Survey on UFO Abduction and/or ET Contact

Abstract: MUFON Experiencer Research Team members Michael Austin Melton, PsyD., Robert Upson, D.CH., Craig Lang, M.S., Denise Stoner, A.A., ERT Director Kathleen Marden, B.A., and Don C. Donderi, Ph.D. a retired associate professor in the Department of Psychology at McGill University, Montreal, Quebec completed two phase, multi-year, comprehensive study on individuals who have reported experiencing various types of contact with nonhuman entities of purported extraterrestrial origin. Dr. Donderi administered the American Personality Inventory, a test developed by Ted Davis and the late Budd Hopkins in collaboration with Dr. Donderi, to identify abductees as a separate group who exhibit the symptoms of “UFO Abduction Syndrome” as a separate group from simulators and the general public. Their responses are compared and contrasted with the responses from “contactees” who had reported either positive interaction with benevolent non-physical entities or highly negative contact phenomena. The research team identified the differences between the groups in an attempt to obtain qualitative and quantitative data on experiencers of contact with nonhuman entities. We collected qualitative data on the messages that alleged nonhuman entities have imparted to experiencers regarding the implications for humanity’s future.    

The MUFON ERT's Experiencer Survey and A.P.I.: What Experiencers Tell Us About Their Experiences and The Implications For Humanity’s Future   

By Kathleen Marden, B.A., Don C. Donderi, Ph.D., Michael Austin Melton, Psy.D., Robert Upson, D.CH., Craig Lang, M.S.,

and Denise Stoner A.A.                                   

       In 2018 MUFON’s Experiencer Research Team (ERT) completed a comprehensive multi-year study on UFO abduction and ET contact experiencers. It was a two-phase study designed to obtain general statistical data, and to compare two groups of experiencers. The proposal for the study was approved by MUFON’s Board of Directors in 2015, and the survey was posted to MUFON’s website on July 27 of that year. We used Survey Monkey, an online application that is readily available to participants and automatically calculates statistical data. The raw statistics provided a platform for the further analysis of the data. We set target number of 500 completed questionnaires. In total 516 were analyzed statistically.

     Survey takers were instructed to read and agree to cautionary statements and requirements for participation in an informed consent agreement. The clause advised participants that they might experience increased anxiety due to the nature of the questions. Potential survey takers were advised that the minimum requirement for participation was recall of the nonhuman entities they encountered, and the procedures performed in an alien environment. A link to the ERT’s 30 question “Experiencer Questionnaire” was offered for those that did not meet the minimum requirements but wished to speak with a member of the ERT, who offered nonjudgmental listening in a supportive manner.

     ERT members Craig Lang, MS (1956-2018), Michael Austin Melton, PhD (former member), Robert Upson, DCH, Denise Stoner, and I (Kathleen Marden) developed 118 questions for the “Experiencer Survey.” Our objective was to identify a variety of characteristics that experiencers share and to collect statistical data that would be of value to MUFON investigators, researchers, and experiencers alike. Our questions were straightforward and pertained to the abduction/contact experience, based upon our investigative findings, the historical findings of other investigators, the psychological research findings in a variety of academic studies, and the postulates offered by prominent skeptics. The survey questions pertained to demographics, family structure, generational contact, religious/spiritual beliefs, emotional impact, medical impact, psychic and paranormal phenomena, perceived treatment by NHI (nonhuman intelligence or intelligent) entities, description of NHI, the contact experience, MILABS, and messages from NHI.

    The greatest problem with a survey of this type is the inability to measure the psychological functioning of its participants and the veracity of the statistical data. Given the opportunity for hoaxers (fakers) and delusional people to participate in the study, we developed trick questions to identify and exclude this category of participant. The questions were carefully worded and presented to prevent false positive or false negative responses. All incomplete questionnaires and those identified as completed by fakers were eliminated.

