1968 12 00 Perceptual and Motor Skills - Vol 27 No 3 suppl - D R Saunders

Magazine Overview

This document is a research article titled "II. POINTS OF VIEW ABOUT UFOS: A MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING STUDY" by D. R. Saunders and Peter Van Arsdale, published in the journal Perceptual and Motor Skills in 1968. It is presented as Monograph Supplement 5-V27 and is published by Southern Universities Press.

Summary of the Study

The study aimed to identify and describe five stereotypical points of view regarding UFO reports, based on perceived similarities among them. Using an improved multidimensional scaling (MDS) approach, the researchers developed numerical parameters and verbal descriptions for four-dimensional and nine-dimensional viewpoints. The study delineated the apparent assumptions and concerns of each viewpoint and examined the corresponding profiles of expressed UFO-related attitudes.

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) can elicit intense differences of opinion. However, little was known about the structure of attitudes towards UFOs or the forces shaping them. A previous study by Saunders (1968) extracted nine dimensions of individual differences concerning UFOs from 41 items. This current study sought a more nuanced understanding, hypothesizing that attitudes influence the perception of UFO reports. The researchers were particularly interested in the concept of UFO prejudice, drawing a parallel to racial prejudice where prejudiced individuals have difficulty distinguishing among members of minority groups. They hypothesized that individuals with attitudes least favorable to UFOs would perceive and classify UFO reports using a minimal number of dimensions.

The study was based on data collected and analyzed independently of the "UFO Project" at the University of Colorado, where one of the authors was associated until February 9, 1968. Additional data were available as a supplement.

Procedure and Results

The study used 14 "stories," each about 300 words long and written in the style of a "UFO report." These stories were based on actual reports but rewritten in a uniform style, retaining factual details while discarding subsequent investigation or interpretation. The goal was to represent the existing range of UFO reports, though the limitation to 14 stories was due to a decision to limit the MDS task to 3 hours per subject.

The participants were 25 undergraduate students from the University of Colorado who volunteered for the experiment as a course requirement. They were run in groups of one or two between April 18 and May 1, 1968. As a familiarization step, each participant first read all 14 stories and selected one pair of stories they judged as most similar and another pair as most dissimilar. These were assigned to points '1' and '8' on a 10-point scale (0-9). Participants then judged the "distance" between all 91 story-pairs on this scale. After completing the MDS task, they responded to a 41-item "UFO Opinionaire" (Saunders, 1968).

The analysis of the MDS data involved determining the number of viewpoints and each participant's relation to them. A 91x25 score matrix (X) was created, where 91 pairs were entities and 25 participants' judgments were attributes. This matrix was factor analyzed. The researchers noted that a common approach using Eigenvalues could be problematic if participants made random judgments. To ensure that only shared viewpoints were considered, they factored the covariance matrix with communality estimation. This process clearly determined five shared viewpoints.

The results indicated a 25xk matrix (F) which was rotated to display the simple structure correlation of each participant with each viewpoint. The equamax F matrix and the sex of each participant were presented in Table 2. The communality for Subject 17 was close to the chance level, suggesting a potential outlier.

The study then computed beta-weights (B) and used them to estimate attitude responses characteristic of each viewpoint factor, on the scale of the raw attitude data. This involved the expression (A-K)'B + K, where A is the matrix of participant responses to attitude items, K is a constant matrix for neutral responses, and B is the beta-weights matrix.

Identified Viewpoints and Their Characteristics

Viewpoint A (Prejudiced): This viewpoint utilizes the fewest dimensions and is characterized by an interest in explicit ingredients of impact, interest-level, or general excitement in UFO stories. The dimensions identified are: Number of object-sightings, Number of witnesses, Time-duration of sighting(s), and Damage or threat of harm. Stories high on dimension A1 involved multiple or simultaneous sightings. Stories high on A2 involved solitary witnesses. Stories high on A3 had long durations. Stories high on A4 reported explicit harm or damage. This viewpoint is described as closed-minded, insisting on the non-existence of objective evidence for extraterrestrial visitation, and viewing UFO reports as fiction. It shows a strong distinction between governmental adequacy (low) and Air Force adequacy (high), and a general negative evaluation of government. The researchers suggest this viewpoint is the most likely to be labeled "Prejudiced," noting its superficial dimensions and agreement with an attitude item interpreted as indicating racial prejudice.

Viewpoint B (Party-Liner): This viewpoint uses the second smallest number of dimensions. It focuses on observing conditions and the perceptual quality of observations, explaining phenomena through physics, psychology of perception, or hallucination. The underlying assumption is that all witnesses and observations are fallible. The identified dimensions are: Observation of similar objects, Observation of glowing object(s), Observation in the air, Observation near the ground, and "Observation" of "impossible" phenomena. This viewpoint is characterized by a willingness to accept stories as distorted reports of real happenings, with an emphasis on human frailty. It suggests that extraterrestrial visitation is a negligible possibility and that natural and psychological explanations are in order. The Air Force and government are seen as doing an adequate job.

