THE SOL FOUNDATION
MAY 2026
Preamble
Research integrity constitutes the shared foundation upon which trustworthy knowledge is built. This Code of Conduct for UAP Research (Sol CoCon) adopts the four core principles enshrined in the ALLEA European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2023) reliability, honesty, respect, and accountability affirming their broad and enduring applicability across scientific domains. It further endorses the values articulated in the Declaration on SETI and UAP Research and draws on complementary frameworks for scientific integrity, including those advanced by the US Office of Research Integrity.
This Code offers guidance for the conduct and communication of UAP research under conditions that differ in significant respects from those of established scientific fields. These conditions include persistent epistemic uncertainty, entrenched social stigma, the potential vulnerability of witnesses and researchers, and the possibility that findings may carry substantial institutional or societal implications. Where established standards of research integrity provide sufficient orientation, this Code reaffirms them; where the specific character of UAP research demands additional care or nuance, it offers further elaboration.
The Sol CoCon applies to all research, data collection, publication, and public communication supported by, conducted under the auspices of, or otherwise associated with the activities of the SOL Foundation. It is designed to support individual researchers, collaborative teams, and institutional actors in cultivating a research culture that is responsible, reflective, and worthy of public trust.
The Sol Foundation understands this as a contribution to an ongoing and collective effort to establish and uphold standards of good scientific practice in the study of UAP and related fields. We invite researchers, institutions, and all stakeholders engaged in this area of inquiry to participate in this process, to offer critique, and to collaborate in the further development of shared principles. Given the extensive historical record of contested practices, ethical ambiguities, and epistemic uncertainty that has shaped our domain, the need for such collective standard-setting is both evident and pressing. The Sol Foundation is committed to supporting and hosting this dialogue in a spirit of openness, intellectual humility, and cooperation.
1. Core Principles
Good research practice is grounded in four foundational commitments, to which UAP research adds a fifth:
- Reliability: Research shall be designed, conducted, and reported with methodological rigor.
- Honesty: Researchers are transparent, fair, and unbiased in all phases of their work, from design through to public communication.
- Respect: Researchers treat colleagues, participants, witnesses, and the broader research community with dignity and care.
- Accountability: Researchers take responsibility for the integrity of their work and its wider societal consequences, from conception through to publication and beyond.
- Epistemic Humility. Given the unresolved nature of UAP phenomena, researchers distinguish clearly between observation, interpretation, and speculation. They explicitly acknowledge uncertainty, resist premature conclusions, and remain open to multiple explanatory frameworks. This principle extends and sharpens the honesty requirement in a domain where the temptation to exaggerate is structurally elevated.
2. Best Practice
2.1 Research Design and Procedures
Researchers shall design and document studies in a transparent and reproducible manner, taking into account the state of the art in relevant fields and the specific evidentiaryl challenges of UAP data. Methods, data, and degrees of uncertainty must be recorded from the outset. Testimony-based research requires particular care: interview protocols should, for instance, avoid leading questions (unless they are part of the approach), and, ideally, original accounts must be preserved in full.
2.2 Research Environment and Culture
Institutions and research organizations shall foster a culture in which rigor and integrity are actively supported rather than merely formally required. This includes protecting researchers from stigma and reputational harm arising from their association with UAP research a hazard uncommon in established fields as well as from external pressures that may distort findings. Early-career researchers and individuals who raise concerns in good faith require particular protection. Secure channels must exist for reporting sensitive findings or concerns, and institutions shall take allegations of misconduct seriously, handling them fairly, confidentially, and expeditiously.
2.3 Participant Engagement and Protection
UAP witnesses and research participants are a potentially vulnerable population. Informed consent shall be obtained before engaging with them and must be based on communicating not only the standard risks of research participation but also potential social, reputational, and psychological effects specific to involvement in UAP studies. Anonymity is the default; any departure from it requires the explicit, informed consent of the participant. Participants retain the right to withdraw, or restrict the use of their data, or to have them permanently deleted at any point. Researchers must be equipped to engage sensitively with experiences that may be transformative or distressing, without pathologizing witnesses or offering undue validation of contested claims.
2.4 Data Governance
UAP research requires a tiered approach to data management:
- Open Data: Anonymized, non-sensitive datasets, shared as openly as possible and in alignment with FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable).
- Restricted Data: Sensitive research material that cannot be made openly available but may be accessed under defined conditions by authorized researchers within established governance frameworks. Restrictions are primarily procedural, ensuring appropriate use, confidentiality, and compliance with legal or ethical requirements.
- Protected Data: Highly sensitive material for which access is substantially restricted, often through legally binding agreements, due to potential risks to individuals, institutions, or broader societal interests. Such data
2.5 Collaborative and Cross-Sector Working
Where research involves multiple partners (including government agencies, private actors, or citizen scientists), all parties must agree in writing in advance on data handling and disclosure thresholds, interpretive standards, and procedures for resolving disputes. Cross-sector collaborations require transparency regarding any constraints placed on publication or communication. The integrity of the research process must not be subordinated to the interests of any commissioning or partner organization. All collaborators share responsibility for the integrity of the results.
2.6 Research Culture, Intellectual Autonomy, and Interdisciplinarity
A responsible research environment in UAP studies shall support intellectual autonomy, critical inquiry, and a willingness to engage with uncertainty and risk. Researchers—particularly those in early career stages—shall be enabled to pursue unconventional questions and to articulate findings that may challenge established assumptions, without undue concern for reputational or institutional repercussions. Progress in this field depends on openness to paradigm development, the constructive role of disagreement, and the tolerance of divergent interpretations grounded in good-faith inquiry. In this respect, UAP research benefits from the interpretive and pluralistic traditions of the humanities and, to a significant extent, the social sciences, while also engaging with the evidentiary standards of the natural sciences.
A healthy research culture shall recognize these differing epistemic orientations and foster interdisciplinary perspective-taking where appropriate, feasible, and conducive to advancing understanding. It shall further acknowledge international and cultural diversity in knowledge production, including traditions and perspectives that may not be fully reflected in standardized Western research frameworks.
2.7 Publication and Public Communication
Researchers shall communicate findings accurately, including all relevant uncertainties and limitations. Inconclusive or ambiguous results should not be exaggerated. Public communication, whether in academic publications, media appearances, or social media, shall avoid sensationalization and clearly distinguish evidence from interpretation. Authors shall acknowledge all meaningful contributions, disclose conflicts of interest, and correct or retract publications promptly when errors are identified. Negative results shall be recognized as carrying evidential value and shall be disseminated on terms equivalent to positive findings.
2.8 Review and Assessment
Peer review and institutional assessment of UAP research must apply the same standards of fairness and methodological care that govern review in any scientific field. Reviewers must not allow stigma to substitute for substantive evaluation. Equally, reviewers must not allow fascination with the subject matter to lower their standards. Non-standard forms of evidence are to be assessed rigorously rather than dismissed or uncritically endorsed. Reviewers must declare conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality.
2.9 Equity and Fair Evaluation of Research
The Sol Foundation is committed to fostering equity within the research environment, including fair access to institutions of research, dissemination, and knowledge production, while upholding the highest standards of scientific integrity. This commitment includes the cultivation of rigorous, constructive skepticism as a core scientific practice—understood as disciplined inquiry into the conditions, limits, and validity of knowledge claims. Such skepticism shall be exercised with methodological care and intellectual openness, and shall not be reduced to dismissive or a priori debunking. In this spirit, non-paradigmatic and innovative research, methodologies, and conclusions shall be evaluated fairly and rigorously, on the basis of their scholarly merit rather than their conformity to established frameworks or disciplinary expectations.
3. Responsible Conduct and Areas of Particular Care
The established standards of research integrity encompassing the avoidance of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism apply in full to UAP research. The distinctive conditions of this field, however, call for heightened attentiveness in the following areas:
- Protection of Identity and Sensitive Information. Researchers should exercise diligence in safeguarding the identities of participants and the confidentiality of sensitive information, ensuring that any disclosure is contingent upon informed and explicit consent.
- Clarity in Interpretation. Researchers shall maintain a rigorous and transparent distinction between empirical observations, interpretive conclusions, and speculative propositions, communicating each with appropriate epistemic qualification.
- Completeness of Reporting. Findings shall be presented in a balanced and comprehensive manner encompassing inconclusive and negative results alike so as to preserve the coherence and integrity of the evidentiary record.
- Responsibility in Disclosure. The release of data and findings shall be guided by careful and conscientious consideration of potential consequences for individuals, institutions, and the broader societal context.
- Respectful Engagement. Participants and witnesses shall be treated with dignity and respect throughout the research process; their accounts shall be received without dismissal, pathologization, or exploitation.
The Sol Foundation is committed to fostering a research culture in which concerns regarding good practice may be raised openly and addressed constructively. Where questions arise as to adherence to this Code, they shall be examined in a spirit of fairness, proportionality, and collaborative learning, with full regard for confidentiality and the rights of all parties concerned. The overriding purpose is to sustain responsible conduct, strengthen institutional trust, and uphold the integrity of the research enterprise.
4. Implementation
The Sol Foundation and affiliated researchers commit to:
- Promoting a research culture actively aligned with the principles and practices set out in this Code.
- Providing training and guidance that address both general research integrity requirements and the particular challenges of UAP research.
- Inviting and supporting collaboration within and beyond academia to advance and disseminate robust standards of good scientific practice.
- Reviewing and updating this Code periodically considering evolving knowledge, methodological developments, and emerging ethical considerations.