UFOs and Prolonged Uncertainty
UFOs and Prolonged Uncertainty
Chronic uncertainty around unexplained phenomena and its psychological effects.
Key points
- Prolonged UAP uncertainty can turn curiosity into powerlessness, anger, and mistrust.
- Information gaps make false narratives and confident claims more appealing.
- Honest communication about what is known and unknown can make uncertainty easier to tolerate.
Source: Ahmed/Unsplash
The growing public interest in unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) isn’t just about wanting to know what’s in the sky. It is about answering the question of what implications they have for mankind. But as the interest is growing, so is the level of frustration many people are experiencing.
While recent congressional hearings, scientific initiatives, and mainstream media coverage show the previously taboo subject is now being talked about more openly by serious people, the conclusions remain inconclusive.
The PURSUE (Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters) files, which Donald Trump specifically stated on his Truth Social account he was releasing so “the people can decide for themselves 'WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON,'” have received almost 2 billion views. But the information being released is being given without context or explanation and has, thus far, left more questions than answers.
Many government and military officials have gone on record stating they have seen classified information that indicates the possibility of non-human space craft and biologics, but they can’t say more. Even whistleblowers who are trying to provide information, report they can’t give specifics because of NDAs or fear of retaliation.
It always seems as if someone knows something they can’t tell you for some reason.
All of this ambiguity has led to feeling that we may never get the real answers.
And this type of chronic uncertainty has significant psychological implications.
When people feel information is being intentionally withheld, it changes the way they process what’s happening.
Uncertainty Can Become Powerlessness
Humans live with constant uncertainty. We don’t know exactly what will happen in the next five minutes let alone five days, five months, or five years.
But when we start to feel uncertain because it seems like someone else is controlling what we are allowed to know, we stop wondering what’s true and instead begin asking, “Why is the truth being kept from me?”
When you can’t access information you need to answer important questions, you can start to feel powerless, which can lead to other negative emotions like suspicion, frustration, and even anger.
Anger can give you a sense of having more power in a situation. It motivates and mobilizes people into action. People may begin to protest or demand answers as a way to help regain control.
But if there is no clear action capable of resolving the uncertainty, that energy has nowhere productive to go. Someone can remain psychologically activated while the situation remains unchanged.
For some people, this may lead to disengagement, they stop caring or paying attention entirely, for others it may cause them to become more proactively involved.
The Search for Closure
When people encounter uncertainty around a subject that has personal meaning they naturally try to soothe their anxiety. In the case of UAPs, they may seek out more information by reading government reports, following congressional hearings, searching historical records, listening to interviews, or becoming actively involved in online communities. Each new document or testimony offers the possibility that they may finally get the missing piece of the puzzle.
But it can also create a cycle of anticipation and disappointment. Every time there is a new hearing, a new witness that comes forward, or a document release is promised, people raise their hopes that this will be the confirmation they’ve been looking for, but definitive evidence never seems to appear.
People can begin to feel deceived or foolish for believing they were finally going to get an answer. And the search for information can start to become emotionally consuming because the brain continues to treat the open question as unfinished business that needs resolving.
Confidence Can Substitute for Evidence
When the explanations being given, if there are any at all, are inadequate to explain what we are seeing, let alone answer the ultimate question everyone is asking, which is “are we alone in the universe?” interest doesn't just disappear. People begin to search elsewhere for the answers they need.
Research shows that uncertainty and a lack of control can make people more receptive to false explanations.1 This can open the door to believing in conspiracy theories, particularly those that portray the government as deceptive or threatening.
When no information is being provided, people can begin to mistake voices that seem loud or certain for credibility. A confident explanation feels reassuring, but it does not necessarily mean it is an informed one.
While government communication won’t prevent misinformation, it can reduce the space in which misinformation grows.
The Erosion of Trust
Trust helps people tolerate uncertainty. We do not need all the information ourselves as long as we believe that those who do possess it are competent, honest, and acting in good faith.
Just releasing information does not guarantee trust. Research on government transparency shows it can sometimes reveal disagreement, poor decisions, or uncertainty and may sometimes reduce confidence in the short term.2
But people are more likely to view a process as fair and trustworthy when they believe the government is being transparent, even when they don’t get the outcome they wanted.3 This matters psychologically because fair and understandable procedures make uncertainty easier to tolerate.
People can understand that the government won’t know what every UAP is. But they do want to understand how the evidence is being evaluated, why some information continues to remain classified, what conclusions the available evidence can support, and how open questions are being answered.
Without that understanding, people are left to interpret what the ambiguous information being provided is, as well as what the government’s silence means.
People Can Tolerate Honest Uncertainty
Officials may fear that admitting uncertainty will undermine public confidence, but research suggests that honest uncertainty is often less damaging than expected.
Studies have found that communicating uncertainty does not result in a meaningful reduction in trust in the source providing the information.4 Transparent explanations of the strength and limitations of evidence also don't appear to undermine public trust.5
This kind of communication provides a psychologically important framework.
People can understand that evidence is incomplete or that different explanations are possible. And they can understand that there are good reasons, such as national security, why some information cannot be immediately released. What is harder to tolerate are feelings of ambiguity and uncertainty when there is no clear process for resolving it.
Turning Uncertainty Into a Shared Process
UAP transparency is not dependent on the release of every document, but it does require clear and honest communication that helps people better understand the process as it is unfolding.
Communication, by itself, won’t eliminate uncertainty. But when people understand what's happening, discovering what UAPs are can become a shared scientific problem rather than a process from which they feel excluded.
The search for answers can remain focused on discovering the real evidence rather than driven by a desire to eliminate the discomfort of not knowing.
Whatever the ultimate explanation for UAP may be, the public is already responding psychologically to the process by which information is being investigated and released.
The answers matter, but so does the experience of waiting for them.
References
- Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417718261
- Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B., & Im, T. (2013). The effect of transparency on trust in government: A cross-national comparative experiment. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 575–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12047
- de Fine Licht, J. (2014). Transparency actually: How transparency affects public perceptions of political decision making. European Political Science Review, 6(2), 309–330. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773913000131
- van der Bles, A. M., van der Linden, S., Freeman, A. L. J., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2020). The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(14), 7672–7683. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1913678117
- Kerr, J. R., Schneider, C. R., Freeman, A. L. J., Marteau, T., & van der Linden, S. (2022). Transparent communication of evidence does not undermine public trust in evidence. PNAS Nexus, 1(5), pgac280. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac280