Viewpoint C (Skeptic): This viewpoint is five-dimensional, with the final output being six-dimensional after origin replacement. It is characterized by a willingness to accept stories as reports of real happenings but focuses on their potential value as scientific data. "C" seeks to reason forward from reports to new facts and insights. The identified dimensions are: Witness Credibility, Personal-Psychological Evidence, Natural-Biological Evidence, Instrumented-Physical Evidence, Structural Information, and Performance Information. This viewpoint segregates stories based on uniformed witnesses (C1), dependence on personal eye-witness evidence (C2), scene examination (C3), photographic evidence or wrecked aircraft (C4), structural detail and quantitative estimates (C5), and "operational characteristics" (C6). The attitude profile reflects a sophisticated scientific thinker, with a rejection of the idea that scientific theory can be definitively true or false. "C" takes a moderately conservative position on the potency of science, a strongly positive position on extraterrestrial intelligence and visitation, and views official handling of the problem as inadequate.

Viewpoint D and E: The document mentions that Viewpoints D and E were also identified, but detailed descriptions for these are not provided in the excerpt. Table 2 lists them as viewpoints, and Table 3 provides attitude profiles for them, but the narrative discussion focuses primarily on A, B, and C.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout the article is the analysis of how individuals perceive and interpret UFO reports based on their pre-existing attitudes. The study employs a rigorous scientific methodology (multidimensional scaling) to categorize these perceptions into distinct viewpoints. The editorial stance appears to be one of objective inquiry, presenting the findings of the study without overt bias, though the labeling of viewpoints like "Prejudiced" and "Party-Liner" suggests an analytical framework that categorizes and critiques these perspectives. The article emphasizes the importance of understanding the psychological underpinnings of belief and skepticism regarding UFO phenomena.

This document, titled "MULTIVARIATE STUDY OF UFOS," is a scholarly article authored by D. R. Saunders and P. Van Arsdale, published with the page number 1229. The article, accepted on November 11, 1968, delves into the psychological and attitudinal profiles of individuals who report or interpret UFO phenomena. It utilizes multivariate analysis, specifically multidimensional scaling (MDS), to categorize different ways people perceive and understand UFO reports.

Viewpoint D: The 'Believer'

Viewpoint D is described as a school of thought that is six-dimensional. Individuals in this group tend to go beyond merely assuming UFO stories are reports of real events. They additionally assume that all UFOs are under intelligent control, whether occupied or not. Their primary focus is on understanding the motivations of this intelligence, a reasoning described as frankly anthropocentric. This viewpoint is labeled as that of a "Believer."

A significant finding for Viewpoint D is an unusually high additive constant (4.9) in the Messick-Abelson procedure, suggesting either an overestimation of dimensionality or that the subjects (Ss) have overestimated the similarities of the stories. The authors suggest that it is characteristic of a "Believer" to "go overboard in seeing similarities."

In terms of attitudes, Viewpoint D strongly supports the potency of science (Factor VI) and insists on the existence of objective, not subjective, evidence (Factors III and II) for extraterrestrial visitation. Despite these strong convictions, the balance of their attitudes is neutral or middle-of-the-road. The "Believer" does not appear concerned with maintaining a logically coherent overall position regarding UFOs.

Viewpoint E: The 'Contactee'

Viewpoint E, characterized as a "Contactee," initially presents an eight-dimensional output from the MDS, increasing to nine by moving the origin. With only 14 story-stimuli, most dimensions serve to isolate single stories. The additive constant here is even higher (6.9), indicating a gross overestimation of story similarity by the subjects. The authors find it futile to interpret all nine dimensions but note that Dimension E segregates stories describing landings with humanoid occupants.

The attitude data for Viewpoint E are sparse but consistent with the "Contactee" profile. They exhibit an extreme stance supporting the likelihood of extraterrestrial intelligence but also agree that nothing can travel faster than light. "E" has considerable faith in science (Factor VI), suggesting actual visitation might be out of the question, yet questions of evidence are paramount. Notably, "E" is more likely than members of other viewpoints to have "seen" a UFO himself, viewing it as a process of communication and a normal psychological experience. This skill, though normatively rare and potentially embarrassing, may lead the "Contactee" to perceive themselves as being in the vanguard of a new evolutionary phase.

Hybrid Viewpoints and Interrelations

The study reveals that only about half of the subjects can be assigned predominantly to a single viewpoint. The rest are considered hybrids of two, three, four, or even all five primary stereotypes. While the MDS judgments of a hybrid are a weighted average of component viewpoints, their expressed attitudes may not follow this pattern, suggesting that hybrid interactions influence attitudes.

Regarding demographics, Viewpoints A and C are predominantly male, while Viewpoints B, D, and E are predominantly female, though these trends are not statistically significant.

The study also highlights that the four best-defined viewpoints can be recognized solely from their positions on Factors I and III. Viewpoints B and C represent the extremes of Factor I, while A and D represent the extremes of Factor III. This suggests that hybrids of A with D or B with C might be less common.

