If you saw an alien would you approach it?

 What response would you give an alien?

You are a SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) organization's lone social scientist employee. Director of Interstellar Message Composition is your official title. That has to be the most interesting and peculiar job I have ever heard of.

It's intriguing because the entire endeavor is a jump that many psychiatrists will find quite unsettling. Since the end of the 19th century, when psychology split from philosophy, we have taken pleasure in being an empirical science. 

What could be more speculative than theories about the characteristics of an ET intelligence that we do not even know exists? And yet, I would contend that the contributions of psychologists can significantly boost the likelihood that SETI researchers can discover and, ultimately, even converse with intelligent life in the universe, if it exists.

I think that astronomers, computer scientists, and engineers have dominated the hunt thus far.

Yes, but there has also been an increasing input from other fields, especially anthropologists and archaeologists, probably because they share the worldview of SETI scientists. Archaeologists piece together distant civilizations in time and their extinct languages and cultures, just like astronomers do with other alien civilizations that are far away from us in space. 

Astronomers looking for intelligence of a sort they cannot completely fathom must have the same openness that anthropologists have when confronting vastly diverse civilizations and viewpoints.

And psychology is ideally situated to participate?

Yes. Instead of focusing on the labels used to classify the task we need to complete, take into account psychologists' knowledge. Because other academics have PhDs in fields other than psychology, such as sociology, cognitive science, or musicology, I don't arbitrarily segregate their pertinent work from mine. I just urge that psychologists take into consideration how their field might further our knowledge of cosmological life.

Though I am convinced that intelligent life exists elsewhere, I have serious doubts that it has ever come here. Is that the general consensus among scientists?

That's fascinating, I suppose. Three groupings were indicated by a Bainbridge study conducted a few years ago. "Geocentrism" disregarded the idea of alien intelligence, either in the form of visits to Earth or on other worlds. Because the "audiophiles" assumed that UFOs came from other worlds, they also assumed that such planets must be inhabited. The third group, which included those who thought alien life may exist but didn't think UFOs provided evidence of it, was the most intriguing.

Bainbridge referred to these respondents as "all patriots," using a word from population genetics to describe gene pools that are geographically dispersed. These survey respondents appeared to be cognizant of the vast distance between stars and the impossibility of face-to-face interaction, yet still maintained hope that intelligence may exist someplace. Over 70% of allopatric had earned their college degrees, compared to fewer than 50% of Europhiles, and allopatric were less religious than the typical person.

Are you able to utilize that type of knowledge in your position?

The majority of previous research on the subject of alien life has been on UFOs, which limits the applicability of its findings to interstellar contact. In most SETI scenarios, civilizations are billions of kilometers apart, acting as a buffer to reduce respondents' concerns about the potential effects of direct extraterrestrial contact. However, certain studies, like that of Pettinico, suggested interaction by a signal conveyed at interstellar distances.

Education level indicated the most probable reaction to detection: people with a college degree were 2.5 times less likely than those with only a high school diploma or less to say they would feel scared and anxious. Fully 90% of those who previously thought there was a good chance of life existing somewhere else than Earth would advise sending a reply. Therefore, research like this enables us to predict who would support and oppose sending a reply to extraterrestrials.

So you're the one who represents Earth if we do respond? tough job

Yes, and Pettinico's poll really uncovered another intriguing truth regarding it. If creatures from another planet transmitted a message to us via deep space, do you believe we would be able to understand what they were saying? only half of the respondents gave a favorable response.

When SETI originally started, its supporters frequently believed that science and arithmetic would provide a universal language that might close the gap between civilizations. Recent studies show an understanding of the numerous difficulties that must be overcome to produce an understandable message.

What would we say, putting that significant difficulty aside for a second?

Messages intended for alien listeners have often emphasized human virtues. Consider the interstellar message from the Voyager spacecraft: there were no images of conflict, deprivation, or sickness among the more than 100 images of Earth's existence that focused on human presence. But the focus on human weaknesses may be what extraterrestrials are most interested in. 

