19: Quantitative criteria: Introduction

Best UFO Cases” by Isaac Koi

PART 19:  Quantitative criteria: Introduction

 

Previous sections of this article have examined with some of the qualitative criteria that have been proposed for selecting the best UFO cases.

 

Although rarely referred to, some attempts have been made to go further and make _quantitive_ assessments of aspects of UFO reports to assist in selecting the best cases and/or the cases which should be given priority by investigators/researchers.

 

The best known such attempts are also the most straightforward (e.g. by J Allen Hynek and Jacques Vallee). 

 

Lessor known attempts have been more ambitious, either seeking to refine the systems proposed by Hynek and Vallee or creating rather complicated new systems for quantifying the significance and/or reliability of UFO reports.

 

Jacques Vallee has commented (in his book Confrontations) that assigning credibility or weight to an observation is an integral part of any intelligence evaluation task, but “UFO researchers have rarely bothered to apply it in support of their own work” (see Footnote 19.01).

 

Several proposals for quantitative criteria are discussed in subsequent Parts of this article, including:

 

1. J Allen Hynek’s Stangeness/Probability ratings (adopted and extended by several researchers, including Don Berliner, Jim Speiser and Clause Poher). See PART 20: Quantitative criteria : Hynek – Strangeness and Probability.

 

2. Jacques Vallee’s SVP ratings - i.e. [S]ource reliability, [V]isit to site and [P]ossible explanations. See PART 21: Quantitative criteria : Vallee’s SVP ratings;

 

3. Jenny Randles’ strangeness-investigation level classification (adopted by BUFORA). See PART 22: Quantitative criteria : BUFORA’s case priority;

 

4. A system proposed by Ballester-Guasp (endorsed by MUFON). MUFON's field investigator's manual sets out this system in some detail and in relation to which it comments that “since 1992, MUFON has aimed to give reports processed into the MUFON files a numeric evaluation using this method”. See PART 23: Quantitative criteria : Ballester/MUFON index.

 

5. Thomas Olsen's reliability index (applied by Thomas Olsen in his book "The Reference for Outstanding UFO Sighting Reports" (1966) and more recently by Illobrand Von Ludwigger in his book “Best UFO Cases – Europe”). See PART 24: Quantitative criteria : Olsen’s Reliability Index;

 

6. Criteria suggested by M. Figuet in relation to the FRANCAT database. See PART 25: Quantitative criteria : Figuet’s hardest cases.

 

7. Mark Moravec’s “UFO Report Rating System”. PART 26: Quantitative criteria : Moravec's rating system.

 

8. Miscellaneous other quantitative criteria. See Part 27.

 

 

FOOTNOTES

 

[19.01] Jacques Vallee, “Confrontations” (1990) at page 218 (in the Appendix) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition.