RESEARCH

ESTABLISHING THE ORIGINAL CLAIM

Every project begins by identifying the original claim. Before accepting what books, documentaries, websites or social media repeat, we try to establish where the story originated, who first reported it, when and where it occurred, who was directly involved and when it first became public. We look for original interviews, statements, recordings or written accounts, and we check whether the story has changed through retellings.

We seek the earliest available documentation rather than modern summaries. This matters most with historical cases, where details can become exaggerated, merged with unrelated incidents or attributed to the wrong people and places.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

A location’s history may reveal previous occupants, significant events, deaths, ownership changes or disputes that give context to reported experiences. Depending on the case, we may research property and land records, census records, directories, birth, death, marriage and burial records, newspaper archives, court and police records, government records, maps, photographs, architectural and military records, and personal letters, diaries and family records.

We also examine the broader environment, including social conditions, available technology, cultural beliefs and local traditions, since these shape how an event was experienced and recorded.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES

Primary sources originate from the time of an event or from people directly involved: firsthand testimony, original newspaper reporting, official records and correspondence, diaries and letters, original photographs and recordings, and contemporary interviews.

Secondary sources interpret or summarize earlier material, including books, documentaries, research articles, case studies, later interviews and investigative websites. Secondary sources offer valuable leads, but important claims should be traced back to primary documentation.

A story appearing on many websites is not verified, since the publications may all be repeating one original account. We identify the original source rather than treating repetition as confirmation.

WITNESS TESTIMONY AND HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS

When weighing testimony, we consider whether it is firsthand or secondhand, when it was originally recorded, whether the witness was interviewed independently and whether the account has stayed consistent over time. We look for similar experiences from other witnesses and for historical or physical documentation that supports the account. We preserve the witness’s original words wherever possible.

A later recollection can still be valuable, especially when no contemporary account exists, but its date and circumstances must be identified. We do not dismiss an account because it is extraordinary, nor treat every detail as established fact.

Related: How we interview witnesses →

EXAMINING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PARANORMAL STORY

Cases often become famous long after the original events, acquiring additional witnesses, new details, dramatic interpretations or explanations that were never part of the original account. We trace this development by identifying the earliest known version, changes between early and later accounts, details introduced by books, documentaries or television, conflicting timelines and unverified claims repeated as fact. We also consider the influence of folklore, popular culture and later contributors.

This is especially important for famous hauntings, historical mysteries, UFO incidents and cryptid reports. We want to understand not only what was reported, but how the case became the story people recognize today.

GOVERNMENT, INSTITUTIONAL AND OFFICIAL RECORDS

Where relevant, we examine declassified files, military and aviation records, police and emergency service documentation, court records, public inquiries, official investigations, scientific and academic publications, and institutional archives. For UFO and UAP cases, these may reveal radar observations, pilot testimony, military involvement or flight paths. For historical hauntings or unexplained deaths, court records, newspapers and property documents may provide context.

We distinguish what a document actually establishes from what later researchers have interpreted it to mean. A government document does not automatically validate every claim associated with it. Its contents, origin and relevance must be examined.

EVALUATING SOURCES AND CONFLICTING INFORMATION

We evaluate sources by their origin, reliability, proximity to the event, supporting documentation and whether they can be independently corroborated. Independent accounts that agree strengthen a claim, but they do not by themselves establish a paranormal explanation.

When sources conflict, we identify where each originated, which is closer to the event and whether documentation exists. We consider whether discrepancies stem from dates, terminology, mistaken identities or later retellings. Unresolved conflicts are acknowledged, not settled in favor of the best story.

Unverifiable information is labeled an unconfirmed claim, not established history. Missing documentation does not mean an event did not occur, particularly with older cases, poorly documented communities or privately reported experiences.

Related: How we corroborate and evaluate evidence →

RESEARCHING FOLKLORE, LEGENDS AND CULTURAL TRADITIONS

Legends about haunted locations, unexplained creatures and supernatural encounters offer insight into the cultural history of a place. We examine the earliest known appearance of a legend, regional variations, cultural influences, oral traditions, how the legend evolved across generations and its relationship to reported experiences.

Folklore is identified as folklore unless independent documentation supports the specific events described. It deserves serious consideration in its own right, even when it cannot be treated as a record of a specific paranormal event.

RESEARCH STANDARDS FOR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF CLAIMS

We use the most relevant sources for each type of claim rather than one method for every case.

• Hauntings and apparitions: property histories, previous occupants, historical deaths, contemporary accounts and how reported activity developed over time.
• UFO and UAP reports: original witness interviews, aviation, military and radar records, government investigations, and astronomical and meteorological records.
• Cryptid and unknown creature encounters: original sighting reports, eyewitness descriptions, local traditions, physical evidence, geographical information and documented regional sightings.
• Poltergeist and unexplained activity: witness timelines, previous reports, property histories, environmental information and original recordings.
• Historical mysteries: contemporary newspaper coverage, official investigations, court records, correspondence and photographs.

DOCUMENTATION, CITATIONS AND RESEARCH TRANSPARENCY

Research should be traceable. For any report, case study, article or presentation, we identify the sources behind important facts. Where available, we record the source title and author, publisher, original publication date, page or document references, archive information and original links. Interview dates and witness identification are recorded subject to privacy and consent.

We acknowledge limitations affecting reliability or completeness, including sources we could not independently access or verify. We distinguish information established through research from interpretations drawn from it, so another researcher can follow the same trail and see how we reached our findings.

RESPONSIBLE USE OF RESEARCH IN PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

When research is shared through articles, presentations, documentaries, podcasts or videos, we preserve the original context and meaning of the information. We respect the privacy and dignity of the people involved, and we obtain consent before publishing identifiable witness accounts, photographs, recordings or other private material.

We do not sensationalize accounts, present speculation as established fact, fabricate historical details or attribute quotations to people who never made them. We do not remove important context from documents or recordings, misrepresent official records, present modern interpretations as original testimony, or alter photographs or recordings in misleading ways. Disputed or extraordinary claims are identified as such, and the underlying accounts and evidence are left to speak for themselves.

Related: Our witness privacy and ethics standards →

OUR RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY

The paranormal field is full of unanswered questions. Some cases have substantial documentation and multiple firsthand accounts. Others rely on a single witness, an incomplete record or information passed down through generations. All deserve a thoughtful, responsible approach.

Research should not be done to confirm an existing belief, nor to dismiss every extraordinary account. We follow the information wherever it leads. Historical accuracy, firsthand testimony and careful source evaluation are not obstacles to exploring the unexplained. They are what make that exploration meaningful.

At RISEUP Paranormal Society, the story matters, the history matters, the witnesses matter and the truth matters. Our commitment is to preserve the record, respect the people behind the reports and pursue the unexplained with an open mind and a responsible research process.