael Freeman initiated the Omega 3 project to assess the findings of Ring and Rosing. The study involved seventy-one individuals who had experienced abduction and fifty-one participants who were interested in abduction phenomena but had no firsthand experience. These formed the experiential and control groups respectively. The questionnaire consisted of eight instruments from the Kenneth Ring Omega Project study, complemented by two from Persinger's research, which explored physiological, psychological, and philosophical dimensions.

Results revealed that neither group exhibited greater fantasy-proneness compared to the general population. Nonetheless, the experiential group displayed a heightened interest in extraterrestrial contact, influencing their worldviews significantly. Participants reported increased awareness of altered states of consciousness; earlier psi experiences; elevated levels of stress along with conflict and tension in adulthood; and psychosocial distress during childhood; along with a greater propensity for dissociative coping strategies; a shift towards spiritual beliefs; as well as concerns regarding ecological issues on our planet. These findings do not imply that ET contact is purely a figment of imagination. Rather, they suggest that those who experience ET contact undergo a profound transformative journey, distinguishing them from other demographic groups.

Extensive investigations aimed at evaluating the hypothesis that UFO abductees possess a propensity for fantasy have yielded predominantly negative outcomes, save for one notable instance. In their 1991 research, Robert E. Bartholomew (James Cook University), Keith Basterfield (UFO Research Australia), and George Howard (University of Notre Dame) found that an impressive 87% (N=132) of the self-reported contactees or abductees they studied exhibited one or more significant traits of a fantasy-prone personality as delineated on the Wilson/Barber scale. These conclusions were derived from the biographical accounts of 152 self-identified contactees/abductees. It is important to note that no psychometric assessments were utilized to evaluate individual personality characteristics. A predominant theme among the abductees was the manifestation of reported psychic phenomena.

As previously highlighted within this paper, it is not viable to dismiss psychic phenomena simply as a form of fantasy. Scholarly research reveals that such phenomena indeed exist, though they are not widespread within the broader population. A plethora of scientific studies suggest that the Wilson/Barber Fantasy Prone Personality Inventory carries an inherent bias against those who have experienced psi phenomena. Wilson and Barber posited that while the observation of psychic phenomena is impossible, it remains subjectively authentic for the fantasy-prone individuals. In contrast, a multitude of scientists have amassed evidence supporting the reality of psychic and paraphysical occurrences. (Refer to Dr. Claude Swanson's The Synchronized Universe book series for more information.)

In 1991, Mark Rodeghier (University of Illinois), Jeff Goodpastor (Gateway Technical College), and Sandra Blatterbauer (CUFOS) undertook a study involving individuals who met explicitly defined criteria for having undergone a verified UFO abduction experience. Their findings revealed no significant differences in the Inventory of Childhood Memories and Imaginings scores between alleged abductees and the general population. This suggests that psychic phenomena are not confined exclusively to those who have experienced extraterrestrial contact or near-death experiences.

Nicholas Spanos, PA Cross, K. Dickson, and SC DuBreuil (from Carleton University) conducted a comprehensive assessment involving a range of scales for 19 individuals who reported sightings of erratically moving lights in the sky, which they believed to be UFOs, alongside 20 individuals who claimed to have had close encounters with or abductions by non-human entities. Their results indicated that those who report UFO experiences, including episodes of missing time and telepathic interactions with extraterrestrials, do not possess higher levels of fantasy proneness than the general population. Nevertheless, individuals with elevated scores on the fantasy proneness scale tended to describe more intricate abduction experiences.

In 2005, UFO skeptic Christopher French (from England) administered the Wilson/Barber scale, without any supplementary personality assessments, to 19 self-identified abductees and a control group of 19 individuals. His research revealed a notably higher incidence of "fantasy proneness" among those who identified as abductees.

As highlighted earlier, I firmly believe that we cannot regard the Wilson/Barber scale as a valid assessment tool for measuring fantasy proneness in individuals claiming abduction experiences. When research outcomes diverge from the prevailing perspectives held by the academic community, it becomes crucial to scrutinize the researcher's motivations and inherent beliefs. We must question why Dr. French exclusively utilized the potentially flawed Wilson/Barber scale. Was he attempting to substantiate a hypothesis using a dated and partial psychological tool? I have observed what seems to be a consistent bias within the research results produced by certain members of skeptical societies.

 Boundary Deficit Disorder 

In 1988, Midwestern farmer and outspoken skeptic Martin Kottmeyer composed a detailed scholarly paper discussing the phenomenon of alien abduction in relation to boundary deficit disorder. An online biographical profile describes him as someone who "challenges the notion that one needs academic credentials to intelligently explore cultural enigmas." Even though he lacks formal training as a behavioral scientist, his article found considerable traction among skeptics who categorically dismiss the possibility of alien abductions.

Kottmeyer's theory was informed by psychiatrist Ernest Hartmann's research (Tufts University, 1984) focusing on college students plagued by frequent nightmares. Dr. Hartmann identified that this unique subgroup experienced difficulties in distinguishing between fantasy and reality, exhibited a weakened sense of self, struggled socially, often felt rejected, endured suicidal thoughts, experienced feelings of impotence, and were highly attuned to various sensory inputs. He coined the term "boundary deficit disorder" to describe the syndrome associated with these recurring nightmares. Kottmeyer reviewed Dr. Hartmann's findings and penned his own paper proposing that symptoms of boundary deficit could lead UFO abductees to confuse nightmares with genuine experiences. However, he did not conduct any original research to verify if UFO abductees actually suffered from the frequent nightmares or any symptoms identified by Dr. Hartmann. This was a speculative assertion rather than a hypothesis grounded in empirical evidence.

Kottmeyer's work caught the attention of experimental psychologist Nicholas Spanos, PhD, who in 1993 embarked on an academic investigation involving witnesses of UFO close encounters alongside a control group to critically assess Kottmeyer's conjecture. Spanos and his colleagues deployed five psychometric scales to both groups, with the results showing that UFO close encounter witnesses had a notably lower incidence of schizophrenia, greater self-esteem, improved overall well-being, reduced perceptual aberration, a less hostile world view, decreased aggression, and showed no significant differences from the control group regarding social potency. This group starkly contrasted with Dr. Hartmann's frequent nightmare sufferers. Further analysis revealed no variance in absorption, fantasy proneness, or the inclination to engage in imaginative thought between the control and experiential groups. The findings suggest that Kottmeyer's hypothesis was unfounded, regardless of the effort he put forth and the backing he received from staunch skeptics.

