1997 03 00 Systems Research and Behavioral Science - Vol 14 No 2 - Albert A Harrison

Magazine Overview

This document is a research paper titled "The Kennedy Assassination, Unidentified Flying Objects, and Other Conspiracies: Psychological and Organizational Factors in the Perception of "Cover-up"". It was published in Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 113-128 in 1997. The authors are Albert A. Harrison and James Moulton Thomas from the University of California, Davis. The paper explores the psychological and organizational factors that contribute to the belief in government cover-ups, using the JFK assassination and UFO phenomena as primary examples.

Introduction

The paper begins by defining cover-up theories as beliefs that powerful governmental agencies withhold the truth from the public. It draws on Kruglanski's theory of lay epistemics and J. G. Miller's analysis of information overload to propose that individual information processing, combined with organizational actions, gives rise to cover-up hypotheses. These hypotheses are then 'supported' by perceived delays, errors, and omissions. The authors state that a combination of ambiguous evidence, selective perception, and biased assimilation makes resolving controversies like the JFK assassination and UFOs nearly impossible.

Robert J. Groden's book, 'The Killing of a President,' is cited to illustrate the pervasive nature of JFK assassination cover-up theories. The paper notes that while it's impossible to definitively disprove a cover-up allegation, the popularity and strength of such theories often seem to exceed verifiable data.

Psychological Factors and Suspicions of Cover-Up

The authors frame cover-up theories as psychological attributions, but note the field has been dominated by historians. They focus on the cognitive theme, specifically Kruglanski's theory of lay epistemology, which explains how people acquire knowledge. This theory encompasses attribution theory, cognitive consistency theory, and social perception. Beliefs in conspiracies are seen as rational information processing strategies, influenced by emotions, values, and motivational states.

Lay epistemology involves two phases: hypothesis generation and hypothesis testing. Hypothesis generation is influenced by memory, situational cues, and motivational states like the need for closure and fear of invalidity. Hypothesis testing involves assessing evidence logically. A key assumption discussed is the presumption of proportionality: large, momentous events must have large, momentous causes. This is illustrated by studies showing people are more likely to endorse conspiracy theories when a president is assassinated than when an attempt fails.

The paper notes that the sheer involvement of large, powerful agencies in an investigation can imply a profound mystery. It also discusses how the early 1950s perception of UFOs as potential Russian secret weapons or causes of mass hysteria, rather than extraterrestrial craft, influenced public belief.

Ideas

Cover-up theories are partly based on people's ideas about governmental agencies' capabilities and intentions, shaped by knowledge, social pressures, and media. The paper highlights the known capabilities of organizations like the Air Force, CIA, and FBI in maintaining secrecy, citing examples like the Manhattan Project and the development of advanced aircraft. It also notes a significant decline in public trust in the US government since the 1950s, with trust dropping from 73% in 1958 to 19% in 1994.

Motives proposed for cover-ups include shifting political power, maintaining the military-industrial complex, serving foreign or domestic enemies, or protecting agencies from embarrassment due to stupidity or inaction. For UFOs, motives often involve preserving government credibility and power, or even a pact with aliens in exchange for technological advances.

Factors in the Perception of 'Cover-up'

The paper discusses how people's perceptions of government agencies' power influence their receptiveness to cover-up theories. Those who view agencies as very powerful or omnipotent may be more receptive. Low trust and high suspiciousness are linked to cover-up beliefs, as seen in reactions to the Watergate affair and disbelief in the Warren Commission's conclusion. Minorities, due to potentially less positive experiences with government, are also more likely to perceive conspiracies.

Belief in one conspiracy can lead to believing in others, as it raises the salience of conspiracies-in-general. Media depictions of events like assassinations or UFO sightings can prompt or strengthen these beliefs. The film 'JFK' is cited as an example that reinforced conspiracy theories.

Human memory is described as unreliable, prone to fading, blocking, shaping by newer memories, and contamination. Eyewitness accounts, especially those given years after an event, can be influenced by media and social pressure, potentially leading to fabricated memories. Hypnosis is mentioned as a factor that can implant memories.

Motivational states, such as the need for structure and the fear of invalidity, drive people to seek clear answers and avoid errors. Conspiracy theories offer ready answers for unanswered questions. The Zeigarnik effect (remembering uncompleted tasks) is suggested as a reason for continued interest in the JFK assassination. The sheer volume of information in conspiracy books makes refutation difficult.

Conclusional needs, including utilitarian motives (e.g., profits from books and media), aggression, defensiveness, and projection, also contribute. Conspiracy explanations can be attractive as they offer a way to avoid admitting vulnerability to unpredictable destruction. Investigating such complex events can lead to frustration, which may manifest as questioning agency competence and integrity.

Denial, rationalization, and self-justification are plausible reactions for those who have invested heavily in studying these topics. The escalation of commitment, where people raise the stakes rather than accept a loss, is also discussed.

