Symposium on unidentified flying objects: hearings before the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninetieth Congress, second session, July 29, 1968.

108
(The prepared statement of Dr.Hall follows:)
PREPARED STATEMENT BY ROBERT L. HALL
From the point of view of a social psychologist, UFO reports present us with
a most interesting and challenging situation. To a social psychologist the known
facts appear to be facts about people and the things that they are saying and
doing. First, many people, all over the world, including reliable and knowledge-
able witnesses, keep reporting puzzling flying objects, and the reports have cer-
tain recurrent features. Second, several competing systems of belief have grown
up to explain these reports, with some rational men supporting each of several
different explanations. Third, as any sociologist would predict, the systems of
belief have, to a large extent, become rooted in complex organizations of people:
some organizations have been created to defend a particular position about
UFOs; some organizations whose main purposes are remote from UFOs have
been drawn into the controversy and found themselves committed to defending
a position.
Nearly all rational observers appear to be agreed that the great majority
of reported sightings of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) can be explained
as misidentifications of familiar phenomena, with an occasional hoax contribut-
ing to the confusion. However, there are approximately 100 to 200 cases per
year, based upon apparently sound testimony, with recurrent features of appear-
ance, movement, and reaction to the environment. Strong disagreement arises
over these cases.
One major area of disagreement is the question whether any novel physical
phenomenon underlies these reports or whether they are simply a miscellaneous
collection of familiar phenomena, misidentified because of mass hysteria and
misperceived as having recurrent features because of a process of hysterial
contagion. Among those who believe that there is-a physical phenomenon, there
are, in turn, several alternative explanations as to what it is. A substantial num-
ber argue that there are technological devices or vehicles entering our atmos-
phere from the outside. A substantial number argue that there is a novel natural
phenomenon, as yet ill understood, such as a form of plasma or "ball lightning."
There are other explanations supported by some people, such as the belief that
"space animals" are swimming around in our atmosphere, or that these objects
are secret devices manufactured somewhere on earth. In my judgment these
last two explanations fit the available evidence so poorly that I shall not deal
with them further. We might, then, label the three major hypotheses: (1) Mass
hysteria and contagion; (2) Extraterrestrial devices; (3) New natural phenom-
enon.
My comments, as a social psychologist, will be organized around three major
questions: (1) What has brought about this situation of competing systems of
belief, strongly held and often unresponsive to the observed facts, and how can
we modify the situation? (2) Is the mass hysteria hypothesis a plausible one,
and can it account adequately for the known facts? (3) For each of the major
explanations, what would be the probable consequences if the explanation were
true, and what actions or precautions might be taken in the public interest?
How did the present situation come about? Much sociological research on
rumor and belief systems indicates that ambiguity about an important matter
begets improvised news. To the extent that trusted information is not available,
systems of belief are generated to fill the gap. A recent scholarly work by
Shibutani describes a rumor as a kind of improvised news which ". . . arises
in situations of tension when ordinary communication channels are not oper-
ating adequately." (Shibutani, 1966, p. 57). Shibutani further argues that people
are always being confronted with new circumstances which are not clearly and
adequately treated by trusted channels of information, and therefore rumors
are a normal and important part of men's efforts to adapt to their environment
(p. 161, 182-183). Alternative explanations of UFO reports have arisen because
of a lack of sound, authoritative information in which people have confidence.
This is a normal and usual reaction to such situations of ambiguity.
In order to complete my answer about how the present situation came about,
I must digress briefly to explain what I mean by a "system of belief." Just as
nature abhors a vacuum, nature abhors an isolated belief. Neither a belief nor
the person who holds it can normally persist long in isolation. Each person's
beliefs tend to become organized into an interdependent system of beliefs which
support one another. Also people who share important beliefs typically become