Comment on: History repeating: guidelines to address common problems in psychedelic science
Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology 2024 DOI: 10.1177/20451253241243242 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Commentary Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Data science |
| Citations | 7 |
| Key points | Argues that van Elk and Fried's call for rigor in psychedelic research is welcome and that future studies can benefit from adhering to principles of internal, external, and construct validity. |
Abstract
The call for rigor by van Elk and Fried 1 is a welcome contribution to psychedelic research.The authors emphasized the well-known principles of internal, external, and construct validities, highlighting that conclusions should not extend beyond robust statistical inferences.The examples of previous inadequacies and mistakes regarding some of these principles, including oversight by peer reviewers, are valuable, and future research can indeed benefit from more rigor.