Logic

Lay epistemology involves testing hypotheses logically, though not necessarily with formal logic. This often involves subjective 'if-then' relationships, such as 'if the government stands mute, then they have something to hide.' This overlooks possibilities like lack of information. Agencies classifying documents as confidential may do so for reasons other than sensitive content, such as protecting informant identities.

People seek consistency, especially on important issues. Selective perception (focusing on consistent information) and biased assimilation (interpreting information to fit beliefs) help maintain attitudes, even in the face of disconfirming evidence. Studies show that people become more polarized in their beliefs when exposed to information about conspiracy theories, particularly on emotionally charged issues like assassinations and UFOs.

Organizational Processes and Evidence of Cover-Up

Organizational processes in collecting, storing, and disseminating information can provide spurious evidence of cover-up. Organizations, like individuals, are imperfect information processors, especially under information overload. This leads to strategies like delays, omissions, and increased tolerance for error, which can be misconstrued as deliberate attempts to suppress information.

The fundamental attribution error explains why the public and insiders interpret these indicators differently. Outsiders may attribute errors to incompetence, while employees attribute them to situational factors. Jurisdictional disputes between agencies can lead to delays, missed opportunities, and distrust.

The paper uses the JFK assassination as an example, noting how the removal of JFK's body before an autopsy and the subsequent controversy could have been avoided with a procedurally correct forensic autopsy. It also mentions how investigations broken down into components can lead to details falling through the cracks, as seen in the HSCA's five independent reports.

Factionalism and in-fighting within organizations can also fortify cover-up beliefs. Leaks and employee discontent can complicate investigations. The Condon Commission's report on UFOs is described as disjointed and assembled by a committee.

Information Acquisition

Investigations into shocking crimes like the Kennedy assassinations require assembling large teams and conducting painstaking analysis under severe time pressures. Investigators must obtain information quickly before it is lost or distorted, as eyewitness memories fade and physical evidence deteriorates. The sheer volume of information, such as the 24 volumes of the Warren Commission report and 50,000 documents for the RFK investigation, is immense.

Time pressures can lead to premature conclusions, overlooked information, and inconsistencies. As the investigation progresses and officials attempt to correct the record, changes themselves can be interpreted as evidence of cover-up. Selective interviewing and biased assimilation can tilt reports towards false support for cover-up beliefs.

Storage and Retrieval

Organizational memories, like human memories, fade and distort over time. Physical evidence deteriorates, and documents can be lost or misfiled. Routine purges of files can create 'gaps' in information. Faulty retrieval strategies can make information effectively absent. The paper cites an example where a UFO report filed years earlier could not be found due to a faulty retrieval strategy.

Dissemination

Many forces discourage the release of information to outsiders. Katz (1977) suggests that while external authorities and internal authorities may seem to have common fates, antagonism can exist, with cover-up being a tool for internal authorities to protect themselves from outsiders and to increase loyalty among members.

Forces for secrecy are particularly strong in agencies like the FBI, CIA, and DOD, which conduct confidential business. Reasons for secrecy include preventing the apprehension of subjects, avoiding reputational damage, and protecting sensitive information. The paper notes that the Condon Commission's report on UFOs was filtered in a way that only the most sensational reached the public, and that selective interviewing of witnesses occurred.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this paper are the interplay between individual psychology and organizational processes in shaping beliefs about conspiracies and cover-ups. The authors consistently apply the framework of lay epistemology to explain why people are drawn to and maintain these beliefs, even in the face of contradictory evidence. The paper's stance is analytical and academic, aiming to explain the phenomenon of cover-up beliefs through cognitive and social science principles rather than endorsing or refuting specific conspiracy theories. It highlights the difficulty in resolving such controversies due to the nature of evidence, perception, and organizational behavior. The paper implicitly suggests that a better understanding of these psychological and organizational dynamics could help mitigate the formation and spread of unsubstantiated cover-up beliefs.

This document consists of pages from a research paper titled "Factors in the Perception of 'Cover-up'" published in "System Research in Behavior Science." The paper, authored by Albert A. Harrison and James Moulton Thomas, explores the psychological and organizational factors that contribute to the widespread perception of government cover-ups. It delves into how information is processed, how media influences public opinion, and why conspiracy theories are persistent and difficult to disprove.

Information Processing and Public Opinion

The paper begins by discussing how government policies, such as Operation Security (OPSEC), can restrict information release, sometimes leading to public suspicion. It cites the Air Force's secrecy on UFOs between 1947 and 1968 as an example that fueled distrust. A simulation study on agency responses to environmental risk requests indicated that the manner in which information is released significantly affects public perception, with courteous and open agencies fostering more trust than secretive ones.

The authors introduce the concepts of 'self-fulfilling prophecy' and 'behavioral confirmation' to explain how interactions can intensify mutual suspicions. They draw parallels with Lemert's study of paranoia, suggesting that individuals who believe they are being targeted may act in ways that elicit confirmatory responses from others, creating a downward spiral of suspicion and defensiveness.