If we establish contact, we won't be the most advanced species in the cosmos. Less than a century ago, humans first developed the ability to communicate by radio, a brief period in the 13 billion-year history of our galaxy.

The chances that alien civilizations seeking contact will share the same century as humanity are zero if their technological development is comparable to that of Earth. On the basis of basic statistics, the only way we will make contact with alien life is if it has existed for a very long time compared to us. 

Perhaps we won't be distinguished from extraterrestrials by the splendor of our symphonies or even by our moral excellence in upholding our altruistic goals. If we want to express what makes us unique, we may talk about our frailty, our worries, and our ignorance while yet being willing to move forward and make contact in spite of these things.

We could end up becoming the most intellectual race in the Milky Way with the most perfect harmony of joy and sadness. And it is these fundamental truths about human existence that could be best communicated to other civilizations, where psychology may be most useful.

So all you have to do comes to an understanding of the basics of human life!

I know, it's so simple! There is a common belief among SETI researchers that we should talk as one Earth. Take the One World message initiative from New Horizons as an example. But in reality, we live in a variety of universes. Although some psychological subfields focus on finding universal truths that apply to all cultures, others emphasize the variety of human experiences and knowledge.

But the main idea here is that I'm advocating a significant change in how we approach communication. The common belief is that a language based on math and science has the highest chance of being understood by extraterrestrials. The conditions for developing the technology required for interstellar communication are those ones.

But what's the point if all we do is point out what the extraterrestrials and humanity already have in common? How may we continue the conversation once we have explained the fundamental concepts of arithmetic, physics, and chemistry before moving on to discuss what makes us uniquely human? Isn't it far more exciting to examine how we may represent a quality of our species that would appear uniquely human, like our appreciation of beauty, for example? Perhaps we would try to explain the Fibonacci sequence and why some ratios are seen as lovely. or the mental models that underlie how we perceive music.

What if artificial intelligence is built on silicon is that strange?

Then, if our aim in communicating with extraterrestrials is to teach them something new rather than merely inform them about ourselves, our attitude toward death may be where we have the most to impart. 

A species like this, with replacement components, could stop understanding death, or at the very least, might regard it substantially differently than a species with a lifespan of less than a century would.

An existential psychologist's fear manifests itself... Since Freud, we've become accustomed to psychologists assisting us in reconnecting with parts of ourselves that we've shut off. 

Even as we move away from the more mechanical theories of cognitive psychology, we continue to concentrate on the hidden and the obscured in the field of clinical psychology. 

Our undesirable urges and beliefs may fascinate an extraterrestrial civilization just as much as they have always fascinated psychiatrists.

And it's crucial to "fascinate" them?

Of course! How can one captivate an alien? I have two cats, and so does my wife. What if aliens are similar to them in that they are aware of our presence but don't care? What is the "interstellar yarn" that will elicit a reaction from them?

Brilliant! Maybe in order to converse with aliens, we need to become more alien?

Exactly! However, in order to achieve that, we must first comprehend the limitations of our own mind. We conjure up sights and sounds that define life on our Earth as we consider the signals we would convey to other planets.

But what if inhabitants of other planets don't rely on our five senses? When we look at the number of our cerebral cortexes that are used to process different sensory modalities, we can see that visual and auditory processing takes up a considerably larger percentage than processing information from our other senses. 

How therefore can we try to understand what it would be like to not be seeing and hearing creatures but something else? In this case, comparative psychology can help us be more accepting of non-human means of communication.

You are the lead researcher for "Earth Speaks" (see www.earthspeaks.seti.org). Please elaborate.

The submission of images, sounds, and text messages intended for extraterrestrial communication is open to all people. The initiative seeks to open a discussion on what to say to alien intelligence and whether or not to transmit messages on purpose. 

