ArticleBiological psychiatry global open science2025
The Hallucinogen Rating Scale: Updated Factor Structure in a Large, Multistudy Sample.
Article in Biological psychiatry global open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The 3D-ASCr scale: A revalidation of the core dimensions of the Altered States of Consciousness Rating Scale 5D(11)-ASC for psychedelic research.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2026Trial
- Integrating the Mystical Experience Questionnaire Into a Broader Psychometric Framework: English Validation of the Psychedelic Experience Scale and Comparison of Psilocybin and LSD Sessions Across Two Controlled Settings.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2026Article
- Salvinorin A andInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Hallucinogen Rating Scale (HRS) has been widely used to measure the subjective effects of psychedelics and other psychoactive substances. Its advantages include a basis in phenomenological interviews and clinical studies, straightforward items, and broad coverage of psychedelic effects. Previous studies have attempted to resolve its factor structure but were limited by small samples of participants who took only one substance. Methods: We obtained 991 HRS questionnaires from the authors of 18 publications involving 13 psychoactive substances. Exploratory factor analysis was used to analyze its factor structure, and mixed-effects analyses of variance were used to compare HRS scores between drugs. Results: The HRS resolved into 8 factors with good to excellent internal consistency and that intuitively map onto the effects of psychedelics. The factor model also showed good measures of fit that were superior to previous proposed models. Model factors were able to show dose responses for most drugs. Additionally, patterns of responses on the 8 factors significantly differentiated classic psychedelics, such as psilocybin and DMT, from other substance classes, including dissociatives such as ketamine and salvinorin A, empathogens such as MDMA, stimulants such as methylphenidate and amphetamine, and Δ Conclusions: These data show that the HRS is an intuitive and psychometrically sound tool for measuring the effects of psychedelic drugs, and it may also have utility for measuring the effects of other drugs and altered states of consciousness.
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.