Mr. Kottmeyer made an error in his assumption that Barney Hill had watched the popular television series "The Outer Limits" just days prior to his hypnosis session with Dr. Benjamin Simon, during which he recounted the details of the non-human entities he had seen through binoculars in Lincoln, NH, at midnight on September 19, 1961. In reality, Barney was not at home when the episode aired and had no interest in this genre of television programming. He did not watch this show. Kottmeyer suggests that Barney's description of the Bifrost man was influenced by this series. It is crucial to adhere to the facts and avoid presenting speculation as though it were undeniable truth, a common practice among staunch skeptics.

Barney described the figures seen through the craft's windows as wearing glossy black uniforms. One figure seemed to wear a cap and a scarf, which, given the distance from which he observed, could have led Barney to misinterpret the extraterrestrial's headgear as familiar human attire. I have analyzed various images of non-human entities captured through craft windows, revealing that they often wear advanced headgear technology. Notably, Barney's description of the entity's face during hypnosis was markedly different from that of the Bifrost man. Additionally, during the abduction, Barney had a clear, close-up view of the extraterrestrials' faces, eliminating any reason for him to fabricate details concerning their appearances.

Sleep Paralysis & Hypnagogic/Hypnopompic Hallucinations

For an extended period, academic psychologists have speculated that sleep paralysis might explain why some people report experiencing nighttime abductions from their own bedrooms. Those who claim to have been abducted frequently describe waking up unable to move, with dark, indistinct figures looming near their beds or hovering overhead. In these terrifying moments, their attempts to scream are futile as their voices do not come forth. They find themselves trapped in bodies that won't respond, completely powerless to express their fear. The only aspect of their bodies they can control is their gaze. The intersection of sleep paralysis and the threatening presence of indistinct figures causes their hearts to race. They struggle to breathe under the weight of an overwhelming pressure on their chests. They remain sharply aware of their surroundings, while dark shapes become increasingly sinister, and ambient sounds grow more pronounced. Those who experience sleep paralysis often battle to break free from this horrifying ordeal, only to awaken moments later. Interestingly, there are no extraterrestrial beings nearby. (It's notable that investigators from the government who studied Skinwalker Ranch in Utah reported encountering a phenomenon described as "hitchhikers," where they too experienced abrupt awakenings accompanied by shadowy figures, which were not explained by sleep paralysis.)

Research indicates that approximately thirty percent of individuals will experience sleep paralysis at least once in their lives. Those who face sleep paralysis often feel as if they are awake, even though they are actually in a state of partial REM sleep (rapid eye movement). This occurrence is a common characteristic of REM sleep, intended to keep us from physically acting out our dreams. However, in certain instances, we wake up, and during those moments, our bodies and minds may briefly become misaligned. As a result, the paralysis persists for several seconds, rendering us unable to move except for our eyes. 

I have spoken with numerous individuals who have experienced sleep paralysis, and not one of them has mistaken it for alien abduction; they were well-informed about the phenomenon due to their prolonged encounters with it. Most shared that the sensation of weight on their chest was the most distressing aspect of sleep paralysis, frequently comparing it to the feeling of suffocation.

MUFON's Experiencer Research Team embarked on an extensive examination of this phenomenon through a meticulous study involving 516 experiencers. This in-depth, two-phase project commenced in 2015 and concluded in 2018. In Phase 1, participants were asked, "Have you ever woken up unable to move your body or cry out for help?" Among the 510 individuals who provided responses, an astonishing 74% confirmed they had undergone such an experience. Phase 2 of our inquiry further identified those participants categorized as abductees, armed with the appropriate evidence, awareness, and emotional context to validate such classification. Our findings revealed that 90% of the UFO abductees reported awakening while experiencing paralysis. However, we exercised caution and refrained from hastily concluding that sleep paralysis alone could fully explain their interactions with extraterrestrial beings.

We asked the question, "Have you been awake and able to move your body, yet perceived a non-human or ET presence and found yourself immobilized?" Out of 507 participants in our survey, 36% responded that they were conscious at the initiation of a UFO abduction and then experienced paralysis. Significantly, among those classified as genuine abductees, an impressive 60% reported awareness prior to the onset of paralysis.

Despite various theories posited by academic psychologists, it is clear that many ET contact experiencers are cognizant when non-human entities penetrate their environment. They have described the transformations in their surroundings mere moments before being taken to an otherworldly realm. Our research indicates that sleep paralysis fails to sufficiently explain the ET contact experience.

What stands out is that sleep paralysis alone fails to explain the intricate imagery reported by abduction experiencers. Skeptics have advanced alternative theories. Some academic psychologists speculate that extraterrestrial beings manifest through sleep hallucinations known as hypnagogic (the transitional state from wakefulness to sleep) and hypnopompic (the transitional state from sleep to wakefulness) phenomena. This condition impacts approximately 5% of the population in the US.

Hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations typically occur when elements such as stress, severe exhaustion, medication, or mental health issues disrupt the brain's ability to differentiate between conscious sensations and those generated internally. As a consequence, vivid visions, sounds, sensations, odors, or tastes emerge from within. Experiencers often report seeing colorful geometric figures or fragments of objects. Additionally, some might perceive the vibrant image of a person, creature, or animal. The sensations of levitating or soaring through the air are prevalent, often accompanied by imagined buzzing sounds. These hypnagogic hallucinations can be quite unsettling. They can last from mere seconds to several minutes and are generally followed by a short episode of sleep paralysis.

Hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations are notably prevalent among individuals with narcolepsy, a condition characterized by severe fatigue and uncontrollable episodes of daytime sleep. This sleep disorder often has a lifelong impact and tends to run in families, implying a possible genetic link. However, most individuals who encounter these sleep phenomena tend to have a clear ability to differentiate between their internally generated hallucinations and the reality surrounding them.

