Faculty perceptions of unidentified aerial phenomena

The 2021 Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) report confirmed the existence of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), formerly known as UFOs. After ruling out natural occurrences and technical glitches, the report stated that many UAP could not be attributed to known military arsenals. This report, along with congressional hearings and statements from former and current government officials, legislators, and scholars, has significantly increased public and academic interest in UAP. Other countries have also begun investigating UAP, including Japan, Canada, France, Germany, and Brazil. Several universities, such as Harvard with its Galileo Project, are now actively conducting research into UAP. Despite the stigma associated with the topic, the growing attention to UAP warrants an investigation into the perceptions of university faculty, who are responsible for generating knowledge and evaluating truth claims. This study aims to assess the perceptions of tenured and tenure-track faculty at major research universities regarding recent UAP-related developments, their opinions on academia's involvement in UAP research, and their personal experiences with UAP.

The existing literature on UAP is largely anecdotal and lacks rigorous scientific investigation. While journalistic reports and government documents provide some accounts of UAP sightings and analyses, there is a significant lack of peer-reviewed academic research on the topic. This study aims to fill this gap by exploring faculty perspectives, a crucial step in establishing a more robust and credible academic discourse around UAP. Existing scholarship highlights the stigma associated with UAP research, hindering open discussion and collaboration among researchers and institutions. Previous studies have focused on public perception of UAP, but this research is the first to investigate the views and experiences of university faculty.

A national survey was conducted among 1460 tenured and tenure-track faculty members across 14 disciplines at 144 major research universities in the United States. The disciplines included sciences, social sciences, humanities, and arts, selected based on the popularity of undergraduate majors. The sample was chosen randomly, excluding inactive faculty and those whose primary role is teaching rather than research. Data was collected using Qualtrics, with email invitations and three reminder emails sent to participants. The survey included demographic questions, questions about news consumption regarding UAP, questions assessing awareness and reactions to UAP-related developments (including journalistic reports, government reports, and academic publications), questions exploring explanations for UAP, questions about awareness of current research, questions about UAP-related research and teaching, and questions about personal observations of UAP. The survey also included open-ended questions to allow for more detailed responses. The response rate was 3.9%, potentially due to the pandemic, concerns about spam, and the taboo nature of the topic. Data analysis was conducted using SAS 9.4, with descriptive statistics employed to analyze the responses. Qualitative data from open-ended questions were analyzed using the constant comparative method.

The majority of faculty participants (overwhelmingly and regardless of discipline) expressed curiosity about UAP, exceeding skepticism or indifference. While many were aware of media reports on UAP, far fewer were aware of related government legislation or the scholarly work being done on the topic. The study found that most faculty believe the academic evaluation of UAP information and more academic research on the topic are important. Nearly one-fifth of the faculty reported observing something that might fit the government's definition of UAP, either personally or through someone they know. Faculty offered varied explanations for UAP, with the most frequent response being "I don't know." Natural events and devices of unknown intelligence were also frequently cited explanations. When asked about the most compelling evidence for UAP representing unknown intelligence, the majority prioritized meta-analysis of peer-reviewed studies. While a small percentage of faculty had conducted research on UAP, more than one-third expressed some level of interest in engaging in such research, particularly if other reputable scholars in their field did so and funding was available. The study also found that participation was influenced by the stigma associated with the topic. A significant portion of faculty expressed some level of skepticism about the sources and analysis of the information presented to them (media, government reports, and academic publications). Finally, the survey demonstrated a notable increase in interest among many faculty regarding UAP, particularly among those who were initially not at all interested. The gender distribution of the sample was not representative of national faculty demographics. This likely reflects the stigma associated with UAP research and a hesitancy among female researchers to participate openly.

The study's findings highlight the growing interest among university faculty in UAP. Despite the inherent stigma associated with the topic and lingering skepticism about information sources, a significant number of faculty perceive the academic investigation of UAP as crucial. The results suggest that a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to properly understand UAP and its implications. The relatively high percentage of faculty reporting UAP observations, coupled with their openness to further research, indicates a shift in perception. The lack of awareness about government legislation points to the need for increased dissemination of information regarding UAP-related developments. The importance placed on meta-analysis of peer-reviewed studies suggests a reliance on strong scientific evidence before engaging with the topic more fully. The study's limitations, such as the relatively low response rate and the non-representative gender distribution, highlight the need for future, larger-scale studies that address these issues. The study also emphasizes the importance of addressing the stigma surrounding UAP research to encourage greater participation and unbiased investigation. The recent surge of media attention surrounding UAP could contribute to a normalization of the topic, ultimately leading to increased academic involvement.

This study provides the first comprehensive look into faculty perceptions regarding UAP. The findings demonstrate a considerable level of interest and a belief in the importance of academic involvement in UAP research, despite the challenges posed by stigma and skepticism. Future research should focus on larger, more representative samples and employ various methodologies to investigate the topic further. Addressing the stigma and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration are critical steps in advancing the academic understanding of UAP. The study concludes by underscoring the need for a multidisciplinary approach, urging colleagues across disciplines to engage with this important subject matter.

This study has several limitations. The relatively low response rate (3.9%) may limit the generalizability of the findings. The sample's gender distribution was not representative of the national faculty population. The focus on recent developments may have limited the exploration of the broader historical context of UAP. Finally, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce bias into the results.