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.

174
THE
USE
OF
PROBABILITY SCORING FOR
OBSERVATIONAL CREDITABILITY
In
order
to
translate
the
results
of
an
extensive, multispecialty
medicalevaluation
into
a
handy
estimate
of
observer creditability,
a
percentage
-
evaluation scoring method
has
been devised. These "probability
of
creditability"
scores
are
mainly
intended
to
serve
the non
-
,
medical expert.
They are
numericalstatements reflecting
the
level
and quality
of
observational
ability
and
are
based
on all
the
obtained
findings
relative
to
central
nervous
system integrity.
The
scores
will
be
presented
in
conjunction
with
(not
in
place
of)
summaries
of
the
results
of
each
part
of
the medical
assessment
(i.e.,
medical, neurological,neuro-ophthalmological,
and psychiatric)
of
an individual
observer.
A
composite
score
will also be
offered
to
suggest
the
overall
level
of
observational credita-bility.
This
final
score
is
based
on
careful scrutiny, extrapolation, and
inter-
pretative
integration
of
all
the
findings
at
hand, as they
would
be
expected
to
influence
(in
a
highly multifactorial
way) any
reported observations.
The
nature and
extent
of
an
individual's abnormalities
will
thus
be
reflected
in
his creditability
score(s),
a
scale
for
which has been
set
up
as follows:
Degree
of
Impairment Creditability Score
none
95%
mild
75%
moderate
50%
severe
25%
extreme
5%The
scores
will be
variably useful, depending
on their
applicability
to
the
situation
in
question.
It
is
expected
that they will
be helpful
in
thescreening and selection
of
candidates
for
observational jobs
(i.e.,
predictive
evaluations).
They
will
usually be more reliable
as measures
of
creditability,
however,
when they are
part
of
a
retrospective evaluation
that is
being done on
an
individual
who
has already reported
a
particular event. This
is
because
theexaminer-scorer
is
able
to
avail himself
of
specific observational material onwhich
to
"zero
in"
and check
out,
including occassional clues
to
physical
and
psychological pathology.
In
those instances where there are different stories
from several individuals
who
report having witnessed
the same event,
the
value
of
the creditability scoring can be further demonstrated
for
sorting
out con-flicting data.
It
is
repleily
acknowledged
that
this scoring method
is
somewhat arbitrary.
Its
reliability and reproducibility
will
depend largely on the sophistication
and
the
abilities
of the
scorer.
It
is
essential that the
physician
doing these
studies have
1)
a
high-level working knowledge of the
four
specialties involved,
that
he
2)
be specifically well-informed
in the
pertinent interdisciplinary
material related
to
observational phenomena, and
that he
3)
be adept
in the
matter of investigating, synthesizing, interpreting, and finally applying theramifications
of his "pure" medical findings
to
observational situations.
It
is
further recommended
that
4)
he himself be thoroughly checked out as
a
creditable
observer, since this
proposed method assessing observers rests heavily
on thephysician's awn ability
to
make accurate observations and sound judgements.
It is
probably true that,
at
this point
in time, there are few men in
medicine
who are
adequately trained
to do this matispecialty
kind
of assess-
ment. This is
a
remediable situation, however, once the projected need
forsuch professional preparation has been recognized and established.