Ufologie Contact - Special - No 04 - Projet Magonia, nov 1980

Magazine Overview

Title: UFOLOGIE CONTACT
Issue: N°4
Date: November 1980
Publisher: SPEPSE
Price: 5 F.

This special issue, titled 'PROJET MAGONIA', is a bulletin of information, study, and research conducted voluntarily by members and correspondents of the SEPSE. It is also open to contributions from those wishing to share reflections, messages, and announcements. The 'CONTACT SPECIAL' supplement focuses on significant technical, scientific, or ufological events and advances made by private researchers.

Editorial and Administrative Information

The publication is directed by R. BONNAVENTURE, with a reading committee comprising M. MONNERIE, J. SCORNAUX, and Th. PINVIDIC. The ISSN is not provided, but the publication is printed and edited by SPEPSE. The issue notes that published articles represent the views of their authors only.

Subscription Information

'UFOLOGIE CONTACT' is published four times a year, with subscriptions costing 15.00 F. 'UFOLOGIE CONTACT SPECIAL' also has four issues per year at the same price. Subscriptions begin on January 1st of the current year.

Introduction to Projet Magonia

Thierry PINVIDIC, following personal observations and group discussions, initiated 'Projet Magonia'. This project aims to study the psychological aspects of human reactions to UFO encounters. The methodology involves computer analysis of data gathered from various populations. This special issue is dedicated to the chronology of administrative and technical documents that contributed to this large-scale project, codenamed 'Projet Magonia'.

The project is described as a significant technical, administrative, and financial undertaking, involving a colossal number of hours and passionate individuals. It includes correspondence between the project leader and researchers, numerous letters sent internationally, and consultations with university professors. The official organization UNPAN is following the project's progress. The financial cost is estimated at 40,000 francs, excluding the 100,000 francs potentially needed for computer processing.

The introduction emphasizes that this experience, involving many people from private ufologists to scientists, is worthy of elevating private ufology. It encourages participation and highlights the credibility of ufologists and the representation of ufology.

Psychological Study of the Contact Situation

Thierry PINVIDIC presents a psychological study on the 'situation of contact'. He distinguishes between general psychology tests and those specific to 'contact situations', defined as interactions between our usual environment and the UFO phenomenon. A contact situation is characterized by an 'unsettling strangeness' that can disrupt a witness's value system.

While general human psychology is understood, the psychological aspect of UFO contact remains largely unknown. Despite the variety of reported UFO shapes, the phenomenon can be unsettling. The author questions whether Carl Gustav Jung's interpretation of UFOs as a stimulus onto which we project our archetypes is fully justified, noting that Jung's study was based on limited material.

PINVIDIC argues for a balanced approach, weighing the pros and cons, rather than immediately defending the thesis of the collective unconscious. The proposed study involves four tests to assess how individuals estimate physical magnitudes, report observations, imagine UFO narratives, and understand the problem.

Research Methodology and Tests

The study proposes several tests linked together, anticipating that estimations of physical size will influence reported observations, and knowledge of the phenomenon will affect invented narratives. The research does not question the physical reality of UFOs, which it states has been clearly established by Claude POHER. Instead, it aims to estimate how people report the perturbations caused by UFOs in their daily lives and their cultural responses.

The tests will be administered to three categories of people: direct UFO witnesses, individuals interested in the phenomenon ('indirect witnesses'), and those not interested in UFOs but who may have heard of them. A study by Jean BEDET revealed that 29% of interviewees had read a book or article about UFOs.

Test d'Estimation (Estimation Test)

This test, partially based on Claude POHER's work, aims to quantify the ability to estimate physical magnitudes. It focuses on parameters such as distance, size/apparent diameter, angular height, speed, noise, duration of observation, and dimensional ratios. The methodology involves varying one parameter while keeping others fixed, and then varying them jointly. The test will focus on parameters that can be varied conjointly, such as distance and diameter, and distance and duration, as speed and duration are considered key indicators of strangeness.

Test d'Observation (Observation Test)

This test involves projecting a short film of a typical UFO observation with average parameters and strangeness. Participants will be asked to describe what they saw, first in writing and then through a detailed questionnaire. The goal is to evaluate the percentage and nature of information reported by a witness of a UFO observation. Statistical analysis based on age, sex, and socio-professional category will help establish a reliability index. The test aims to characterize a UFO observation by three figures: strangeness, credibility, and morality, with credibility further broken down into reliability and morality.