The onset of an ET contact experience, especially when it takes place during sleep, may likely be triggered by hypnagogic and hypnopompic phenomena. Nonetheless, individuals who believe they have undergone genuine encounters—evidenced by clear memories of the event, corroborating eyewitness accounts, instances of missing time, physical traces, and more—describe nuanced yet critical distinctions between their experiences and sleep anomalies. Unlike sleep anomalies, these alleged experiences leave tangible evidence of an intrusion into our reality.

A significant number of abduction experiencers describe being fully awake when they perceive a sudden beam of light illuminating their environment. They may experience an unusual sound, a tingling sensation, and observe strange occurrences in their homes. Initially during these encounters, they might not feel immobilized. However, I have viewed photographs documenting the injuries sustained by experiencers who resisted abduction, indicating that not all individuals are paralyzed immediately. Many retain the ability to move and call out for help. Some even attempt to flee or hurl objects at the intruders before these entities ultimately seize control over their minds and bodies.

The experiencer observes small entities, often characterized by their glimmering eyes, as they cross into the human realm. Sometimes, the experiencer's partner may instinctively try to resist but is quickly restrained and gently returned to slumber, drifting back into a deep sleep. A wave of paralysis envelops the ET contact experiencer, rendering them instantly compliant. The initial fear fades, replaced by an unexpected feeling of familiarity. I theorize that this paralysis is essential for two main reasons: 1. to protect the ET from any potential threat, and 2. to ensure the human's safety during their entry into the ET's domain.

Individuals are rapidly moved from their homes to awaiting spacecraft or otherworldly environments where they participate in various biological and behavioral examinations. It is important to understand that not every extraterrestrial encounter requires a journey into an alien environment. Only those encounters involving advanced technology aboard the craft necessitate entry into the ET realm, such as when tissue samples are taken. Occasionally, the experiencers are informed by the extraterrestrials that these samples are vital for evaluating the degree of environmental toxicity present in the human body. In such cases, the experiencer may receive a significant alert to be cautious about consuming potentially contaminated food or being exposed to environmental hazards.

Glandular tissue may be extracted, particularly after emotionally intense experiences unfold in an otherworldly setting. Experiencers often encounter deceased family members or cherished pets. Alternatively, an experiencer may engage in a lifelike, albeit unreal, scenario where they believe they have harmed or killed a beloved individual. The glandular tissue is retrieved immediately following the experiencer's overwhelming feelings of distress or joy.

They could gain insights into the grave dangers presented by nuclear weapons and the total devastation they can cause. They might be shown vivid depictions or scenarios illustrating a catastrophic incident occurring on our planet. Urgent messages emphasize the critical importance of environmental consciousness and the imminent risk of ecological disaster. Those having these experiences may be encouraged to share knowledge regarding nuclear and environmental risks, while advocating for sustainable living habits.

Some individuals find themselves back in their beds or in other areas of their homes, while others discover they are unexpectedly locked out. Others may awaken in their vehicles or even inside unfamiliar residences. If they were taken outside and guided to a vehicle, they might notice dirt and natural debris either on the windows or in their beds. In these situations, the craft could have landed or hovered just inches above the ground, leaving behind clear evidence of its landing.

Some people realize they are no longer wearing their own clothing or that their garments are in disarray. A nightgown may be on backwards, or earrings may not be properly placed. If multiple individuals are taken, they might return wearing items from a friend or companion. Alternatively, they might find themselves under their bed or with their feet resting on their pillow. The small, assisting extraterrestrials occasionally make blunders. 

Research has shown that psychologists tend to be the most skeptical group among well-educated individuals when it comes to acknowledging the possibility of extraterrestrial (ET) presence and interaction with humans. A significant number of academic psychologists overlook the distinct features associated with ET contact experiences, which include conscious recall, multiple witnesses, and tangible evidence. Instead, they claim that individuals who believe they have been abducted from their homes during the night are simply undergoing a sleep disturbance.

It is true that sleep irregularities may account for the perception of abduction without actual occurrence. Some people suffer from sleep paralysis and may perceive indistinct figures or abstract shapes. They often awaken unable to move, with only their eyes free, leading them to witness shadowy, formless entities while experiencing profound fear. Additionally, they may face sleep paralysis alongside brief hallucinatory phenomena reminiscent of dreams during the hypnagogic and hypnopompic states. Nonetheless, the aforementioned characteristics linked to ET contact are absent. Sleep disturbances do not result in sophisticated abduction scenarios or yield any physical evidence.

Intractable Skeptics

Intractable skeptics have consistently asserted that UFO experts are responsible for spreading misleading narratives regarding alien abduction, arguing that phenomena such as sleep paralysis and hypnagogic/hypnopompic hallucinations can adequately account for the majority of reported ET encounters in bedrooms. These skeptics are unhesitating in labeling some of the most knowledgeable and perceptive researchers as deceivers. They push the notion that susceptible individuals suspect they have been abducted primarily because they have consumed literature or films focused on the subject. They presume that those who have experienced abductions are mere victims of their imagination, lacking any proof, and who naively follow UFO abduction experts simply to belong to a select group or due to a masochistic desire to indulge in a protracted suffering fantasy. These stubborn skeptics are deniers who have not taken the time to rigorously investigate the evidence.

Intractable skeptics have leveled accusations against therapists, claiming unethical practices. They argue that when "abductees" approach therapists who focus on alien abduction, the hypnosis practitioner encourages them to reenact a fabricated story that has been subtly suggested by UFO abduction researchers. They contend that this constructed false memory is then accepted as a genuine event in the experiencer's psyche. Consequently, a mistaken belief morphs into an obsession that unnecessarily disrupts feelings of safety and stability, as well as the perception of normalcy.

While it may be true in a limited number of instances, the vast majority of hypnosis practitioners adhere to strict ethical standards that prevent them from exploiting their practitioner-client relationships. These professionals possess a depth of training and expertise that surpasses that of the typical certified hypnotist. Many employ specialized techniques aimed at minimizing the likelihood of confabulation. Yet, the risk of confabulation remains an inherent aspect of the hypnosis process, particularly when the therapist poses direct inquiries. Clients can indeed fabricate falsehoods while under hypnosis just as easily as they might when not hypnotized. However, skilled hypnosis practitioners are adept at providing suggestions that reduce the chance of intentional misinformation. Ultimately, it all hinges on their training and knowledge.

