Between enhancement and risk: A critical review of psychedelic microdosing

IF 6.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Iva Totomanova , Eline C.H.M. Haijen , Petra P.M. Hurks, Johannes G. Ramaekers, Kim P.C. Kuypers
{"title":"Between enhancement and risk: A critical review of psychedelic microdosing","authors":"Iva Totomanova ,&nbsp;Eline C.H.M. Haijen ,&nbsp;Petra P.M. Hurks,&nbsp;Johannes G. Ramaekers,&nbsp;Kim P.C. Kuypers","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Microdosing psychedelics, the regular use of low doses of LSD or psilocybin, have attracted growing public and scientific interest. This review synthesizes findings from 57 human studies on psychological and physiological outcomes in clinical and non-clinical populations. Reported benefits include improved mood, enhanced cognition, social functioning, and mental health, although findings are inconsistent and largely self-reported. Adverse effects such as anxiety, physical discomfort, and cognitive disruption are also frequently reported. Outcomes appear to be highly individual and shaped by user expectations, context, and baseline state. Notably, many experimental studies focus on the acute effects of single low doses, whereas observational studies reflect repeated use and generally report more benefits, while experimental trials tend to yield more null findings. Differences between observational and experimental findings highlight the need for rigorous, placebo-controlled research. While microdosing shows potential in some studies, current evidence remains inconclusive and warrants caution.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 102129"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X25001423","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Microdosing psychedelics, the regular use of low doses of LSD or psilocybin, have attracted growing public and scientific interest. This review synthesizes findings from 57 human studies on psychological and physiological outcomes in clinical and non-clinical populations. Reported benefits include improved mood, enhanced cognition, social functioning, and mental health, although findings are inconsistent and largely self-reported. Adverse effects such as anxiety, physical discomfort, and cognitive disruption are also frequently reported. Outcomes appear to be highly individual and shaped by user expectations, context, and baseline state. Notably, many experimental studies focus on the acute effects of single low doses, whereas observational studies reflect repeated use and generally report more benefits, while experimental trials tend to yield more null findings. Differences between observational and experimental findings highlight the need for rigorous, placebo-controlled research. While microdosing shows potential in some studies, current evidence remains inconclusive and warrants caution.
在增强与风险之间:致幻剂微剂量的重要回顾
微剂量致幻剂,即经常使用低剂量的LSD或裸盖菇素,已经引起了越来越多的公众和科学界的兴趣。本综述综合了57项临床和非临床人群心理和生理结果的研究结果。报告的益处包括改善情绪、增强认知、社会功能和心理健康,尽管研究结果不一致,而且主要是自我报告。副作用如焦虑、身体不适和认知障碍也经常被报道。结果似乎是高度个性化的,受用户期望、环境和基线状态的影响。值得注意的是,许多实验研究侧重于单次低剂量的急性效应,而观察性研究反映了重复使用,通常报告了更多的益处,而实验试验往往产生更多的无效结果。观察和实验结果之间的差异突出了严格的安慰剂对照研究的必要性。虽然微剂量在一些研究中显示出潜力,但目前的证据仍不确定,需要谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Psychology
Current Opinion in Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
293
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Current Opinion in Psychology is part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite of journals and is a companion to the primary research, open access journal, Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology. CO+RE journals leverage the Current Opinion legacy of editorial excellence, high-impact, and global reach to ensure they are a widely-read resource that is integral to scientists' workflows. Current Opinion in Psychology is divided into themed sections, some of which may be reviewed on an annual basis if appropriate. The amount of space devoted to each section is related to its importance. The topics covered will include: * Biological psychology * Clinical psychology * Cognitive psychology * Community psychology * Comparative psychology * Developmental psychology * Educational psychology * Environmental psychology * Evolutionary psychology * Health psychology * Neuropsychology * Personality psychology * Social psychology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信