In contrast to other attempts to compile letters to extraterrestrials, it aims to detect and "tag" the main topics that individuals mention in their messages.

We will be able to find similarities and differences in message content related to things like nationality, age, and gender by tracking demographic variables for each person who submits a message. 

That relieves some of the pressure off of me because this uses a dialogic model for interstellar message design to provide a more comprehensive representation of our species than trying to identify a single "Message from Earth."

For example, how a Maori or someone from Papua New Guinea depicts a human being, visually and in descriptive terms, can be very different from the Western view that has dominated efforts so far. Psychology is crucial here in the lexical analysis, in interpreting the themes - for example, in terms of Maslow's hierarchy - and in cross-cultural understanding.

What is ahead for you and your position?

Oh, the options are endless! The most divisive issue in SETI today is whether we should send strong, information-rich signals to potential extraterrestrials even before we are certain they exist. This tactic is known as "active SETI," and none other than Stephen Hawking has cautioned against using it since it can draw the notice of hostile aliens. Accordingly, Hawking advises against using strong signals to target other stars.

However, fear is preventing people from evaluating this new search strategy objectively. This fear may be of alien annihilation, or for SETI scientists who understand that interstellar space provides a natural buffer, it may be a fear of losing public support and funding by taking a controversial stance. 

Organizational psychology might help a prolonged active SETI program comprehend and support intergenerational teams in their quest. examining the explorer's perspective. ln the "search for alien intelligence," taking into account just what we understand by "intelligence."

The largest concern, though, maybe whether we have the courage to make contact in the first place. Religion, fear, danger, and responsibility are enormous psychological issues, and if we don't address them head-on, we run the risk of stifling potentially fruitful new channels of communication. 

Do we dare not? Ecopsychology is crucial for teaching us how to overcome our own obstacles and survive, but we must make sure that our attention is split equally between the inside and the outside world.

And last, what odds do you believe we have of finding life elsewhere in the universe? Is all that required only to tilt the electromagnetic telescopes upward and wait for the computers to beep?

No, people actually have a part to play. Processing electromagnetic signals that reach the telescope has been a significant search barrier since SETI's inception in the quest to find something that stands out from the cosmic background radiation as being clearly manufactured.

The human eye was replaced as a signal detector in favor of computer algorithms that could identify weak signals in the 1980s as SETI searches grew increasingly automated. As signal processing has advanced into the 21st century, billions of radio channels may be analyzed for each star by computers. 

However, psychologist John C. Baird and colleagues began testing human volunteers' capacity to recognize signals of the kind that may be encountered in a SETI experiment as early as 1982. 

They found that humans are particularly adept at recognizing signals of a shape that cannot be expected. Automated computer programs can only employ algorithms that look for precisely specified signals. That still holds true now.

What then can individuals do practically?

The SETI Institute developed a web-based experiment called SETILive, enabling lay citizen scientists to visually analyze screen pictures taken from real-time SETI observations, in an effort to seek human assistance in locating difficult-to-characterize signals.

However, we do not yet have a proven signal from an alien civilization; at most, we only have examples of false alarms that have been stored and could not be verified by further observations. Finding motivated individuals who are ready to visually examine screenshot after screenshot, even if they might never uncover a signal from ET, is therefore a significant issue.

As we consider how to design an experimental activity that would be interesting for participants, even if they are unable to locate a signal from another civilization, SETI might benefit from the contribution of learning theorists. 

The current images coming in might be interspersed with sporadic historical screenshots of signals like those produced by satellites. In essence, we're building a cosmic slot machine; the intermittent reinforcement schedule and occasional little payouts may be enough to keep us holding out for the big win.

The telescopes are looking as we are conversing. It's possible that tonight will be the night we find an alien. And if we do, psychologists should be in charge of deciding how we react and making sure that the choices aren't only chosen by a small group of astronomers. Everyone on the planet has a duty to think about what they would say to an extraterrestrial.