Years ago, a handful of UFO investigators dabbled in hypnosis without obtaining certification or undergoing comprehensive training. They provided free hypnosis sessions, largely because they had not committed financially to their education or professional development. Lacking the rigorous precautions taken by today's well-trained hypnosis practitioners, these amateurs inadvertently created challenges for established professionals, and the repercussions of this misjudgment linger even today. Currently, the overwhelming majority of hypnosis practitioners who assist ET contact experiencers are highly trained, ethical, and thoroughly vetted experts.

Additional Academic Research on Experiencers

Revisiting my exploration of academic research concerning abduction experiencers, a comprehensive study was conducted in 1991 by June Parnell and Leo Sprinkle from the University of Wyoming, involving 225 participants. Those who took part underwent the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), a well-established tool for assessing psychopathology, in addition to The Sixteen Personality Factors Test (16PF), which evaluates various dimensions of healthy personality functioning. The participants represented a wide spectrum, including individuals who did not claim to have seen a UFO, as well as those who firmly asserted they had witnessed spacecraft or encountered occupants of UFOs. Some participants expressed a belief that they had been taken aboard a spacecraft, while others reported experiences of having communicated with non-human entities associated with UFO phenomena.

The psychologists were primarily interested in four scales: 1. Scale F on the MMPI measures unusual attitudes, feelings, or thoughts. 2. Scale 8 on the MMRI measures divergent thinking, creativity, schizoid tendencies, and alienation. 3. Scale 9 on the MMPI measures unstable mood, flights of ideas, and psychomotor activity. 4. Factor M on the 16PF scale may indicate tendencies toward fantasy proneness, imaginative thoughts, absent-mindedness, or bohemian behavior.

Participants who reported sightings of UFOs and/or non-human entities recorded scores within the normal range on scale F. Conversely, individuals who claimed to have communicated with extraterrestrial beings exhibited scores that were modestly above the average. This specific subgroup also showed statistically significant results on scale 8, indicating tendencies toward divergent thinking, increased creativity, or schizoid traits, alongside feelings of alienation. The psychologists suggested that these elevated scores could be seen as a validation of their extraordinary experiences. Notably, both groups of participants scored within the standard limits on scale 9, implying they did not show indications of mood instability, racing thoughts, or abnormal psychomotor activity. Likewise, Factor M on the 16PF scale suggested that even participants who reported encounters with beings and communication with extraterrestrials remained within the normal range for factors like emotional stability, psychomotor activity, unconventional behavior, and racing thoughts.

False Memory Syndrome 

Elizabeth Loftus from the University of Washington is recognized as a pioneering figure in the field of psychology, primarily because she coined the term false memory syndrome. Her research was notably inspired by the numerous allegations of childhood sexual abuse, many of which were heavily influenced by authoritative individuals such as mental health professionals and law enforcement, yet often lacked any factual basis. False memory syndrome refers to a phenomenon where individuals create detailed memories of events that never actually occurred, believing these memories to be authentic. Dr. Loftus and her research team have undertaken extensive investigations to explore the fundamental mechanisms responsible for the formation of false memories.

Though false memories were initially linked to traumatic experiences, university ethics committees rightfully restrict academic psychologists from exposing research subjects to trauma. As a result, experiments designed to test their hypotheses are carried out in safe and supportive environments. Among the notable experiments in this context is the Semantic Word Association Test.

The Semantic Word Association Test was developed by James Deese, Henry L. Roediger, and Kathleen McDermott at Washington University in 1995 to fulfill a particular research requirement. This groundbreaking test, recognized as the DRM word paradigm memory, consists of presenting participants with lists of semantically related words, which can encompass as many as 192 words in total, including 6 critical lures. A critical lure refers to a word that, although related to the other words, is absent from the memorization list. For example, a participant might hear a sequence of words such as sour, candy, sugar, bitter, good, taste, tooth, nice, honey, soda, chocolate, heart, cake, tart, and pie. The crucial point here is that the critical lure (sweet) is left out of the presentation but later included in a word recognition task, possibly causing participants to incorrectly remember it as one of the associated words.

Some participants faced significant challenges when the words were presented audibly, with each list being played consecutively through an audio recording at a consistent rate of one word every three seconds. After this auditory exposure, participants were asked to write down all the words they could recall from the list. Once all six lists had been delivered, they participated in a distraction task, which may involve solving basic math problems or completing a brief reading assignment. Following this, they were required to answer a variety of questions.

Next, participants received a packet that included a list of semantically related words they had encountered earlier, along with new words that contained critical lures. Their assignment was to categorize the words as either "known" from the previous list or "remembered" from the oral presentation. It becomes evident how individuals could mistakenly merge the semantically related terms with the critical lures, likely leading to inaccuracies in their recall.

Participants who incorrectly recognized critical lures were deemed to have developed a false memory concerning the erroneous word. This observation has been understood to suggest that elaborate false memories can be formed in a comparable manner.

In follow-up research conducted in 1997 by David A. Gallo, Meredith J. Roberts & John G. Seamon from Wesleyan University, it was found that the testing framework could be adjusted to diminish the incidence of false recall by informing participants about the existence of misleading semantically related words (critical lures). However, this valuable insight did not entirely eliminate the occurrences of false recall.

A groundbreaking study carried out in 1998 by Seamon, Chun Luo, and Gallo demonstrated that certain participants inaccurately identified critical lure words, regardless of the differing speeds at which they appeared. This intriguing phenomenon was associated with individual differences in memory retention capabilities. It is essential to understand that our memories can greatly differ from one individual to another.