The establishment of Viewpoint C as a distinct entity is considered an important outcome, as it had previously tended to blend into the background. The identification of two distinct pro-UFO and two distinct anti-UFO viewpoints helps clarify the overall situation.

Appendix: Case Studies of UFO Incidents

The appendix provides detailed accounts of 14 specific UFO incidents, serving as the raw data or examples analyzed in the study:

• Case 1: Aberdeen, Maryland (July 2, 1955): Boy Scouts reported seeing three identical luminous, metallic discs with bright white lights, appearing sequentially.
• Case 2: Exeter, New Hampshire (September 3, 1965): Norman Muscarello reported a huge, round, brilliantly-lit UFO that forced him into a ditch. Police investigated and also observed the object with blinking red lights.
• Case 3: Flatwoods, West Virginia (September 12, 1952): Three boys witnessed a glowing red object and later a "floating entity" with a heart-shaped head in a mist-covered area.
• Case 4: Great Falls, Montana (August 15, 1950): Nicholas Mariana observed two bright, disc-like objects hovering and then moving on a fixed heading, which were photographed.
• Case 5: Loch Raven Dam, Maryland (October 26, 1958): Two men reported a large, flat, egg-shaped object hovering over a bridge, which emitted a flash of light and heat before ascending rapidly.
• Case 6: Poncey, France (October 4, 1954): Mme. Yvonne Fourneret saw a luminous body that illuminated a plum tree, leaving behind ground disturbance. Other villagers saw it ascend.
• Case 7: Portsmouth, New Hampshire (September 19, 1961): Betty and Barney Hill reported a bright light that grew larger, revealing a wingless fuselage with blinking lights and figures inside. They later reported being taken aboard a UFO for examination.
• Case 8: Ravenna, Ohio (April 17, 1966): Deputy Sheriffs observed a 50 ft. diameter object with a darkened dome and bright bottom hovering, emitting a humming noise, and tracked by radar.
• Case 9: Socorro, New Mexico (April 24, 1964): Officer Lonnie Zamora encountered a shiny, oval object resting on legs, with two short figures nearby. The object later ascended rapidly on a bluish-orange flame.
• Case 10: Sumner, Washington (April 1, 1959): A C-118 transport plane crashed after reporting being hit by something, with witnesses seeing two parachute-like, glowing objects following it.
• Case 11: Trindade Island, Brazil (January 16, 1958): Ship crew members observed a flattened, Saturn-like object glittering in sunlight, traveling at high speed and undulating.
• Case 12: Vernon, France (August 23, 1954): M. Bernard Miserey saw a huge, motionless, luminous cigar-shaped object from which several discs emerged and maneuvered.
• Case 13: Sao Francisco de Selles, Brazil (October 15, 1957): Antonio Villas-Boas reported an egg-shaped object landing, from which three small men abducted him for intercourse.
• Case 14: Yalu River, Korea (September 10, 1950): A radar gunner and pilot reported two huge, circular objects moving at extreme speed, which interfered with their radar and radio.

References

The article includes a comprehensive list of references, primarily books and journal articles related to UFO studies, psychology, and statistical analysis, published between 1956 and 1968. Notable authors cited include J. G. Fuller, C. E. Lorenzen, R. P. Messick, and J. Vallee.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the psychological categorization of individuals' beliefs and perceptions regarding UFOs, using statistical methods like multivariate analysis. The editorial stance appears to be one of objective, scientific inquiry into the phenomenon, attempting to understand the underlying psychological structures and attitudes that shape interpretations of UFO reports. The detailed case studies serve to illustrate the diversity and often extraordinary nature of the reported events, providing empirical data for the theoretical framework presented.

This document is a single-page erratum, identified by the title 'ERRATUM' and the page number '1238E'. It pertains to a study on UFOs and was published by 'Perceptual and Motor Skills' in 1969, with the specific issue noted as '28, 3E'. The original study that this erratum corrects was published in 1968.

Erratum Details

The erratum specifically addresses an article by D. R. Saunders and P. II. Van Arsdale titled 'Points of view about UFOs: a multidimensional scaling study'. This original article was published in 'Perceptual and Motor Skills' in 1968, volume 27, pages 1219-1238. The primary correction concerns Equation 1, which was erroneously presented on page 1225 of the original publication. The erratum provides the corrected form of this equation:

$$a_{k+1} = \sqrt{\frac{kn}{\sum\sum a_{ij}^2 / nk}} \quad [1]$$

The erratum itself is stated to have been published in 'Perceptual and Motor Skills', 1969, 28, 3E, with a copyright notice for 'Perceptual and Motor Skills 1969'.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The content of this document is purely technical, focusing on the correction of a scientific formula within a research paper. It highlights the importance of accuracy in scientific publications and the process of rectifying errors. The themes are limited to research methodology, scientific accuracy, and the specific subject matter of the original study, which was UFOs. The editorial stance is one of maintaining scientific integrity through the correction of published material.