The Impact of Communicating the Benefits and Safety of Psilocybin on Policy Support: a Survey Based Experiment
Karla Hitchins, James P. Reynolds
International Journal of Drug Policy August 1, 2025 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104909 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 804 |
| Population | Online participants |
| Interventions | evidence for psilocybin benefits evidence for psilocybin safety |
| Topics | Psilocybin |
| Keywords | Survey research Hallucinogen |
| Citations | 1 |
| Key findings | Providing evidence about the benefits and safety of psilocybin increases public support for psilocybin policies and strengthens beliefs about psilocybin. |
Abstract
Background: Preliminary evidence suggests psilocybin may have therapeutic value for various mental health conditions; despite this, it is currently illegal in the UK. Less is known about how people form their attitudes towards psilocybin policies.
Objectives: To explore whether beliefs about the benefits and safety of psilocybin influence support for psilocybin policies.
Methods: In an online survey experiment, 804 participants were randomised to receive one of four interventions in a 2 (no information vs evidence for psilocybin benefits) x 2 (no information vs evidence for psilocybin safety) design. Public support for four psilocybin policies and beliefs about the benefits and safety of psilocybin were measured before and after participants were randomised to a group.
Results: In a two-way ANCOVA, the Benefits Intervention significantly increased policy support overall (d = 0.11, p < .001); and for two of four psilocybin policies when analysed separately. Furthermore, the Benefits Intervention significantly strengthened beliefs that psilocybin is beneficial (d = 0.44, p < .001) and safe (d = 0.26, p < .001). The Safety Intervention increased psilocybin policy support overall (d = 0.10, p = .003); and for three of four psilocybin policies when analysed separately. The Safety Intervention also strengthened beliefs that psilocybin is safe (d = 0.28, p < .001) but not that it is beneficial.
Conclusions: Communicating the benefits and safety of psilocybin can increase psilocybin policy support and strengthen beliefs about psilocybin, however further research is needed to explore the longevity of these results.