Renowned expert in false memory research, Elizabeth Loftus, along with her dedicated research team,  conducted a multitude of experimental studies designed to encourage participants to recall fabricated memories of various events. For example, in one specific study, participants were asked to evaluate the likelihood of having experienced certain events from their childhood. Following a two-week interval, the researchers prompted these individuals to envision being involved in fictional scenarios through guided imagination techniques. Surprisingly, in one instance, twenty-four percent of participants developed a false memory, genuinely believing that the imagined incident had actually occurred. Additionally, it is significant to note that twelve percent of those who did not engage in the imagination exercise still formed false memories, underscoring the powerful effect of external suggestive information on the distortion of their recollections.

In 1996, researchers Saul Kassin and Katherine Kiechel from Williams College aimed to create false memories surrounding a significant event in a compliance experiment involving college students. Participants were instructed to type specified letters on a computer while being warned not to press the ALT key, as this would lead to a computer crash. After a minute, the experimenter deliberately crashed the computer and pretended to be upset, claiming that all the information had disappeared. The experimenter accused the student of having pressed the ALT key, despite their innocence. Half of the students were misled by a "witness" who falsely claimed to have seen them press the ALT key, while the other half did not receive this information. The students whose "mistake" was supposedly validated by the witness were significantly more inclined to admit guilt, sign a confession, and form a false memory regarding the incident compared to those who were not observed by the witness. As a result, some students developed a memory for an event that had not occurred, leading to what is classified as a false memory. This phenomenon ensued due to the influence of social compliance, where both an authority figure and a witness exerted pressure on the student to accept their assertions. Consequently, the student formed a false belief of having committed an error.

A comprehensive study conducted by Rinad Beidas at Colgate University examined the individual variations in the development of false memories. The results indicated an absence of correlation between high suggestibility and the occurrence of false memories as measured by the Semantic Word Association Test. Beidas employed both the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale 2 and the Semantic Word Association Test with student participants to investigate the possible link between suggestibility and the Deese-Roediger-McDermott word memory paradigm. The findings showed no statistically significant relationship between false recall or false recognition in the Semantic Word Association Test.

In his research, Beidas explored the correlation between students who created false memories in a Kassin and Kiechel model experiment and their performance on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale 2. He identified a significant positive correlation among participants who acknowledged pressing the ALT key, in contrast to those who denied doing so. Beidas's findings highlight that social compliance and suggestibility are fundamental factors in the formation of false memories. Nevertheless, it is crucial to recognize that false memories triggered by words and those linked to complex events are separate phenomena.

The Harvard False Memory Study on "Abductees"

A contentious study conducted in 2002 by Susan A. Clancy, Richard J. McNally, Daniel L. Schacter, and Mark F. Lenzenweger at Harvard University delved into false memories among self-reported "alien abductees." This research has faced significant pushback from various scholars within the UFO community. To gather participants, Clancy and her team placed advertisements in local newspapers. The recruitment ad for the experiential group explicitly called for individuals who believed they had been contacted or abducted by extraterrestrial beings to join a memory study led by Harvard University researchers. In contrast, the ad for the control (non-abductee) group was much simpler, only mentioning the need for participants to take part in a memory study by the same researchers at Harvard University.[3]

According to the researchers, none of the participants met the criteria for having a confirmed alien abduction. The experimental subjects all met the criteria for sleep paralysis and hypnagogic hallucinations, and all had been exposed to popular media pertaining to alien abduction. One must question why the researchers evaluated participants who showed no indication of having had a real "abduction" experience, only those with sleep paralysis and hypnagogic hallucinations. Perhaps they did not distinguish between a typical complex abduction from a home environment, which involves paralysis and a lengthy period of missing time, and a quick sleep paralysis experience accompanied by simple sleep hallucination. But let us examine the details relating to the experiment.

The test subjects were divided into three groups: 1. Recovered Memory (11, mean age=47.0). This group had memories of abduction that were recalled through therapy, hypnosis, or spontaneously. 2. Repressed Memory (9, mean age=40.4). This group consisted of people who suspected they had been abducted but had no recollection of the event. They reported having insomnia, a strong interest in science fiction, waking up with unexplained body marks, and other characteristics that had been publicized by skeptics. 3. Control Group (13, mean age=46.1). This group denied having been abducted by aliens. (I will refer to groups 1 and 2 as the Experiential Groups.)

Dr. Clancy and her team hypothesized that the experiential groups would recall a higher percentage of false targets on the Deese, Roediger, McDermott semantic word test (discussed above) than the control group, suggesting that they were prone to false recall and false recognition. However, although the experiential groups had elevated scores on false recognition, her hypothesis fell short of statistical significance regarding false recall. Variables such as the frequency with which rote memorization is utilized, fatigue, anxiety, and age are all factors in rote memorization and had an impact on the study results.

As noted above, the Beidus study suggests that high scores for false recognition and false recall on the DRM may not be an indication of false memory for complex events. It is also important to mention that false accusations made by authority figures and researchers' attitudes can skew the results of an academic study.

All three groups completed four subjective experience scales designed to measure PTSD, depressive symptoms, memory lapses, and hypnotic suggestibility, as well as four schizotypy and schizophrenia screening measures. These screenings indicated that, although the experiential (abductee) groups experienced a slightly higher degree of depressive symptoms and anxiety than the control group, they were, for the most part, normal. It seems important to mention that many of the "abductee" participants exhibited higher levels of creativity, vivid memory formation, open-mindedness toward psi experiences, and the ability to become absorbed in music, a movie, or nature. Dr. Clancy and her colleagues interpreted these characteristics as symptoms of fantasy proneness.

The researchers hypothesized that the two experiential groups would score higher on the schizotypy screening measures than the control group. Schizotypal behaviors include odd or eccentric behavior, a lack of close friends outside of the family, magical thinking, excessive social anxiety associated with paranoid fears, and odd thinking and speech. Schizotypal behavior disorder (SBD) is a mild variant of schizophrenia. Multiple family studies indicate that persons with SBD and schizophrenia have a similar genetic predisposition to this major mental illness. Schizotypy falls on the lower end of the spectrum and indicates a tendency to exhibit some, but not all, of the characteristics of schizophrenia.

The Experiential (abductee) Groups showed notably higher scores on both the Magical Ideation Scale and the Perceptual Aberration Scale compared to the control group, although they did not perform better on the Referential Thinking Scale. To fully comprehend the implications of each group's scores on these assessments, it would be beneficial to familiarize ourselves with the specific questions posed.