Evidence and Interpretation

Ambiguous or poor-quality evidence, such as censored documents or grainy photographs, can paradoxically increase suspicions rather than allay them. The paper notes that both assassination and UFO researchers have complained about the quality of released documents. The JFK assassination is used as a case study, with Abraham Zapruder's home movie being highlighted as photographic evidence that, despite its significance, is subject to interpretation and enhancement, leading to variations in quality and content over time.

The concept of 'hyper-reality,' as described by ethnographer Nick Trujillo regarding the JFK assassination, suggests that the constant reproduction and retelling of events can blur the distinction between reality and simulation, making a definitive answer less likely.

Media Influence and Public Understanding

The public's lack of understanding of technical jargon or official nomenclature can lead to misinterpretations, as seen in the Three Mile Island nuclear incident where the public misunderstood the scale of a radioactive release. The media plays a crucial role in dispersing information, often being selective, sensationalized, and driven by pressures to 'scoop' competitors. This can result in incomplete stories that seem plausible but lack depth. The mass audience's demand for entertainment can further influence reporting, prioritizing sensationalistic aspects over thoughtful analysis.

In contemporary news, there's a blurring of fantasy and reality due to technology that allows for re-enactments, retouching of images, and misleading charts, making it difficult for audiences to distinguish fact from fiction. This, combined with limited attention spans and a desire for entertainment, can feed beliefs in conspiracies.

Psychological Underpinnings of Conspiracy Beliefs

Reporters themselves are subject to psychological principles that can influence their reporting, potentially perpetuating conspiracy theories through selective perception and escalation of commitment. The paper discusses how media speculation about the JFK assassination initially focused on a right-wing plot, shifting when evidence pointed to Oswald, but still fostering a sense of conspiracy.

Discussion on Cover-up Theories

The essay proposes that public acceptance of cover-up theories is rooted in an interplay of information processing at the organism and organization levels, framed by Kruglanski's theory of lay epistemics. These beliefs are shaped by a need for closure, a desire for a stable world, and the need to vent frustration. The activities of agencies like the CIA and FBI provide opportunities to test these hypotheses, and bureaucratic structures, policies, and errors can create the illusion of cover-up.

Cover-up theories are presented as nearly impossible to dismantle because any lack of definitive evidence is interpreted as proof of the cover-up's effectiveness. As arguments are dismantled, new ones emerge, making these theories adaptable and persistent, akin to viruses. Evaluating complex issues like the JFK assassination or UFO reports requires expertise in multiple fields, and individuals often make up their minds based on minimal or biased information, subsequently seeking evidence that confirms their initial position.

People who lack motivation or ability to follow issues tend to rely on heuristics, such as the credibility of the communicator or the length of the message. Official reports, often cautious and conditional, can seem inconclusive to those seeking definitive answers, whereas vivid, colorful accounts from independent investigators are more attention-grabbing and promise closure.

Organizational Strategies for Addressing Cover-ups

From an organizational perspective, allegations of cover-up are a significant problem that can undermine public confidence and hinder future investigations. The paper suggests several steps organizations can take:

1. Resolve Jurisdictional Issues: Conflicts between federal and local authorities can lead to lost time, evidence, and misattribution of intent.
2. Establish Realistic Timelines: Assigning massive resources to high-profile cases might speed resolution, but coordination problems can arise.
3. Manage Information Overload: Strategies like delaying, queuing, and filtering information are preferable to crude processing that introduces errors. Errors in records can cause confusion and doubt, leading to accusations of manipulation.
4. Avoid Premature Statements: Early, hesitant statements intended to show progress can raise more suspicions than they allay, especially if they are incomplete or awkward.
5. Keep It Simple (KISS): Larger investigations are more prone to interpretation issues due to data overload. Simple, straightforward reports are beneficial, and providing guides or interpretations to reporters can help prevent misinterpretation of technical jargon or blacked-out sections.
6. Direct Refutation Can Backfire: Attempts at direct refutation may be seen as further evidence of duplicity, and withholding agreement can weaken verbal behavior.

Conclusion

The authors conclude that suspicions of government cover-up absorb significant attention. They neither endorse nor reject specific cover-up theories but aim to identify the behavioral underpinnings of social phenomena that are robust and transcend culture and time. The paper emphasizes that these beliefs are not necessarily products of ignorance but arise from normal psychological and organizational processes.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this research paper revolve around the psychological mechanisms behind belief formation, particularly concerning conspiracy theories and government cover-ups. It highlights the interplay between individual cognitive biases, organizational practices, and media influence in shaping public perception. The paper maintains a neutral stance, aiming to explain the phenomenon of cover-up beliefs rather than validating or debunking specific theories. The editorial stance appears to be analytical and academic, focusing on identifying the behavioral underpinnings of these social phenomena.