An objection raised is that participants might be more attentive due to it being a test, thus not reflecting real-world conditions. However, the authors argue that the 'contact situation' itself heightens senses and attention, creating a 'startle pattern' similar to a general stimulus.

Test de Créativité (Creativity Test)

Participants are asked to invent a UFO story, with the category of strangeness left to their initiative. This test aims to quantify the impact of information and the degree of strangeness in invented narratives. It will also assess the 'credibility' of these invented stories based on known invariants of UFO reports. The goal is to determine if invented UFO stories differ significantly from actual reported accounts.

This test is considered crucial, as demonstrating the possibility of imagining phenomena like truncated light beams or Zeeman effects would be significant. If statistical results from invented narratives match observed distributions (duration, distance, speed, etc.), it would be important to know.

The creativity test is to be complemented by a 'Test d'Analogie', inspired by Jacques Vallée's observation that UFO phenomena borrow from the witness's available realities. This suggests that witnesses may be concretizing 'analogical material' available to them to describe their experiences.

Test de Connaissance (Knowledge Test)

This test involves projecting 20 slides with multiple-choice questions about UFOs, similar to a driving test. The questions cover various aspects of UFO descriptions. The statistical material is based on an article published in the review 'Armée d'aujourd'hui' by Lieutenant Colonel ALEXIS. The QCM format allows for rapid correction.

The objective is to objectively evaluate public knowledge of UFOs, as the credibility of human testimony is fundamental to ufology. The study will measure the impact of information on witnesses, interested individuals, and indifferent persons, allowing for finer statistical nuances based on age, sex, and socio-professional category. A drawback is that this test requires participants to be gathered together.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue is heavily focused on the scientific and psychological study of UFO phenomena, particularly through structured research methodologies. The editorial stance is one of rigorous investigation, aiming to move beyond anecdotal evidence to quantifiable data. There is a strong emphasis on developing reliable tests to assess witness testimony, the impact of information, and the psychological underpinnings of UFO encounters. The 'Projet Magonia' represents a significant effort to bring a systematic and scientific approach to ufology, exploring the cultural and psychological factors that shape our understanding and reporting of these events.

This document comprises a series of circulars and communications related to "Projet MAGONIA," a research initiative focused on the psychological aspects of UFO phenomena. The primary author and organizer is Thierry PINVIDIC, who outlines the project's theoretical framework, methodology, and organizational structure.

Theoretical Framework and Objectives

Thierry PINVIDIC presents theoretical models for testing, acknowledging that their practical application will take time. The initial phase aims to establish a scientific study model for UFO phenomena, with a focus on witness testimony as the primary material, rather than just the observation itself. Subsequent stages involve refining numerical indices for credibility and strangeness through statistical analysis. The goal is to develop a standardized questionnaire that minimizes the investigator's influence, providing a reliable tool for approaching the phenomenon scientifically. The project also questions the utility of such a study given the perceived incoherence of UFO testimony, but posits that it is essential for understanding the human testimony aspect.

Long-term objectives include a general semantic study of reports, focusing on the cultural message and psychological impact of events, such as alleged "Ufonaut" sample collections. The emphasis is on the perturbations caused in the witness's value system, suggesting a potential premeditated aspect to these events.

Methodology and Testing

The project proposes a multi-stage testing approach:

• Observation and Knowledge Tests: To refine the reliability index.
• Creativity Tests: To facilitate the evaluation of the strangeness index, which is considered arbitrary.
• "Morality Index": A subjective measure that is open to suggestions.
• Standardized Questionnaire: Designed to minimize investigator bias and ensure reliable information collection.

The project emphasizes the need for a systematic psychological study of the "contact situation."

Project Organization and Participation

"Projet MAGONIA" is structured as a national network. Initial communications (circulaires) were distributed to solicit advice and suggestions. The second circular, distributed to 44 recipients, aimed to establish a network of regional delegates. Participants are asked to complete a participation request form, indicating their group's willingness to participate, the types of tests they wish to conduct (estimation, observation, creativity, knowledge), and how they will manage test responses. The project is strictly private, with no immediate funding from SPESE.