     The study was advertised in the MUFON UFO Journal, on Kathleen’s Facebook page, at her website, and in some of her media interviews. MUFON’s ERT encouraged the experiencers they counseled to complete the survey if they met the criteria for participation. We intentionally did not elicit participation from contactees who practiced astral travel, conscious contact with non-physical entities, remote viewing, and shamanic drug induced contact.

     Dr. Don C. Donderi, a retired associate professor in the Department of Psychology at McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, worked on Phase 2 of our study, the “American Personality Inventory” (API). One hundred and eighty eight of the survey participants agreed to take part in the next phase of our survey. The API is a standardized measure developed by Ted Davis, a clinical social worker, and Budd Hopkins (1931-2011), a distinguished Abstract Expressionist artist and UFO abduction researcher from New York City, as an indicator of UFO Abduction Syndrome. Davis and Hopkins used the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory as a model for the API. Dr. Donderi collaborated with them by enlisting the assistance of students at McGill University as control groups for the evaluation and standardization of the statistical portion of the test. 

     During the development of the API the researchers obtained responses to 608 true/false questions from 52 self-reported abductees and compared their responses to 75 non-abductee controls and 26 simulators who knew the common characteristics that pertain to experiencers of UFO abductions but had not had an experience themselves. Dr. Donderi completed a statistical analysis of the three group’s responses and a subset of 65 questions were identified for the standardized measure.

     We were surprised to find that Dr. Donderi’s API analysis in phase 2 of MUFON’s study did not yield the anticipated results. No one obtained a score close to the simulator or non-abductee targets. However, Phase 1 of the study identified and eliminated hoaxers, so this could explain the surprising results.  Many scored close to the abductee target, but others were distributed along a wide range in reference to the UFO Abduction Syndrome target. For this reason, Dr. Donderi and Kathleen compared the responses of the 20 highest scorers to the 20 lowest scorers in an effort to identify the variances between the two groups. The 20 participants who scored closest to the target were identified as the “abductee group” because they met the criteria for UFO abduction syndrome. The 20 lowest scorers (outliers but having some of the characteristics of UFO Abduction Syndrome), were labeled the “contactee group,” because the majority indicated that their contact was positive. However, five members of this group reported contact of a highly negative nature. Phase 2 survey analytics, where applicable, are interspersed throughout this paper.

     We discovered that the phase 2 “abductee group” shares a unique set of characteristics that are prevalent at a statistically higher rate that is seen in the phase 1 survey takers and the phase 2 “contactee group.” These include generational contact, increased psychic ability, increased paranormal activity, and the condition of being empathic (a psychic sense of the energy, emotions, or physical well-being of other people.) You will become aware of additional statistically significant qualities of this special group as you read this paper.

 Demographic Data

     The phase 1 Experiencer Survey participants were evenly divided between men and women. The phase 2 “abductee group” was evenly distributed, but the phase 2 “contactee group” had 14 males and 6 females. We received completed surveys from participants residing in 7-time zones around the globe. They are as follows: Eastern: 31%, Central: 21%, Pacific: 13%, and Mountain: 7%. The remaining 28% were widely distributed.

     Ten racial groups and many mixed-race groups were represented. They are as follows:  Northern European Caucasian: 81%, Southern European Caucasian: 22%, Native American: 18%, African: 4%, Asian: 3%, Australian: 2%, East Indian: 1%, Arabic: 1%, Eskimo: less than 1% and Aborigine: less than 1%.      

 What is your current Age?  (Survey Takers N: 513) 

Age groups represented in the phase 1 survey are as follows: under 20: 4%, 20-29: 14%, 30-39: 19%, 40-49: 21%, 50-59: 22%, 60-69: 17%, 70-79: 3%, over 80: less than 1%. Only 2 survey takers were 80+ years old.

     The phase 2 “abductee group” was evenly distributed by age group, but 50% of the phase 2 “contactee group” was 50-59 years old and 28% was 20-29 years old.

 What age were you when you had your first experience?  (Survey Takers N: 514)

     The phase 1 survey group indicated that 26% were less than 5 when they had their first experience, 52% were less than 10, and 72% were less than 20. Only 21% were over the age of 20 when their first abduction/contact experience occurred. Surprisingly, 6% stated that they were more than 40 years old when their first experience took place. The remaining 7% were uncertain.    

