ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
A novel method for quantitative analysis of subjective experience reports: application to psychedelic visual experiences.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mixed-methods analysis on psychedelic-augmented meditation experiences from a randomized controlled mindfulness retreat.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Visual Hallucinations in Serotonergic Psychedelics and Lewy Body Diseases.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Psychedelic compounds such as LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, and DMT can dramatically alter visual perception. However, the extent to which visual effects of psychedelics consistently vary for different substances is an open question. The visual effects of a given psychedelic compound can range widely both across and within individuals, so datasets with large numbers of participants and descriptions of qualitative effects are required to adequately address this question with the necessary sensitivity. Methods: Here we present an observational study with narrative self-report texts, leveraging the massive scale of the Erowid experience report dataset. We analyzed reports associated with 103 different psychoactive substances, with a median of 217 reports per substance. Thirty of these substances are standardly characterized as psychedelics, while 73 substances served as comparison substances. To quantitatively analyze these semantic data, we associated each sentence in the self-report dataset with a vector representation using an embedding model from OpenAI, and then we trained a classifier to identify which sentences described visual effects, based on the sentences' embedding vectors. Results: We observed that the proportion of sentences describing visual effects varies significantly and consistently across substances, even within the group of psychedelics. We then analyzed the distributions of psychedelics' visual effect sentences across different categories of effects (for example, movement, color, or pattern), again finding significant and consistent variation. Discussion: Overall, our findings indicate reliable variation across psychedelic substances' propensities to affect vision and in their qualitative effects on visual perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.