Regional delegates are responsible for receiving slides for knowledge tests, guides for test realization, and for distributing photocopies to local associations. They are also tasked with circulating test materials and centralizing response bulletins for scientific exploitation by SPFPSE. The success of the project hinges on the willingness of groups to accept regional delegation.

Chronology and Deadlines

The project's timeline is outlined:

• September: Meeting of the MAGONIA commission to finalize test guides and response forms.
• November 15: Ultimate deadline for the return of response bulletins.
• December 15: Transmission of response bulletins, test guides, and a final circular to regional delegates, setting the program's end date.

The program was scheduled to begin on January 1, 1979, and likely conclude on June 30, 1979. Statistical analysis would be conducted by the SPEPSE thematic research section, followed by fine statistical analysis using computers. Interpretation of correlations and socio-psychological analysis would be performed by consultants. A final report would be compiled by the project leader, including financial statements, statistics, socio-psychological analysis, and recommendations. This report would be distributed to participants.

Confidentiality and Publication

The first circular was marked "CONFIDENTIAL" to prevent widespread diffusion and publication in specialized or general information periodicals. Results of the survey might be shared with specialists, depending on their nature.

Key Advisors and Contacts

Several individuals provided advice, including Aimé MICHEL (suggesting contact with Professor FAURE at the Sorbonne), M. Fernand LAGARDE (suggesting inquiry at ORTF), Dr. SCORNAUX (recommending the involvement of psychologists), and N. BIGORNE (advising simplicity and comprehensibility). The project also mentions Raymond BONNAVENTURE as a contact person for "Projet MAGONIA" at a later stage.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes revolve around the scientific study of UFO phenomena, the psychological impact on witnesses, the reliability of testimony, and the establishment of a structured research network. The editorial stance is one of rigorous scientific inquiry, emphasizing systematic data collection and analysis, while acknowledging the subjective and potentially challenging nature of the subject matter. There is a clear call for action and participation from UFO associations, with an underlying concern about the lack of concrete action despite discussions.

This issue of MAGONIA, dated June 1978, focuses on the 'REGIONALISATION DU PROJET MAGONIA' (Regionalization of Project Magonia). The magazine outlines the structure, objectives, and methodologies of this ambitious ufological research initiative.

Project Magonia: Objectives and Structure

Thierry PINVIDIC, the project's responsible, introduces Project Magonia as a crucial step for ufology, aiming to build credibility through scientific research and standardized methods. He emphasizes that the project is a collective effort, symbolizing the solidarity of ufologists dedicated to seeking the truth.

The project is structured regionally, with 16 regions established across France. Each region is to have a regional delegate responsible for local coordination. The delegate's tasks include informing group leaders, distributing response bulletins, centralizing and dispatching information, and circulating test materials like guides and slides. The workload for a regional delegate is described as minimal, primarily administrative.

As of the publication date, 9 out of 16 regions already have delegates appointed, with several more in the process of being confirmed. The selection of delegates considers existing privileged links between associations, often grouping neighboring ones together. The issue lists the appointed delegates for several regions, including Jean-Pierre D'HONT, Rémi RENAUX, Raoul ROBE, Raymond BONNAVENTURE, Patrice BERNARD, Pierre BERTHAULT and Jean-Jacques JAILLAT, Jean GIRAUD, Nicolas GESLOU, and Franz CREBELY. Two additional delegates, Guillaume CHEVALLIER and Bernard DUP I, are also noted as being practically acquired.

PINVIDIC appeals for volunteers to step forward for the remaining regional delegate positions, particularly those who can facilitate document reproduction. He also requests delegates to report on the progress of their network setup and their photocopying capabilities.

Financial Considerations

The project's budget is estimated at around 5,000 French francs, with an additional 300 letters dispatched over the preceding 12 months. While the project aims to be cost-effective, a small reimbursement of approximately 100 francs might be granted to cover expenses like photocopies, especially if regional delegations have limited budgets. The cost per delegation is expected to not exceed 50 francs. Regional delegates will receive slide series as gifts and free copies of the final report. They might also be associated with the commercialization profits of the final report by SPEPSE, which is supporting the project.

