Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40969462›Full record

ArticleDrug science, policy and law2025

Do undergraduates' views of psychedelics relate to the context for psychedelic use?

Dan Petrovitch, Jason Van Allen, Sean M Mitchell, Andrew K Littlefield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug science, policy and law, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dan PetrovitchDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3414-9589
Jason Van AllenDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Sean M MitchellDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Andrew K LittlefieldDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.

Funding

NIMH NIH HHS L30 MH120575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychedelic drug policy is changing, both in the USA and internationally. However, psychedelic use is not homogeneous, as there are multiple unique contexts for use, including clinical therapies, naturalistic use, and microdosing. There are notable differences between these contexts regarding emerging evidence for safety, therapeutic efficacy, likely future legality, and more. We compared psychedelic-naïve undergraduates' views (expectancies, perceptions of benefits, and perceptions of harms) of psilocybin and lysergic acid diethylamide across each context. Item-level data were analyzed using non-parametric methods, correcting for multiple comparisons. Participants were 277 psychedelic-naïve undergraduates (75.81% female; 81.95% White; 76.17% non-Hispanic), with a mean age of approximately 19.50 years (standard deviation = 2.01). Only 19 out of 79 omnibus tests assessing views of psychedelics across contexts were statistically significant; when participants' views of psychedelics were context dependent, they generally had the most positive views of clinical contexts, then microdosing, and, lastly, naturalistic contexts. This indicates that psychedelic-naïve undergraduates make limited distinctions between contexts for psychedelic use, which suggests that, in the USA, psychedelic-naïve undergraduates may benefit from education about differences between contexts, especially considering their potential to impact psychedelic drug policy. To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare views of psilocybin and lysergic acid diethylamide across three important, emerging contexts for psychedelic use.

Indexed as

benefits perceptionsclinicalexpectanciesmicrodosingnaturalisticrisk perceptions

Identifiers

PMID40969462
PMCPMC12442745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.