On Feb. 19, 2026, President Donald Trump directed the Pentagon and other federal agencies to begin identifying and releasing government files related to UFOs—now formally referred to as unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs)—including materials connected to “alien and extraterrestrial life” [1].
The directive follows several years of increasing institutional attention to UAPs. Congress has held formal hearings with sworn testimony from military personnel and a former intelligence official [2]. Lawmakers introduced bipartisan legislation aimed at increasing transparency and establishing a formal UAP records collection process [3]. Though in its 2024 report, the Department of Defense’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) cited the official position, which is that it has found no evidence of extraterrestrial beings [4].
Will Trump’s order produce evidence that changes that assessment? That remains to be seen.
But disclosure is not just about evidence.
When information challenges basic assumptions about reality, institutional knowledge, or mankind’s place in the universe, it carries significant emotional weight [5].
As such, disclosure is a psychological event, with real human impact.
Depending on what is released, psychological reactions will vary widely. Some people will feel anxiety and overwhelm. Some will feel distrust. Some may feel awe. Others may feel disbelief—an immediate sense that this cannot be serious. And many will feel apathy, either because they doubt anything meaningful will change or because they are already overwhelmed by everything else competing for attention [6].
All of these responses are valid.
How the Government Discloses Matters
Information from the government doesn’t get processed in a neutral way. It lands in whatever level of trust—or distrust—you already carry. Trust in institutions is not just a political stance. It functions as a psychological stabilizer [7].
How people will respond has a lot to do with how credible they will perceive the information to be. The way the government discloses will significantly shape the credibility of the information and therefore its psychological impact.
Research shows that trust increases when officials communicate accurately and transparently, with consistent messaging and ongoing briefings [7,8]. On the other hand, when communication is perceived as contradictory or withholding, trust erodes quickly [7].
One of the most significant aspects of government disclosure is that it will almost certainly increase uncertainty.
Shifts in Reality Can Be Destabilizing
Research shows that uncertainty is one of the most uncomfortable states for the nervous system to tolerate [5,9]. When people feel uncertain, they experience more signs of emotional distress such as anxiety or depression, sleeplessness, difficulty concentrating, and lack of motivation [9].
If any released material strongly challenges people’s assumptions, it may trigger what many clinicians and researchers describe as ontological shock: a profound disorientation that occurs when someone’s framework for reality is disrupted [10,11].
Individuals reporting anomalous encounters describe shock and disbelief that can feel life-altering. Some experience persistent, non-pathological obsessive thinking as they try to regain coherence, while others report intense fear and clear physiological stress responses [11]. The destabilization reflects a disruption of meaning structures, not mental illness.
You don’t need confirmation of extraterrestrial life for ontological shock. Simply the awareness that there could be a potential unknown threat that authorities are uncertain of how to handle can create a shift in one’s perceived sense of safety in the world.
This overlaps with the broader concept of ontological security—the felt sense that the world is stable, knowable, and continuous [12]. When that security is challenged, anxiety rises, and people reach for explanations that restore order.
The Search for Meaning Making
When new information enters your reality, you either reject it, fit it into what you already believe, or adjust your framework to make sense of it. Psychologists describe these processes as assimilation and accommodation—ways we preserve coherence when reality shifts [10].
But government disclosure will not simply introduce facts that require mental adjustment; it will likely, for many, cause them to want to make meaning out of what they are learning [10].
When people feel uncertain, they are often drawn toward explanations that sound decisive because it helps to regulate their anxiety [5]. The clearer and more confident the narrative, the more it calms the nervous system. But this can cause people to become more vulnerable to misinformation, especially if the information is coming from people with dogmatic viewpoints [13].
Many people also turn toward spiritual or philosophical frameworks that already provide structure and meaning [10]. Longstanding belief systems offer coherence, identity, and continuity when reality feels uncertain.
Others may increase information consumption as a way to regain emotional control, looking for rational perspectives that allow them to adapt to new information.
While some who reject the information will withdraw altogether in order to preserve their own worldview.
What makes this moment different is that government disclosure gives legitimacy to a stigmatized topic and that changes the landscape in which people can make meaning of the information they are being given.
The Shifting Overton Window Has Important Implications
For decades, interest in UAPs was culturally seen as fringe or suspect. People who reported sightings risked ridicule or professional harm. When the United States Government acknowledges UAPs in formal government proceedings and orders the Pentagon to release all UAP information from all relevant agencies, the boundaries shift. Political scientists call this, movement in the “Overton window”—the range of ideas considered legitimate for public discussion [14].
When a topic moves from one that is mocked to one treated legitimately in government institutions, stigma decreases, and that matters psychologically [13]. When stigma drops, more people engage openly, more people reconsider prior assumptions, and more people allow the topic into conscious reflection instead of automatically dismissing it.
It moves the needle on the subject from suspect to something we must take seriously, particularly in the world of mental health.
Government UAP disclosure isn’t an event that will be contained within the borders of the United States. In a digitally interconnected world, news and psychological reactions spread quickly [13].
Human beings are resilient and while the majority of people adapt to new information as it arises, there are more vulnerable populations that need to be considered. Individuals already struggling with anxiety, distrust, trauma, or social instability may experience heightened distress. Even a small percentage of people reacting strongly to a global event can place strain on mental health systems.
Proactive thought and preparation is required.
Waiting to see what happens will be too late.