Testing Methodologies

The magazine details two primary tests designed for Project Magonia:

Test 1: Estimation Test

This test aims to evaluate a person's ability to estimate physical quantities. It involves several sub-tests:

• Size Estimation: Participants estimate the diameter of 6 cardboard circles presented at varying distances. The values are chosen to be 'disruptive' to encourage precise estimation.
• Duration Estimation: Participants estimate durations, either by providing a 'top' signal at a given time or by estimating the duration of a presented event.
• Distance Estimation: Participants estimate short and long distances, with specific values provided for calibration.
• Angular Height Estimation: Participants estimate angles, both indoors (closer to models) and outdoors (at a distance).
• General Test: This comprehensive test requires participants to estimate multiple parameters simultaneously: size, duration, distance, speed, angular height, and apparent diameter, often using the example of an airplane.

The test requires participants to fill out a questionnaire detailing their personal information, vision issues, and their category (UFO witness, interested non-witness, or indifferent non-witness). The data collected is considered confidential.

Test 2: Observation Test

This test focuses on visual perception and recall. It involves showing participants a specific sequence from Steven Spielberg's film 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind', where the hero observes UFOs. The test can be administered in two ways: by projecting the sequence during conferences or by distributing Super 8 copies to regional delegates for circulation.

The objective is to study how cultural background influences the perception and visualization of phenomena like UFOs. Participants will be asked to describe the sequence and potentially create 'robot portraits' of the observed objects. The test aims to determine the level of visual identification and the reliability of collected data, considering factors like cultural background and socio-professional categories.

Conclusion

Thierry PINVIDIC concludes by urging participants to take the project seriously, emphasizing that the credibility of private ufological research is at stake. He expresses confidence in the collective effort and the potential for a national, standardized approach to ufology in France.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the organization and standardization of ufological research, the importance of scientific methodology, and the call for collective action and solidarity among ufologists. The editorial stance is one of serious, structured scientific inquiry, aiming to elevate the credibility of ufology by moving beyond anecdotal accounts to rigorous data collection and analysis. There is a strong emphasis on the need for precision, objectivity, and a systematic approach to understanding and documenting UFO phenomena.

This document appears to be a section of a research manual or guide, detailing a methodology for studying UFO (OVNI) witness testimony. It outlines a series of tests designed to probe various aspects of an individual's perception, memory, creativity, and susceptibility to suggestion when reporting UFO encounters. The publication is in French and seems to be part of a larger project, possibly an academic or investigative endeavor.

Research Methodology and Tests

The document details a multi-stage testing procedure. The initial stages involve gathering general information and then proceeding to specific tests:

Test 1: Observation Questionnaire

This test begins with a free description of a phenomenon by the witness. Following this, a precise questionnaire is provided, focusing on key descriptors deemed important by the Magonia Commission. These include:

• Form of the craft: Comparison to known objects.
• Disappearance: How the object vanished.
• Size, speed, intensity of light, aspect (material, nebulous, etc.).
• Distance, perturbations, secondary effects.
• Details of structure, duration of observation, number of objects observed.

A specific question about the color of a lateral scale on the craft is included as a test for suggestibility, as no such scale is present on the craft itself. This is intended to gauge how easily individuals can be influenced.

Test 2: Complementary Suggestibility Test

This test, administered after the observation questionnaire, is designed to assess the participant's suggestibility more directly. It is presented as a 'complementary test' to avoid alerting the subject to its true purpose. The results are intended to quantify the 'influencibility' of the witness.

Test 3: Creativity Test

This test requires participants to invent a story about a UFO encounter. For half of the participants, the type of encounter (e.g., diurnal disk, nocturnal light, close encounter) is left to their initiative. For the other half, specific 'close encounter' scenarios are requested to elicit richer narratives. The goal is to evaluate the degree of strangeness in the invented stories and compare them to real UFO literature, analyzing factors like duration, speed, and distribution of information to see if invented narratives differ significantly from reported ones. This test is also framed as a way to study the influence of hypnotic suggestion, comparing it to Alwin Lawson's findings that there's no significant difference between hypnotic regressions of alleged cases and hypnotically invented narratives.

Test 4: Knowledge Test (QCM)

This test involves projecting a series of QCM (multiple-choice) slides related to UFOs, similar to a driving test. The illustrations are by Patrick Burensteinas, and the text is based on statistics published in 'Armées d'aujourd'hui' by Colonel Alexis. The purpose is to evaluate the population's level of information about UFOs, correlating it with age, education level, and socio-professional category. This test is mandatory and must be completed after the creativity test.

Annex: Detail of the Suggestibility Questionnaire

This section elaborates on the suggestibility tests, which are inspired by the work of researchers like Weitzenhoffer, Hilgard, Vurpillet, Frances, Cattel, and Saunders. The tests include:

1. Specific UFO Suggestibility Test: Participants read a descriptive text of a close encounter scenario and are then asked precise questions about information not contained in the text. An example given is a description of a village, followed by questions about meteorological conditions not mentioned in the text.
2. Humanoid Representation Test: Participants are shown a description of a close encounter that mentions the presence of humanoids without further detail. They are then asked to describe their spontaneous representation of humanoids. This test aims to study representation mechanisms and the importance of suggestibility, noting that witnesses may 'embroider' narratives based on cultural or environmental factors.
3. Rorschach Test: Participants are asked what a given inkblot evokes. While commonly used in psychology, this specific application focuses on conceptualization aptitude, whereas the Rorschach test itself assesses visualization aptitude.
4. 'Trap-line' Test: Participants observe a set of unequal lines for a period and then must reproduce the structure from memory without looking at the figure. This is another test of visualization aptitude.
5. Optical-Geometric Illusion Test: This test uses illusions like the Poggendorff illusion (parallel lines appearing to converge) to quantify the participant's aptitude for detecting optical-geometric illusions. This, along with visualization and conceptualization tests, provides data on suggestibility's impact on perception and integration.

Data Processing

The data collected from these five tests will be transcribed onto punch cards and processed by computer by a large French industrial firm. The study is being conducted unofficially, and the name of the firm is not disclosed.

Bulletins and Forms

The document includes several bulletin response forms (Test Numero 1, 2, and 3, with two modalities for Test 3) for participants to fill out. These forms collect personal information (name, age, sex, diploma, profession), witness status (witness, interested non-witness, indifferent non-witness), and specific responses to the tests, including descriptions of imagined UFOs and encounters.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The overarching theme is the scientific investigation of UFO phenomena, with a strong emphasis on the psychological aspects of witness testimony. The methodology is rigorous, employing established psychological testing techniques adapted to the UFO context. There is a clear concern with distinguishing genuine observations from confabulation, suggestibility, or fantasy. The project appears to be driven by a desire to quantify and understand the factors influencing UFO reports, moving beyond anecdotal evidence to a more systematic, data-driven approach. The editorial stance is one of serious, albeit unofficial, scientific inquiry into a controversial subject.

This document is a collection of response bulletins and supplementary instructions for the MAGONIA project, a ufological research initiative. It appears to be a set of materials distributed to regional delegates and participants for conducting tests related to UFO/OVNI observations and psychological responses.

Project MAGONIA: Test Bulletins and Instructions

The core of the document consists of several forms and instructions designed to gather data from participants. These include:

• Page 1: A series of imaginative prompts for participants to describe hypothetical encounters with alien entities, including their physical characteristics, medical examinations, messages received, and the emotional and personal impact of such experiences.
• Page 2: A response bulletin (Test Numero 4) for participants to fill out personal details (name, age, profession, etc.), indicate their stance on UFOs (witness, interested non-witness, indifferent non-witness), and answer questions about their interest in science fiction and UFO literature. It also includes instructions for a subsequent slide projection and a complementary test.
• Page 3: A narrative text describing an observation of a strange object with several humanoid silhouettes on a hillside. This is followed by a complementary test that asks participants to recall and describe details not explicitly stated in the text, such as the time of day, duration, sky conditions, object shape and color, luminosity, sound, landing gear, humanoid size, clothing, number of humanoids, their demeanor, their activities, and any weapons or facial details. It also mentions a Rorschach test, though it is noted as unusable due to poor printing.
• Page 4: Further questions related to visual perception and memory, including estimating where lines will meet and drawing observed lines from memory. It also includes a section for drawing.
• Page 5: A letter from T. Pinvidic, dated February 10, 1979, addressed to a colleague, providing an inventory of circulars, response bulletins, and guide-tests for the MAGONIA project. It details the distribution plan and emphasizes the need for participants to verify the completeness of the slide series and the number of circulars. It also suggests that ufological associations photocopy blank forms to ensure sufficient response bulletins for reliable results.
• Page 6: Supplementary Instruction N° 1, also from T. Pinvidic, concerning a modification to the complementary test response bulletins. It addresses an issue with the paper quality used for mimeographing, where ink shows through, allowing participants to see the schema on the verso, thus compromising the test. Participants are instructed to paste a sheet of paper over the problematic area to prevent transparency.
• Page 7: Supplementary Instruction N° 2, from T. Pinvidic, providing practical guidance for the MAGONIA project. It outlines common prescriptions for all tests, including verifying the completeness of response bulletins and ensuring sufficient data for identification. It also emphasizes the importance of aligning the socio-professional distribution of participants with current French population statistics and provides a breakdown of desired percentages for various professional categories.
• Page 8: Continues the common prescriptions, detailing how to handle professions that are difficult to classify and advising experimenters to clearly explain the test conditions to participants without revealing the test's objectives. It also instructs participating ufological associations to keep detailed notes on the conditions under which tests are conducted, as these might influence the results.
• Page 9: Special prescriptions for Test N° 1. This section provides specific instructions for creating cardboard models, clarifying the difference between solid discs and hollow circles, and detailing how to measure distances accurately for observation tests. It also specifies how participants should report their estimations, including the precision of their measurements.
• Page 10: Continues the special prescriptions for Test N° 1, discussing the use of an eyepiece for estimating angular height and the general test procedure. It also introduces Special Prescriptions for the Second Test, which involves a sequence from Steven Spielberg's film "Close Encounters of the Third Kind." Experimenters are instructed to remind participants of the specific scene without describing it, focusing on preceding events like a power outage and Dreyfus's observation of a UFO. It also clarifies that the test is related to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" and that participants should not turn the page during the test.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the systematic and methodological approach to collecting data for ufological research. The editorial stance, as conveyed through T. Pinvidic's communications, is one of meticulous planning, attention to detail, and a strong emphasis on the reliability and validity of the collected data. There is a clear concern for experimental integrity, as evidenced by the instructions on paper quality, participant guidance, and data reporting. The project appears to be a serious scientific endeavor aiming to study UFO phenomena and their psychological effects through controlled testing and observation.

This document, titled 'PROJET MAGONIA CHECK-LIST', is a set of instructions and verification forms related to a research project on UFOs. It appears to be a series of internal communications and guidelines for researchers involved in the project. The primary focus is on ensuring the standardization and reliability of data collection through psychological testing.

Detailed Content

Instructions and Prescriptions:

The document begins with specific instructions for experimenters (Page 1). These include:

• Test Procedure Refinements: Experimenters must prevent participants from asking additional questions to avoid compromising the test. They should also avoid proximity that could influence participants' responses or creativity. For a 'complementary test', participants must not manipulate the sheet after placing it face down, to prevent them from looking at the recto or being influenced by the Poggendorff illusion.

Project MAGONIA Updates:

Page 2 provides 'Actualités sur le projet MAGONIA' (News on the MAGONIA project). It lists participations from:

• Léo Sprinkle, psychologist at the University of Wyoming, USA.
• Daniel Riche, Editor-in-Chief of Fiction.
• Stan Barets, a specialist in Science Fiction.
• Jean-Luc Rivera, from the Humanoid Study Group of MUFON, USA.
• Bertrand Meheust, contacted in Gabon on Daniel Riche's advice (participation probable from March 6, 1979).

The project is managed by Thierry PINVIDIC, dated March 12, 1979.

