Microdosing Is More Than Placebo In Some Individuals: A Critical Re-examination of ‘Self-blinding citizen science to explore psychedelic microdosing’
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Reanalysis of a self-blinding citizen science study |
|---|---|
| Intervention | Psychedelic microdosing |
| Topics | Microdosing |
| Key points | Positive psychedelic microdosing effects compared to placebo were identifiable for participants who received both placebo and treatment, felt some intoxication, correctly identified placebo from treatment, or had at least mild depression. |
Abstract
This paper presents a critical re-examination of the conclusions drawn from Szigeti et al.'s (2021) “Self-blinding Citizen Science to Explore Psychedelic Microdosing”. The current article’s approach was to a) examine the utility of the guess and expectation variables from the original research, b) explore if drug intensity plays a role in the outcomes, and c) test for within-person variability in the outcomes and effects. Reanalysis and reinterpretation finds that while the original conclusions were partially supported, there are certain conditions for subgroups of the sample which elicited positive psychedelic microdosing effects when compared to placebo. More specifically, we find that there are identifiable microdosing effects for participants who a) received both the placebo and treatment during their trial (in terms of affective benefits), b) felt some level of intoxication (instead of sub-perceptual doses), c) can correctly identify placebo from treatment, and d) participants with at least mild depression. This reinterpretation adds to a growing body of evidence that there do appear to be certain benefits found for the use of microdoses of psychedelics.