The Magical Ideation Scale is a thirty-question true/false self-reported inventory. It was originally introduced as an indicator of schizotypal thinking but has been found to be indicative of thinking styles present in the average population. Individuals with high scores on this measure scored significantly higher than control groups on tests for creativity. Here is a list of some statements from the Magical Ideation Scale:

• Horoscopes are right too often for it to be a coincidence.

• If reincarnation were true, it would explain some unusual experiences I have had.

• I sometimes have a feeling of gaining or losing energy when people look at me or touch me.

• Some people can make me aware of them just by thinking about me.[4]

Those who score in the 0-3 range on the Magical Ideation Scale are considered linear thinkers. A score of 4-12 is normal for males, while 4-15 is normal for females. All three groups were represented by one more male than female member. Scores above 16 indicate that a person exhibits schizotypal thinking. The Recovered Memory Group (6 men, 5 women) scored 10.7 (SD: 5.0), which is clearly within the normal range of thinking. The Repressed Memory Group (5 men, 4 women) scored 11.1 (SD: 5.5), suggesting that perhaps one subject scored within the schizotypal range, while all others were within the normal range. The Control Group (7 men, 6 women) did not fall within the normal mean range for men or women. They scored 3.8 (SD: 3.5), indicating that some were in the linear thinking group, whereas others fell within the low normal range. 

The researchers interpreted this information as confirmation of their hypothesis. However, it is important to note that the mean score for the two Experiential Groups fell within the normal range, while the mean score for the Control Group fell below the normal range, close to the linear thinking range. Therefore, the difference between the two groups can be explained as an abnormality in the control group. 

The Perceptual Aberration Scale measures psychotic-like experiences such as body discontinuities and unusual scenery experiences (e.g., "I felt that something outside of my body was part of my body.")[5]. On this thirty-five question self-reporting inventory, the Recovered Memory Group's mean score was 8.0 (SD: 7.9), the Repressed Memory Group averaged 6.6 (SD: 5.3), and the Control Group averaged 3.1 (SD: 2.3). It should be noted that the mean score for this measure varies by racial groups (whites score lower than other racial groups). It also varies by gender, with white women averaging 6.7 (SD: 5.86) and white men averaging 6.64 (SD: 6.23). These findings indicate that although the recovered memory group scored higher than the repressed memory or control groups, they all fell within the average range of functioning. The scores did not support the contention that the Experiential Groups deviated from the norm.

The Referential Thinking Scale is a thirty-four question true/false inventory that measures ideas of reference, e.g., the idea that strangers are talking about you or that songs were written about you. The test results failed to support the research team's hypothesis that the experimental groups would score measurably higher on this scale.

A critical analysis of the test subjects' scores reveals that the control group performed below the norm on various measures, including the Perceptual Aberration and Magical Ideation Scales. They appeared to be a group of particularly linear thinkers. If this observation is correct, as a group, they would be expected to perform better on an orally presented memory test than non-linear thinkers.

We know that these left-brained linear types are auditory thinkers who process information in a sequential, analytical order. They are good rote memorizers, whereas right-brained Intuitives tend to see the whole picture and are not adept at rote memorization. It appears that the test subjects represented two opposite learning style types, and this would obviously skew the test results. Therefore, one must question the validity of the researcher's conclusions. Was there a potential bias in the study? If bias was present, what were the reasons behind the academic scientists' inability to mitigate it?

Susan Clancy worked on an additional memory distortion research project in 2004 (see "Memory Distortion in People Reporting Abduction by Aliens," Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 3, 455-461). She published a book in 2005 titled Abducted: How People Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens. It stimulated a major uproar in the UFO community because she displayed a significant level of naivety regarding UFO abduction events and the substantial level of investigation and research in this field. Her book is extraordinarily inaccurate concerning major UFO abduction events.

In her book, Clancy conjectured that those who believe they were abducted by aliens are scientifically naive and gullible. She states that they create vivid fantasies from a toxic mix of nightmares, culturally available images, and media saturation, which is reinforced by unscrupulous hypnotists. She further asserts that experiencers of ET contact are eccentric, prone to magical thinking, and hold beliefs in the paranormal even though it does not exist, which contributes to their mixed-up thinking.

I won't explore the extensive bias, misinformation, and misrepresentation found in her book here. However, it prompts an intriguing question: is she truly naive and misinformed regarding the reality of alien abductions, or does she display a bias? Many of her assertions appear to echo the misleading rhetoric associated with skeptic Philip Klass.

An Overview of the Psychological Studies  

The primary conclusion we can extract from all the social research findings presented in this paper is that individuals who are fantasy prone, particularly those with thin psychological boundaries, those who frequently experience dissociative states, and those who score high on the multiple personality disorder scale, along with individuals facing specific sleep disorders like narcolepsy, may erroneously believe they have been abducted by aliens when such events have not occurred. If these individuals are subjected to hypnosis by authority figures who have a preconceived inclination toward UFO abduction theories and are posed leading questions, or if they are staunchly convinced of their abduction due to exposure to abduction-related information, they may be inclined to fabricate an abduction narrative. Once this narrative is created under hypnosis, they may develop a belief that their psychological experience constitutes a genuine UFO abduction. It is critical to note that responsible researchers and therapists investigating abduction phenomena are strongly advised against hypnotizing individuals within this category.

In my view, a crucial criterion for deeming an individual eligible for hypnosis should be the presence of compelling evidence that their experience transcended mere misperception, dream, hallucination or fantasy. What memories does the individual possess? Were there any witnesses to the event? Is there tangible evidence supporting their claims? 

The Alien Symbols Academic Studies

In 2007, Tamara Lagrandeur, Ph.D. (McGill U.), Don C. Donderi, Ph.D. (McGill U.), Stuart Appelle, Ph.D. (SUNY Brockport), and abduction researcher Budd Hopkins (Intruders Foundation) conducted a study of alien symbols observed on extraterrestrial craft. They examined whether the sets of symbols observed inside an alien craft and recalled through hypnosis exhibited consistent detailed characteristics. The academic researchers used twelve sets of symbols that Budd Hopkins had acquired from the Abductee Group, who had sought his assistance. In turn, Stuart Appelle hypnotized a group of twenty-four graduate students, known as the Control Group, and instructed them to imagine and illustrate symbols inside an alien spacecraft. He then asked the group of graduate students to draw the fantasized symbols. All symbol information was kept confidential in order to avoid information contamination.

