Magazine Summary
Perceptual and Motor Skills
Ever wanted to host your own late-night paranormal radio show?
Across the Airwaves
You’re on the air. Callers bring Mothman, Fresno Nightcrawlers, UFO sightings, reptilian autopsies, and whispers about AATIP and Project Blue Book. Every reply shapes how the night goes.
Summary
This article by Stuart Appelle challenges D. I. Warren's 1970 argument that "status inconsistency theory" can explain UFO sightings. Appelle contends that Warren's data, derived from a Gallup Poll of people who thought they saw a UFO, is insufficient to explain actual UFO reports submitted to investigating agencies. The author highlights that the Condon Report found most sightings are not reported, suggesting that those who report UFOs are a distinct group from those who merely see them. Appelle concludes that while Warren's theory might apply to some, it cannot be extrapolated to the entire UFO phenomenon without further testing on a more appropriate sample.
Magazine Overview
Title: Perceptual and Motor Skills
Issue: Volume 32, Issue 32
Date: 1971
Publisher: Perceptual and Motor Skills
Country: USA
Language: English
Article: ON A BEHAVIORAL EXPLANATION OF UFO SIGHTINGS by Stuart Appelle
This article, authored by Stuart Appelle from The George Washington University, critically examines D. I. Warren's (1970) assertion that "status inconsistency theory" can adequately explain the observed patterns of UFO sightings. Appelle's primary objective is to demonstrate that the data Warren used is not suitable for supporting his conclusions.
Warren's argument is based on an analysis of respondents from the 1966 Gallup Poll who reported seeing something they "thought was a flying saucer." Appelle contends that there is no a priori reason to assume that these individuals, who merely *thought* they saw a UFO, share the same characteristics as those who actively report UFOs to investigating agencies. The UFO literature, Appelle notes, largely consists of anecdotal accounts submitted to such agencies. Therefore, he argues, Warren's behavioral mechanisms, derived from a general population sample, cannot be directly applied to explain the data generated by those actively making UFO reports.
To support his critique, Appelle references the Condon Report (1968), a government study that Warren himself cited. The Condon Report found that a significant majority (87%) of respondents who reported seeing a UFO had not reported it to any agency, official or otherwise, beyond their family or friends. This finding reinforces Appelle's point that individuals who report UFOs constitute a group distinct from those who merely experience a sighting. The former group, those responsible for the actual UFO data, was not the group analyzed by Warren.
Appelle clarifies that he is not arguing that Warren's "status inconsistency theory" is invalid for explaining the beliefs of those who *think* they have seen a UFO. Instead, his objection lies in Warren's extrapolation of his findings from this sample to the broader UFO data and to the individuals who generate these reports. Evidence suggests that the population analyzed by Warren and the population generating UFO reports may be quite different.
While acknowledging that Warren's theory might potentially account for the UFO phenomenon, Appelle concludes that there is insufficient reason to accept this behavioral interpretation at the present time. He calls for further tests using a more appropriate sample to validate such claims.
References
The article cites the following works:
- CONDON, E. U. (Ed.). (1968). *Scientific study of unidentified flying objects*. New York: Bantam.
- SAUNDERS, D. R. (1968). Factor analysis of UFO-related attitudes. *Perceptual and Motor Skills*, *27*, 1207-1218.
- SAUNDERS, D. R., & VAN ARSDALE, P. (1968). Points of view about UFOs: a multidimensional scaling study. *Perceptual and Motor Skills*, *27*, 1219-1238.
- WARREN, D. I. (1970). Status inconsistency theory and flying saucer sightings. *Science*, *170*(3958), 599-603.
Additional Information
The article was accepted on May 12, 1971. It also notes that information regarding UFO reports submitted to investigating agencies can be obtained from the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), located at 1522 Connecticut Avenue N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. The arguments presented in the paper were formulated while the author was acting as a consultant to NICAP.
Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance
This issue of *Perceptual and Motor Skills* features an article that engages with scientific and psychological explanations for UFO sightings. The editorial stance, as represented by Appelle's critique, appears to favor rigorous methodology and empirical evidence, cautioning against broad generalizations from limited or potentially unrepresentative data. The publication seems open to exploring the psychological and sociological aspects of unusual phenomena like UFOs, but emphasizes the need for sound scientific inquiry and appropriate sampling techniques for data collection and analysis. The inclusion of references to major studies like the Condon Report and research published in *Science* and *Perceptual and Motor Skills* itself indicates a commitment to scholarly discourse within the field.
It is the purpose of this paper to show that the data presented by Warren (1970) cannot be used to support his conclusions.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main argument of Stuart Appelle's article?
Stuart Appelle argues that the data presented by D. I. Warren, which attempts to explain UFO sightings through "status inconsistency theory," is insufficient because it relies on a sample of people who merely thought they saw a UFO, not those who actually reported them to agencies.
What is "status inconsistency theory" as applied to UFO sightings?
Status inconsistency theory suggests that individuals ranked differentially on social class criteria may experience stress, leading them to reject conventional norms and potentially manifest this in UFO sightings. D. I. Warren proposed this as an explanation for UFO patterns.
What is the significance of the Condon Report in this article?
The Condon Report is cited to support Appelle's argument by noting that 87% of reported sightings were not shared with anyone outside the family or friends, implying that those who generate UFO reports are a distinct group from the general population who might see something unusual.
Where can information about UFO reports submitted to investigating agencies be obtained?
Information regarding UFO reports actually submitted to investigating agencies can be obtained from the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) in Washington, D.C.
In This Issue
People Mentioned
- Stuart AppelleAuthor
- D. I. WarrenCited researcher
- SaundersCited researcher
- Van ArsdaleCited researcher
- E. U. CondonEditor of Condon Report
Organisations
- The George Washington University
- National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)
Locations
- Washington D.C., USA