Complementary Instruction N° 3:

This instruction (Page 3), dated March 24, 1979, from Thierry PINVIDIC, concerns the designation of persons as 'NON WITNESSES INTERESTED' and 'NON WITNESSES INDIFFERENT' on the response forms. To ensure uniformity, 'non-witness interested' individuals are defined as those who have bought and read one or more books or magazines on UFOs. Those who have only read occasional press articles are classified as 'non-witness indifferent'. This clause, not in the original guides, aims to standardize criteria for statistical analysis. It also instructs to mark previously completed tests with a red cross if they were done before this circular.

Additional Information:

• GEPAN is very interested in the MAGONIA project and will follow its progress closely, as stated in a letter from Alain Esterlé dated March 6, 1979.
• There is a possibility of creating composite sketches of craft described in test N° 2 by police experts, which is seriously considered and probable.
• Participants are asked to write legibly.
• Rectification: Do not impose Name, First Name, Address. Replace with an order number. Take full references only if the case is very interesting.

Project MAGONIA CHECK-LIST (Instruction Complémentaire N° 4):

This document (Page 4), dated June 19, 1979, from T. PINVIDIC, is a check-list for associations that participated in the MAGONIA project. Its objective is to verify that the conditions of realization on the ground conformed to the strict methodology. It emphasizes that non-compliance, if not reported, can radically alter the meaning of results. However, if non-compliance is specifically signaled and explained, it can enrich the study's interpretations. Participants are urged to complete the attached questionnaire and mention any useful details on a separate sheet.

Additional Information:

• Creativity test conducted in Peru.
• Probable collaboration with Dr. David STUPPLE from Eastern Michigan University as a socio-psychology consultant.
• Advice: Participants are advised to re-read the test guides and complementary instructions carefully before each realization.
• Annex: The MAGONIA Check-list should be returned at the end of the project with the response bulletins.

Check-List Questions (Pages 5-10):

The remaining pages (5-10) contain the actual check-list, comprising 52 questions. These questions are designed to verify adherence to the project's methodology and instructions across various tests:

• Common Verifications (I): Questions 1-3 check preliminary organizational aspects (receipt of materials, adherence to instructions). Questions 4-6 verify adherence to the methodology, including avoiding inadvertent hints to participants and repeating warnings.

• Methodology Verifications: Questions 7-11 cover specific procedural aspects like marking pre-IC N° 3 bulletins, imposing names/addresses, retaining participant details, informing participants about time, and ensuring all experimenters followed the same methodology.

• Test Atmosphere: Questions 12-17 assess participant understanding, clarity of questions, length of text, and completeness of response bulletins and identification forms.

• Test N° 2 (Observation): Questions 28-38 focus on the presentation of the test, whether it was identified as 'Encounter of the Third Kind', alternative methods used, adherence to specific instructions, participant comprehension, and prevention of cheating.

• Test N° 3 (Creativity): Questions 39-42 concern the presentation of the creativity test, the reporting of potential UFO witnesses, adherence to drawing instructions, and avoiding proximity that could affect creativity.

• Test N° 4 (Knowledge): Questions 43-46 cover the presentation of the knowledge test, whether participants who took Test N° 2 also took this test, clarification of 'I don't know' responses, and overall question comprehension.

• Complementary Test: Questions 47-52 are specific to the complementary test, checking if it was administered to all participants, if specific instructions on suggestibility were given, if participants avoided looking at the back of the sheet, the use of a 20 cm x 13 cm sheet to conceal solutions, and the specific instruction to 'not touch' the sheet.

Final Statement:

The document concludes with a statement that these 52 verifications are necessary for the proper conduct of PROJET MAGONIA and can serve as a guide for field operations upon receipt of the document. It is signed by T. PINVIDIC, dated June 20, 1979.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this document are meticulous adherence to research methodology, standardization of experimental procedures, and the importance of accurate data collection for statistical analysis in the field of UFO research. The editorial stance is highly procedural and emphasizes control, uniformity, and the avoidance of bias. The project aims to conduct rigorous scientific inquiry into phenomena, treating participants and their responses with a structured, almost clinical, approach. There is a clear emphasis on preventing any deviation from the prescribed methods, with detailed instructions and check-lists to ensure compliance. The project appears to be a systematic effort to gather and analyze data on UFO-related experiences and perceptions in a controlled and quantifiable manner.

This document comprises several internal communications related to PROJET MAGONIA, a research project focused on UFO phenomena. The primary documents are dated June 1979, December 1979, and August 1979, indicating a period of active data collection and analysis.