The thirty-six symbol sets, encapsulating both groups, were meticulously scanned and subsequently photocopied into a unified format to guarantee that an evaluator could not distinguish between the sources. The resulting sheets were randomly assigned identification code numbers for organizational purposes. Upon completion of this task, Tamara Lagrandeur oversaw nineteen undergraduate students from McGill University who performed a statistical analysis on the compilation of symbols. They focused on assessing multidimensional similarities and differences.

The findings corroborated that the average scores for both the Control Group and the Abductee Group exhibited significant differences across all three dimensions. The Abductee Group generated strikingly similar symbols that were clearly distinguishable from those created by the Control Group.The research scientists deduced that the uniformity of symbols reported by the Abductee Group during their experiences inside alien craft could potentially suggest the authenticity of their reports.

On May 13, 2008, the researchers unveiled their study's findings at the Association for Psychological Science in Chicago, IL. Following this, they executed a follow-up study involving three groups: 1. an Abductee Group, 2. a Hypnotized Student Control Group, and 3. a Control Group tasked with envisioning what extraterrestrial symbols might resemble. The outcomes of this subsequent study mirrored the original findings. The Abductee Group produced sketches of symbols that were strikingly similar yet distinct from those created by the two Control Groups.

As a side note, Dr. Donderi later assessed the symbols that Kathleen Marden had asked Betty Hill to recall—specifically, the symbols she observed in a "book" located inside an alien spacecraft. In August 2000, she sketched ten symbols from memory. Dr. Donderi noted that Betty's symbols bore a striking resemblance to those collected by Budd Hopkins since the mid-1970s. Notably, Betty had never seen the symbols in Hopkins' collection.

Final Statement

In retrospect, we should inquire why such a significant number of federally funded studies on "abductees" were conducted within academic institutions where the research psychologists were seemingly unaware of the extensive evidence surrounding encounters with non-human intelligent beings.  What motivated the National Academy of Sciences to endorse funding for social science studies focusing on the psychosocial functioning of UFO witnesses, and subsequently on what was then referred to as "UFO abductees?" Was this move politically driven to mislead the public? Did the intelligence community seek to mitigate potential public hysteria? Why were we entangled in a sweeping cover-up and campaign against UFO acknowledgment? Why was it so aggressive? There is substantial evidence suggesting that humanity is engaging with multiple intelligent extraterrestrial races. Historical records show that these entities have been present among us for millennia.  Our studies indicated that the bulk of their experiences are positive and supportive, while a minor fraction are negative. Furthermore, the groups involved in genetic experimentation on humans foster fear and a sense of victimhood among their participants. These beings convey that they are primarily concerned about our survival, emphasizing that our inclination toward conflict, the spread of nuclear arms, and our neglect of environmental stewardship are critical issues. They are striving to cultivate a more survivable human race, while enhancing human consciousness and spirituality. According to them, life on Earth will improve significantly once we transcend our destructive tendencies and progress into a more harmonious, benevolent cosmic environment.

 End Notes

[1] Edward Condon, “Conclusions and Recommendations,” The Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, 28. (Discussed in Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers by Stanton T. Friedman and Kathleen Marden)

[2] Kenneth Ring, & C. Rosing, “The Omega Project: A psychological survey of persons reporting abductions and other UFO encounters,” Journal of UFO Studies. 2 (1990) 89.

[3] Susan A Clancy et al. “Memory Distortion in People Reporting Abduction by Aliens,” American Psychological Society, 2004. 456.

[4] Susan Clancy, Richard McNally, et.al., “Memory Distortion in People Reporting Abduction by Aliens,” Journal of Abnormal Psychology, (Vol. III, No. 3, 2002), 457.

[5] Ibid.

References

Appelle, Stuart. “The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and  Evidence.” Journal of UFO Studies. n.s. 6 1995/96. 29-78.

Bartholomew, Robert E., Keith Basterfield and G.S. Howard. “UFO Abductees and  Contactees: Psychopathology or Fantasy Proneness  Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. Vol 22. No. 3. 1991. 215-22.

Beidas, Rinad. “Individual Differences in the Formation of False Memories: Is suggestibility a predictive factor?,” Colgate University Journal of Sciences. 77-91.

Borderline Personality Disorder.” www.palace.net/~llama/psych/bpd.html 7/5/2009.

Blackmore, Susan. “Abduction by Aliens or Sleep Paralysis?” Skeptical Inquirer Magazine. May/June 1998.    www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc817.htm  

Boylan, Richard, Ph.D. “The Differential Diagnosis of Close Extraterrestrial Encounter Syndrome.” 

www.drboylan.com/diffdxce4a.html 7/2/2009.

Bryan, C.D.B.. Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction, UFOs and the Conference at MIT. New York: Alfred A. Knoff. 1995.

Clancy, Susan, et al. “Psychophysical Responding During Script-Driven Imagery in People Reporting Abduction by Space Aliens.” American Psychological Society. Vol. 15: No. 7. 2004. 493-497.

_____Abducted: How People Come to Believe they were Abducted by Aliens.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 2005. 

_____ “Memory Distortion in People Reporting Abduction by Aliens.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Vol 3. No. 3. 2002. 455-461. 

Condon, Edward U. Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects. New York: Bantam. 1969.

Cowgill, George L., Robert A. Gordon, et al. “People Who See Flying Saucers.”  Science. Vol. 171, No 3975, (March 12, 1971) 956-959.

Dantzig, Saskia van, Eric O. Postma. “A Connectionist Model of False Memories.” Psychology Department. Erasmus University. Rotterdam, Netherlands. Department of Computer Science. University of Maastricht. Maastricht, Netherlands. Pdf file.

Donderi, Don C, Ph.D. “The Scientific Context of the UFO/Abduction Phenomenon.” Dec. 28 1996. www.ufologie.net/htm/donderi.htm. 

_____. “Evidence Weakens Psychological Theories of the Alien Abduction Experience.” McGill University Department of Psychology. Montreal, Canada. 

Fowler, Raymond E. The Allagash Abductions. Tigard, OR: Wildflower Press. 1993.

Friedman, Stanton, and Kathleen Marden. Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience. Franklin Lakes, NJ: New Page Books. 2007, 2021.

______Science was Wrong. Franklin Lakes, NJ: New Page Books. 2010.

Friedman, Stanton. “The Pseudoscience of Anti ufology.” Pursuit. 1983. 17-20.

Gallup Poll. May 1966. St Louis Post-Dispatch, Des Moines Register, (May 8, 1966). Data compiled by John Schuessler. www.mufon.com/znews_publicopinion.html

Ganaway, G. “Historical Truth Versus Narrative Truth. Clarifying the role of exogenous trauma in the etiology of multiple personality disorder and its variants.” Dissociation. 11, 205-220.

Holden, Katherine J., and Christopher C. French. Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit. Goldsmith’s College. University of London, London. (2002) Psychology Press  Ltd. 163-178.

_____Hopkins, Budd. “The Faith-Based Science of Susan Clancy."  www.intrudersfoundation.org/faith_based.html. 7/9/2009.

_____Witnessed. New York: Pocket Books. 1996.

Jacobs, David, Ph.D.” A Review of Abducted: How People Come to Believe they were Kidnapped by Aliens by Susan Clancy.” The Journal of Scientific Exploration.  Vol 20, No 2. Summer 2006. www.ufoabduction.com/clancyreview.htm 7/2/2009.

_____ (editor). UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge. Kansas: University Press. 2000.

Kottmeyer, Martin. “Abductions: The Boundary Deficit Hypothesis

www.thinkoutit.com/abductions/TheBoundaryDeficitHypothesis. 7/6/2009.

Lagrandeur, Tamara, Don C. Donderi, Stuart Appelle, Budd Hopkins. "Self-Reported Alien Abductees Remember Consistent Sets of Symbols.”  Association for Psychological Science, Chicago, IL, May 13, 2008.

LeLieuvre, Robert, et al. “Omega 3: Revelation or Revolution: A Comparative Study of Abductees Experiences and Community Comparison Control Participants,” April 2010.

Lorenzen, Coral and Jim. “Abducted! —The Story of the Casey County Kidnapping.”  Saga UFO Report. Vol. 5, No. 6. June 1978. 20-23 & 60-67.

Mack, John, Caroline McLeod, Barbara Corbusier. “A More Parsimonious Explanation for UFO Abduction.” Psychological Inquiry (7:2) 1996.

Marden, Kathleen. “Another Look at the Harvard False Memory Study.” 2006.

_____ “Barney and Betty Hill: Dream Transference or Alien Abduction?.” MUFON UFO Journal, April 2009. 5-9.

_____ “What Social Researchers Have Learned About Contact.”

_____ Extraterrestrial Contact: What to do when you’ve been abducted.  Red Wheel Weiser: Newburyport, MA. 2019.

_____” Clancy’s version of Hill Encounter Shows Slanting and Poor Research.”   MUFON UFO Journal. No. 459. (July 2006) 8-11.

Niznikiewicz, Margaret A., Martha E. Shenton, Martina Voglmaier, Paul G. Nestor, et al. “Semantic Dysfunction in Women with Schizotypal Personality Disorder.” American Journal of Psychiatry. 159:10. (October 2002) 1767-1774.

Parnell, June O. & R. Leo Sprinkle. “Personality Characteristics of Persons Who Claim UFO Experiences.” Journal of UFO Studies. 2 (1990). 45-58.

Powers, Susan Marie. “Fantasy Proneness, Amnesia, and the UFO Abduction Phenomenon.” Dissociation. Vol. 5, No. 1. (March 1991) 46-54.

Ring, K. & C. Rosing. “The Omega Project: A psychological survey of persons reporting abductions and other UFO encounters.” Journal of UFO Studies. S2 (1990) 59-98.

Rodeghier, Goodpastor and Blatterbaur. “Psychosocial Characteristics of Abductees: Results from the CUFOS Abduction Project.” Journal of UFO Studies. 3 (1991) 59-90.

“Schizotypal Personality Disorder,” http:// www. Mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe03.html 

Spanos, Cross, Dickson, Dubreuil. “Close Encounters: An examination of UFO experiences.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 102 (1993) 624-32.

Stringfield, Leonard. Situation Red. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1977.

Walton, Travis. Fire in the Sky. New York: Marlowe & Company. 1996.

Warren, Donald I. “Status Inconsistency Theory and Flying Saucer Sightings.” Science, Vol. 70, No. 3958, (Nov. 6, 1970) 599-603.

Watson, Jason, Kathleen McDermott & David Balota. “Attempting to Avoid False Memories in the Reese/Roediger/McDermott Paradigm: Assessing the Combined Influence of Practice and Warnings in Young and Old Adults.” Memory and Cognition, 32:1 (2004). 135-141.

Webb, Walter “A Dramatic Encounter in the White Mountains, NH, Sept. 19-20, 1961.”  Confidential NICAP report. 10/26/61.

Webb, Walter. Encounter at Buff Ledge. Chicago: J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies. 1994.

Westrum, Ron. “Social Intelligence About Anomalies: The Case of UFOs.” Social Studies of Science. Vol 7 (1977) 271-302.

Whittlesea, Bruce, Michael E.J. Masson, Andrea D. Hughs. “False memory following rapidly presented lists: the element of surprise.”  Psychological Research. (2005) 69: 420-430.

Wilson, Sheryl C., and Theodore X. Barber. “The Fantasy Prone Personality: Implications for understanding imagery, hypnosis, and parapsychological phenomena.” Imagery, Current Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Wiley. 1983. 340-390.

Zimmer, Troy. “Belief in UFOs as Alternative Reality, Cultural Rejection or Disturbed Psyche.” Deviant Behavior. 6 (1985) 405-419.