She interpreted survey results as reported by FREE to be unclear on details like numbers of respondents and exactly how FREE arrived at some of its figures. Tarr's pointed observations included "the myriad problems with the survey itself and the analysis," as well as "the lack of controlling which respondents answer follow-up questions." As she explained:
There are numerous cases within the survey where more people responded to follow-up questions about a specific type of experience than had claimed to have had the experience. For example, 211 respondents reported having sex with an ET and 236 gave answers regarding what type of ET they had sex with. The likelihood that many items include responses from people who did not have the experience calls many results into question.Tarr also noted survey results were represented by FREE as specifically including people who reported UFO-related contact experiences with a non-human intelligence, yet it is unclear if all who responded actually interpreted that to be the case. For instance, fewer people reported a craft or ship associated with their experiences than participated in the survey.
 |
| Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs at a 2004 Intruders Foundation seminar Credit: Carol Rainey |
Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum
Such challenges with surveys and their interpretations have long plagued the UFO community. The design of a 1991 Roper Poll funded by Robert Bigelow and conducted by Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and Ron Westrum was competently called into question by qualified professionals. The trio arrived at the stunning conclusion 3.7 million Americans had been abducted by aliens through a survey of less than 6,000 people who were never even asked. Instead, those surveyed were subjected to a series of questions of which Hopkins and Jacobs felt themselves qualified to interpret if the responses indicated abductions had occurred. To directly ask respondents if they'd ever been abducted, it was rather incredibly rationalized, would give false results because many people were unaware of their abductions until after hypnosis.
Of a total of 5,947 people interviewed, 119, or two percent, were identified as likely alien abductees. It was from there the conclusion was drawn that about two percent of the American population, which at the time equated to 3.7 million people, had been abducted by aliens.
Critical review was provided by parapsychologist Susan Blackmore and sociologist Ted Goertzel, among others. The work of the late psychologist Robyn M. Dawes and political scientist Matthew Mulford, the latter of which became an expert in research methodology at the London School of Economics and Political Science, showed how questions on the survey were poorly constructed in ways known to produce flawed results. Goertzel wrote:
This conclusion is also strongly supported by Dawes and Mulford's (1993) innovative study at the University of Oregon which demonstrated that the dual nature of Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum's first item, which asked about waking up paralyzed and about sensing a strange person in the room in the same item, actually led to an increased recollection of unusual phenomena as compared to a properly constructed single-issue survey item. Textbooks on questionnaire writing universally warn against "double-barreled" questions of this sort because they are known to give bad results. Dawes and Mulford confirm this and further offer the explanation that the combination of the two issues in one item causes a conjunction effect in memory which increases the likelihood of false recollection.
While the Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum scale is not a valid measure of UFO abduction, they have inadvertently constructed a useful measure of another phenomenon: the tendency to have false memories.
The poll and its questionably interpreted conclusions continue to be cited in UFO circles in spite of its flawed construction. The problematic aspects of its methodologies are typically not addressed when claims are made of some 4 million Americans being abducted by aliens. The objectivity of Budd Hopkins was further questioned due to such circumstances as his claims surrounding alleged alien symbols purported to have been seen by abductees while aboard alien craft. His questionable interpretations and desire to "stack the deck," as he put it, were documented in the 13-minute video clip below shot by Carol Rainey.
Standards of Evidence
An important point, in my opinion, is that Dr. Tarr and other qualified experts demonstrate a willingness to address the UFO phenomenon and offer review of research produced by ufology. The scientific community is often criticized for dismissing the topic out of hand, and the complaint may be justified at times, but there are clearly exceptions.
Furthermore, it should be noted that such critical review is part and parcel of the path to establishing fact-based evidence. The critiques of qualified professionals should be embraced and addressed, not discarded with aversion. It is when standards of evidence are recognized, and professional research protocols are collectively respected and implemented, that the UFO community will mature and begin to gain the credibility it has long claimed to seek.
-----------------------------------------------------
Please join me this summer in Roswell at a conference themed 70 Years Later: Modern Challenges to the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis. I'll be discussing exploitation in ufology, the intersection of the UFO and intelligence communities, and related topics.
A good article raising some excellent questions.
ReplyDeleteI’m not familiar with FREE. My problem with Project Core is survey participation seems to have been self-selected, that is, it seems to have surveyed people who regularly visited a blog who believed they'd been abducted by aliens. I think that's called sample bias. While it might be valid for profiling this very small sample of believers, I don't think it can be extrapolated in any way to a wider population.
ReplyDeleteIt looks as if Ufology is still trying to avoid the issue of professionally conducted scientific research. I suspect it's because of the long-standing fear that serious research could uncover incontrovertible evidence that all the cherished beliefs about UFOs are just smoke and mirrors and nothing is real. (Never mind the whining for show that science doesn't take UFOs seriously. That's the last thing Ufology wants.)
To appease an emerging cohort of internal critics in Ufology, it appears we're now getting these studies that look more scientific than they are. Two steps forward; one step back. Eye roll.
Its obvious you don't know much about the UFO/UAP subject but I have no intention of educating you. You have made some false assumptions and because of such nonsense you have my sincerest sympathy. Good luck .
DeleteAt the end of the day we have this collection of incredible stories from human beings. Some are highly compelling because they are either emotionally moving or because there is associative evidence that makes even the skeptic get slackjawed over what might be at the center of these stories. All my reading and thinking about it tells me that it's the people who tell the tale that need more careful and in depth consideration as opposed to starting from the premise of alien abduction. The questions too often frame the evidence when the open frame is the person in the middle of it all. If someone has claimed abduction and sexual assault, or extreme medical transgressions, then they should be considered first and foremost from a very compassioate perspective and leave the aliens out of the picture.
ReplyDeletethank you for the free Survey I am finding similar histories over the world . I personally contacted many people and asked to fill the survey.
ReplyDeleteaid easy criticize but they are doing a voluntary job using their own time to find the true . I am not surprise talking with people that had the same experiences over the world.