     Among the phase 2 “abductee group,” 15% were less than 5, 40% were less than 10, and 80% were less than 20 at the time of their first abduction. This left only 10% over age 20. The remaining 10% were uncertain when their first abduction occurred.

     The phase 2 “contactee group” produced some interesting statistics. Of the contactees, 20% were less than 5 when their first experience occurred, 25% were less than 10, and 70% were less than age 20. This left an additional 30% who were over age 20, but surprisingly, 15% stated that they were 50-59 years old when they had their first contact experience. No contactee was uncertain of their age at the point of first contact.

     The statistical analysis of these groups indicates that the majority of experiencers believe they were less than ten years old at the time of their first abduction/contact experience. This is consistent with the widespread belief that contact is intergenerational and children are taken, with other family members, from a very young age. 

     Our work with experiencers has led us to believe that the majority have been taken or visited more than one time. A survey of the literature indicates that this is generally true. We were interested in obtaining statistical data on the number of times experiencers believed they had been taken or contacted.

How many times do you believe you’ve been taken? (Survey Takers N: 456)

     Among the phase 1 survey takers, 24% stated they had been taken only one time. 30% said it was 2-4 times, for a total of 54% who stated that they had been taken 4 times or less. 15% indicated they had been taken 5-9 times, 9% said 10-19 times, 11% 20-49 times, 5% 50-99 times, and 6% over 100 times.  

     The phase 2 “abductee group” reported a decreased percentage of multiple abductions, with 10% indicating they had been taken 1 time, 25% 2-4 times, 20% 5-9 times, and 15% 10-19 times. Among the higher abduction rates, 10% fell into in the 20+ range, and 5% in the 50+ range. 15% of the phase 2 “abductee group” were not certain of the number of times they had been abducted.

     Among the phase 2 “contactee group,” 45% indicated that they had been contacted only one time. No one stated that they had been contacted 2-4 times. 15% believed they had been contacted 5-9 times, and 5% stated 10-19 times. A surprising 15% believed they had been contacted more than 50 times and 10% were not certain.

     The small group of those who reported highly negative contacts reported numerous, frightening contact events. We hypothesized that this unique group might have spiritual attachments by negative interdimensional entities, are taken by highly exploitative non-human entities, or have mental health issues. Later in this study, we will examine the physical descriptions of the NHI entities and the emotional responses of the three groups of experiencers regarding their contact events.

Family Structure & Childhood Emotional Environment

      We created questions that would give us insight into the family structure the respondents grew up in. In 2013, several experiencers who had grown up in foster homes or been adopted contacted Kathleen to request this question on her next survey.  

     The MUFON Experiencer Survey devised a series of questions that might indicate the presence of psychosocial tension among experiencers during childhood. Family structure is not necessarily an indicator of distress, but there is an increased level of stress among children of divorced families and children who were abused or neglected.

What was your childhood family structure? (Survey Takers N: 516)

     We discovered that 72% of the phase 1 survey takers grew up in a two-parent home; 19% in a single parent home; 5% with relatives, 2% in a foster home, .19% in an orphanage, and 1% in the homes of unrelated friends. The remaining “other” group were reared in an environment different than those listed above. Two members of the phase 2 “contactee group” indicated disruption and loss during childhood, whereas this was not mentioned by the phase 2 “abductee group.” In a separate question, 6% of the phase 1 survey takers stated that they were adopted. It climbed to 10% among the phase 2 “contactee group” but dropped to zero among the phase 2 “abductee group.”

