How does researcher bias alter accounts of alien abduction?

First, I'd like to share an article I just found, entitled: "Abductions and Researcher Bias: How to Lose Your Way". www.cufos.org... Are any researchers investigating this phenomenon doing so from an unbiased perspective or are they more interested in selling books and making loads of money off the backs of traumatized people? Assuming researchers are genuinely concerned about those who approach them to ask for help, the abduction experience falls generally into 2 major categories: positive and negative experiences. Is this division a sign that abductions are being conducted by more than one alien group or is it the result of aligning oneself to the influence of a given "researcher"? According to this paper, "researcher" bias is not to blame for inconsistencies in results. Okay, fine. If it's not about pleasing investigators, then why are there so many differences? Is this a clue as to the true nature of the "alien agenda"?

I don't doubt for a minute that confabulation plays a role in some abduction cases. There are so may people conducting hypnosis sessions with suspected abductees now that this is bound to occur. I personally don't put a huge amount of stock into single witness cases because their testimony cannot be corroborated. However, when it comes to multiple witness abduction cases I believe that this can be a greatly effective tool.

Also, I'd like to point out that I believe that accusations of confabulation are leveled at some researchers a bit too harshly. With Budd Hopkins, for example, I see numerous examples where he tries to lead a witness to test their leadibility and he is unable to do so. Also, when he has multiple witnesses to work with he is routinely able to gather testimony where details mirror each other from one subject to another with startling synchronicity.

Undoubtedly confabulation is a problem and not all of those diagnosed as abductees really are but there is no doubt in my mind that this technique has often produced legitimate abduction testimony. Debunkers are simply blowing things out of proportion to protect their prosaic world view.

But to elaborate on Hopkins he is often accused of filtering his data when he writes his books. I don't doubt that he does that. But to me much of it is appropriate. Like Jacobs he appears to take a, "It's not what you say, it's what you do." approach. Others like Sprinkle seem to be enormously interested instead in what the aliens have to say and brush over their actions. I come from the school that says actions speak louder than words, whether it relates to people or aliens. Some researchers' and even abductees' interpretations are funny to me. Some of them can have anything done to them and all it takes is a simple encouraging line or two afterward to convince them that everything was done for infinitely benevolent purposes. It's like, "Yeah, he just shoved a cactus up my ass but he told me he loved me so he must be good." Ha ha.

I don’t think we can take the abduction phenomena, and the obvious discrepancies in some cases, as anything other than something is happening to people, and it was overwhelming.

I believe extra-terrestrials are visiting Earth, and from a scientific perspective it would make some sense that they would study us, just like we study other animals. But I’ve always had trouble with the abduction phenomena. Some are outright bizarre. Of course many of them are hoaxes, lies or embellishments, but I don’t think we can dismiss them all.

The more I read and think about it, I’ve come to the conclusion that there are probably other causes, other than alien origin, to the ‘abduction’ phenomena, or at least, the phenomena perceived as such. In other words, I think some people did in fact have some unexplained experience, but they weren’t abducted by aliens, they simply perceived it as an alien abduction.

What I wonder is if they perceived it as alien abductions at the time, or later on, maybe because they stumbled upon some literature, or heard someone else’s abduction story and it made sense to them, or something like that. Either way, I believe the alien abduction scenario works as a framework for the mind to deal with an experience that was overwhelming.

I recognize that alien abductions most likely have happened, but I believe something else is happening too. What exactly it is, I have no idea.

Anyway, my point is that I don’t think we can infer much at this point about the abduction phenomena, much less of an “alien agenda”. For starters, because I’m convinced there is something else behind the phenomena. Secondly, even assuming aliens are abducting people, I don’t think it says anything about their agenda.

Would an endangered animal understand why someone tranquilized it, did something to it, and then let it go? Would a fish understand why while it was eating it was suddenly outside its environment, and then magically, something put it back in?

Bottom line, with the little information we have and even less understanding, regarding the whole abduction phenomena, we can only guess.