Abstract
Rationale and objectivesDifferences among psychedelic substances regarding their subjective experiences are clinically and scientifically interesting. Quantitative linguistic analysis is a powerful tool to examine such differences. This study compared five psychedelic substance report groups and a non-psychedelic report group on quantitative linguistic markers of psychological states and processes derived from recreational use-based online experience reports.MethodsUsing 2947 publicly available online reports, we compared Ayahuasca and N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT, analyzed together), ketamine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), psilocybin (mushroom), and antidepressant drug use experiences. We examined word frequencies related to various psychological states and processes and semantic proximity to psychedelic and mystical experience scales.ResultsLinguistic markers of psychological function indicated distinct effect profiles. For example, MDMA experience reports featured an emotionally intensifying profile accompanied by many cognitive process words and dynamic-personal language. In contrast, Ayahuasca and DMT experience reports involved relatively little emotional language, few cognitive process words, increased analytical thinking-associated language, and the most semantic similarity with psychedelic and mystical experience descriptions. LSD, psilocybin mushroom, and ketamine reports showed only small differences on the emotion-, analytical thinking-, psychedelic, and mystical experience-related language outcomes. Antidepressant reports featured more negative emotional and cognitive process-related words, fewer positive emotional and analytical thinking-related words, and were generally not similar to mystical and psychedelic language.ConclusionThis article addresses an existing research gap regarding the comparison of different psychedelic drugs on linguistic profiles of psychological states, processes, and experiences. The large sample of experience reports involving multiple psychedelic drugs provides valuable information that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. The results could inform experimental research into psychedelic drug effects in healthy populations and clinical trials for psychedelic treatments of psychiatric problems.
Highlights
Psychedelic drugs are commonly associated with recreational, illicit substance use
A small, but growing body of research has recognized the therapeutic potential of psychedelic drugs like Ayahuasca, ketamine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), or psilocybin for psychiatric conditions such as depression and PTSD, especially in patients for whom standard treatments do not work
LSD report writers were of the youngest age (Median = 20.00), being significantly younger than Ayahuasca and DMT (Median = 24.00, p < 0.001), psilocybin (Median = 23.00, p < 0.001), and antidepressant report authors (Median = 24.00, p = 0.001)
Summary
Psychedelic drugs are commonly associated with recreational, illicit substance use. much of the scientific and medical literature has examined psychedelic drugs in the context of substance abuse and its negative consequences. As the legal restrictions over the past half-century have not managed to curb recreational drug use (Degenhardt et al 2008; Reuter & Trautman 2009), there is a myriad of everyday recreational experiences, many of which have been documented in online databases aimed at researching and educating about various kinds of (typically illegal or strictly regulated) drugs This contrasts a relatively low number of experimental studies on the effects of psychedelic drugs in naturalistic settings, there are some relevant observational studies (e.g., Bouso et al 2012; Forstmann et al 2020). The Internet can be a valuable source of information in this context, as it provides an easy and low-risk option for psychedelic substance users to share their experiences with others This might result in data to complement standard measures (e.g., questionnaires or clinical interviews), which might in some cases be influenced by reporting bias (e.g., social desirability effects, reluctance to disclose sensitive information) and the rather contrived testing setting of a clinic or laboratory. Though, that online reports may be biased in some ways, which is why it is important to examine the convergence between results from experimental trials and research relying on online experience reports
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call