Project Magonia: Distribution of Film Clips and Observation Tests (June 1979)

Issued as IC N° 5 of Projet Magonia, this document, dated June 1979, announces the distribution of film clips from Steven Spielberg's movie "Rencontre du 3ème type" (Close Encounters of the Third Kind). These clips are intended for the second observation test, referred to as the "test d'observation". Regional delegates are instructed to keep some bulletins from this test to administer to individuals to whom the sequence will be projected. They are also asked to organize a rotation of the film sequence within their delegation, similar to previous slide series. The methodology for this observation test is to follow the guidelines provided in the first MAGONIA circular and the test guides.

Project Magonia: Supplementary Instructions for UFO Drawings (December 1979)

Dated December 15, 1979, this document provides INSTRUCTIONS COMPLEMENTAIRES N°6 for the "Réalisation massive de dessins d'OVNI" (Massive realization of UFO drawings). It details a test protocol established by Dr. Richard RAINES from the psychology department at the University of Los Altos. Participants are to be asked to draw a UFO or Flying Saucer, and nothing else (no robots, humanoids, etc.). They are also to indicate on the back of the drawing their age, sex, education level, handedness (right or left), whether they are a witness, and if they have read science fiction or UFO-related books or seen films on the subject. If the answer to a specific question is affirmative, they are to annex a drawing of the observed object. The emphasis is placed on collecting a maximum number of drawings for comprehensive analysis.

Project Magonia: Project Completion and Results Exploitation (August 1979)

This communication, dated August 1979, announces the FIN DE REALISATION DU PROJET MAGONIA (End of realization of Project Magonia). Regional delegates are requested to send in the completed test bulletins as soon as possible, starting from October 1, 1979, ensuring the entire stock is sent at once. Any unused bulletins are also to be returned. The project team has been developing contacts with consultants, finalizing a codification book (to be published in two languages), and establishing the chronology of exchanges and results exploitation. The importance of this work is highlighted, with details to be published in the final report. Participants will have the opportunity to request verification of results. The author apologizes for any silence due to the intensive work and points to the Montlucon Congress in April 1980 as the next significant event.

Project Participation and Case Analysis

Further information from December 15, 1979, details the participation of two consultants from GEPAN: Messieurs JIMENEZ (psychologist at the University of Toulouse le Mirail) and ROS PARS (computer specialist at CMAS). David SAUNDERS from UPOGAT in New York is providing comparative statistical data. The GEPAN team will provide access to their files for comparison with ufological literature and a database of humanoid cases compiled by RIVERA, ZUSCHER, and BLORCHER. A study conducted in Gabon by Bertrand MAHSUST suggests that the UFO phenomenon's specificity is practically independent of culture, with manifestations being somewhat independent of cultural factors. All relevant details will be included in the final project report.

SPEPSE: Organization and Activities

This section describes SPEPSE (Société Parisienne d'Etude des phénomènes Spatiaux et Etranges), a Parisian society for the study of spatial and strange phenomena. Founded under the law of July 1, 1901, it is an amateur research organization that is apolitical and non-confessional. Its aspirations include developing intellectual faculties through the study of experimental and applied sciences, particularly space, and investigating the manifestation of spatial and strange phenomena to prove their reality or non-existence. The organization's headquarters is located in Marly le Roi. Its activities include analyzing current scientific knowledge, developing research projects, holding reflection meetings, organizing exhibitions, debates, observation vigils, maintaining a documentary and library archive, and publishing a bulletin. SPEPSE has two working groups: Section UFO, contacted via R. BONNAVENTURE, and Section ASTRO, contacted via J. LE BRAZ in Paris. Information is available upon written request with a self-addressed stamped envelope.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in these documents are the systematic collection and analysis of UFO-related data, the use of film and drawing tests for research, and the collaborative nature of the investigations involving various consultants and organizations. The editorial stance, as represented by Thierry PINVIDIC, is one of rigorous scientific inquiry, detailed methodology, and a commitment to disseminating findings through reports and presentations. There is a clear focus on structured research protocols and data management, aiming to establish the reality or non-existence of UFO phenomena through empirical evidence.