     In addition to family structure, we wanted to determine the emotional environment the experiencers grew up in and their level of stability and happiness in their adult lives. The next question pertains to the childhood abuse and trauma findings of the 1990 Omega Project, a psychological survey of persons reporting abductions and other UFO encounters, by Kenneth Ring, PhD and Christopher J. Rosing, PhD. Their academic study offered a comparative analysis of test scores derived from 265 abductees, Near-Death Experiencers (NDE), and 2 groups of control subjects, who voiced an interest in each topic, but denied having experienced UFO abduction or an NDE. Drs. Ring and Rosing discovered that the abductee and NDE groups reported a higher rate of childhood abuse and trauma than was reported by the control groups. Additionally, both experiential groups reported an increased level of serious illness during childhood. Dissociation, a defense mechanism that involves splitting off from the source of the threat and tuning into other realities, as a coping mechanism, was present in both experiencer groups. However, it was higher among UFO abductees.

     MUFON’s 2010 Omega Project tested the results of the Ring-Rosing study. Robert LeLieuvre, PhD, MUFON Abduction Research Director Lester Valez, and Michael Freeman, PhD, administered psychological instruments to 71 abductees and 51 individuals who reported an interest in abduction phenomena, but had not been abducted. Their results upheld the findings of the Ring-Rosing study.      

     In MUFON’s study, 63% of the phase 1 survey takers indicated that they were happy and without unusual highs and lows during their childhood, but 37% were not. We asked a nearly identical question that pertained to their adult lives. 52% stated that they are usually happy and without unusual highs and lows; 48% were not. Of the participants who were unhappy and experienced instability in their lives, 24% indicated that their troubles are directly related to their abduction or ET contact experiences. This leaves 76% who believe their abduction or contact events are not responsible for instability and unhappiness in their childhood and adult lives. These findings appear to be consistent with the statistical data in both Omega studies. (See www.kathleen-marden.com/psychological-studies.php for an overview of the academic psychological studies on abductees.)

     Among the phase 2 survey takers, the “abductee group” reported a slightly elevated rate of childhood and adult unhappiness. However, the “contactee group” participants reported that they were relatively happy as children and continue to lead stable, happy adult lives. 

The Abduction/Contact Experience

     We developed a series of questions that related to the abduction/contact experience. Our goal was to differentiate those who retained conscious recall of observing a UFO and nonhuman entities versus those who has no conscious recall. 85% of the phase 1 survey takers indicated that they had conscious recall of a UFO sighting. In comparison 90% of the phase 2 “abductee group” and 95% of the phase 2 “contactee group” indicated that they had observed a UFO.

     We then asked if the UFO was 500 feet or less from the witnesses, indicating a close encounter.

Do you recall having a close encounter with a UFO at less than 500 feet in the distance? (Check all that apply) (Survey Takers N:516)

     The phase 1 survey results indicate that the majority of experiencers (65%) reported conscious, continuous recall of observing a UFO at less than 500 feet in the distance. A much smaller percentage of experiencers have recalled this observation through dreams, flashbacks, or hypnosis. Only 22% stated that their memory of a close encounter was limited to their dreams, and 11% had no conscious recall of a close encounter but remembered this through flashbacks. Hypnosis alone, when there was no conscious recall of a UFO encounter or ET contact accounted for only 2% of all close encounter memories. Among the phase 2 “abductee group” 70% had conscious recall of a close encounter. This increased to 85% for the phase 2 “contactee group.” 

     We believe that these statistics are highly significant. A significant percentage of the experiencers in all three experiential groups indicated that they had observed a UFO and that it was less than 500 feet in the distance. In a separate question, we attempted to determine if they were inside, possibly sleeping, or outside when their sighting occurred. Again, the majority of experiencers in all three groups indicated that they were outside for at least one sighting. 20% of the “abductee group” had a sighting from inside their homes, whereas among the “contactee group” 40% stated that they were inside for at least one sighting. 

     We wondered if the survey takers who observed nonhuman entities retained conscious recall for this experience or if it was remembered through other means. Respondents were given the opportunity to indicate only one answer, as our goal was to clearly separate the survey takers who had conscious recall from those who recalled this experience through less reliable means. Again, we worded our questions to reduce the possibility of receiving false positive responses.

“Do you have conscious, continuous recall of observing nonhuman or alien entities? (Not with hypnosis, dreams, or flashbacks)” (Survey Takers N: 512)

     Among the phase 1 survey takers 54% replied in the affirmative. 15% recalled the observation of nonhuman entities through dreams that seemed too real to have been dreams, 6% through flashbacks, and 2% through hypnosis only. A full 25% retained no memory of observing nonhuman entities. This statistic was the same for the “abductee group” and 30% for the “contactee group”. This indicates that 25% of the survey takers did not read the instructions or ignored the clearly stated minimum requirements for participation in the survey. This failure of the participants to read or follow instructions was apparent in both phases of the survey and presented a significant problem for the researchers as we attempted to collate responses among the three groups of survey takers. (When this failure to read the instructions problem became apparent during phase 2 of our study, the American Personality Inventory participants, we used large red font to emphasize our written instructions. However, this seems to have made little difference. It appears that today’s people rush ahead without reading the important instructions.)

     We were interested in obtaining quantitative data regarding intergenerational contact. Among the phase 1 survey takers 50% stated that family members had observed a UFO close up. In the phase 2 “abductee group” 60% had family members who had observed a UFO up close. This was true of the phase 2 “contactee group” as well and the statistic was 60%.

     This question could possibly have identified a lower percentage of intergenerational experiencers than has actually observed a UFO and/or experienced abduction/contact. We must consider a variable in this case that could have skewed our data. We know that some family members conceal their abduction/contact events from other members of their families. Although the current trend favors a greater degree of openness and honesty than ever before, some family members might be reluctant to speak of their experiences within the family group. Ridicule and family upheaval are primary deterrents to honesty and openness among family members. The old societal trend toward harsh ridicule of UFO abduction experiencers and doubts pertaining to their sanity and integrity, remains prevalent among some less informed groups in today’s society. Often, family pressure silences experiencers. Educational efforts by researchers, experiencer advocates, and experiencers has increased public awareness, but there remains an uphill battle toward the goal of disclosure and widespread acceptance. 

Have family members experienced abductions/contact experiences? (Survey Takers N:504)

     41% of the phase 1 survey takers had relatives that had experienced abduction/contact. It was 60% for phase 1 abductees, but only 30% for the “contactee group.” The most frequently cited family members by all three groups were their mothers and fathers, followed by their brothers and sisters. Grandparents and children were also mentioned, but in lower numbers. This indicates that phase 1 survey takers reported fewer cases of intergenerational contact among family members. However, the phase 2 abductees reported a statistically significant rate of close encounters and intergenerational abductions.    

     In 1991, researchers Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs, PhD, Associate Professor of History at Temple University, cooperated on a Roper poll survey to obtain statistical data on the percentage of Americans that had been abducted by aliens. Five marker questions were built into the survey. The first question pertained to waking up paralyzed with the sense of a strange person or presence or something else in the room. This question was criticized by social researchers because it was vague and could be an indicator of sleep paralysis. We wanted to separate sleep paralysis from the paralysis that occurs when experiencers are awake, observe a nonhuman presence in the room, and become paralyzed.

      We posed two questions pertaining to sleep paralysis in an attempt to separate possible sleep paralysis and sleep hallucinations from conscious recall of contact in a wakeful state. The first question we asked is as follows:

Have you awakened unable to move your body or cry out? (Survey Takers N: 510) 

     74% of the phase 1 survey takers answered in the affirmative. This increased to 90% for the phase 2 “abductee group” and dropped to 65% for the phase 2 “contactee group.” This indicates that they experienced the classic symptoms of sleep paralysis with or without a real alien presence in their home.

     We developed our next question to separate sleep paralysis experiencers from those who might possibly have endured a real abduction. We asked:    

Have you been awake and able to move your body, but observed a non-human/ET presence and became paralyzed? (Survey Taker N:507)

     When asked if they had been awake but then saw a nonhuman before they became unable to move or cry out, 36% of the phase 1 survey takers replied in the affirmative. The percentage of wakeful contact increased dramatically to 60% in the phase 2 “abductee group” and dropped to 25% in the phase 2 “contactee group.” The highly significant statistic for the “abductee group” could be an indication that their events are real and not sleep state generated.

     The feeling of flying through the air, although they didn’t know why or how, was the second marker of alien abduction on the Hopkins-Jacobs Roper poll. Skeptics stated that the sense of flying through the air might possibly be experienced as a sleep hallucination. However, we must consider the possibility that it might also be an indication of the act of being transported during an abduction experience. We developed a question to determine the prevalence of this marker among today’s experiencers.   

Do you have conscious memories of moving through the air under someone else's control and there is no commonplace explanation for this? (Survey Takers N: 510)

     Among the phase 1 survey takers 34% had conscious memory of flying through the air under someone else’s control. An additional 20% had dreamed of flying through the air under someone else’s control. A mere 3% had flashbacks and only 2% had recalled this experience with the memory enhancing aid of hypnosis. The statistic for conscious recall of flying through the air under someone else’s control in the phase 2 “abductee group” was 30%, with another 20% stating that they experienced it as a dream that seemed too real to have been a dream. Hypnosis recovered this memory in 5% of the “abductee group,” but no one recalled it as a flashback. Among the phase 2 “contactee group”, 35% indicated that they had conscious memories of moving through the air under someone else’s control. An additional 20% recalled dreams that seemed too real to have been dreams. No member of the “contactee group” indicated memories through flashbacks or hypnosis. Our statistics indicated that approximately one third of the participants in each group had conscious recall of moving through the air under someone else’s control and had no common explanation for how this occurred.

     Missing time was one of the five important markers for alien abduction mentioned on the 1991 Hopkins-Jacobs Roper poll. MUFON’s statistics on missing time indicated that 58% of the phase 1 survey takers were aware of at least one period of lost time that they believed was ET contact related. Missing time was noted by 65% of the phase 2 “abductee group.” However, only 45% of the phase 2 “contactee group” was aware of missing time associated with ET contact. The duration of the missing time experience was slightly elevated to 2 hours among abductees. But it was widely distributed among a broad range of choices from less than 1 hour to 24+ hours.

     We collected statistical data on the percentage of experiencers who retained conscious, continuous recall of being examined by nonhumans in an alien environment. When asked alone, this question could generate inaccurate data due to the fact that some experiencers have recalled this through dreams that seemed to real to be dreams, flashbacks, or in hypnosis. In order to obtain a clear picture of consciously recalled information, we presented the question with three alternative responses. You’ll find the statistics below: 

Do you have conscious, continuous memories of being examined by nonhumans in an alien environment? (Survey Takers N: 503)

     As you can see on the chart above, 22% of the phase 1 survey takers retained conscious, continuous memories of being examined by nonhumans in an alien environment. This statistic increased to 35% among the phase 2 “abductee group.” It was 30% among the phase 2 “contactee group.”

     Among the phase 1 survey takers, 15% recalled being examined in an alien environment through dreams that seemed too real to have been dreams, 5% through flashbacks; and 3% through hypnosis. 15% of the phase 2 “abductee group” recalled this through dreams that seemed too real to have been dreams, and 10% recalled this through hypnosis. 10% of the phase 2 “contactee group” recalled being examined by nonhuman entities through dreams that seemed too real to have been dreams, and no one recalled this through flashbacks or hypnosis.

     Our findings indicated that again, an increased percentage of those with nearly all the characteristics of UFO Abduction Syndrome retained conscious recall of their experience. This was apart from those who reported memories of contact through dreams that seemed like real events, hypnosis, or flashbacks. This contradicts the suggestion by skeptics that all experiences of this kind can be attributed to sleep related phenomena, including sleep paralysis and hypnagogic or hypnopompic hallucinations.    

It is widely known that some experiencers have reported being returned after an abduction dressed in someone else’s clothing. We obtained statistical data on the prevalence of missing clothing among experiencers. We asked the following question:

Have you awakened to find yourself dressed in someone else's clothing without a commonplace explanation? (Survey Takers N: 509)

TOP OF P. 14