Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5R01DA002812-35 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) | NIH |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study will examine the effects of a single low dose of the 5HT2A agonist LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamide) (13 µg) or placebo in individuals who are or are not explicitly told what drug they will receive. Although it is known that expectancies strongly influence subjective responses to most drugs, no studies have examined expectancies on response to a very low dose of LSD. This is especially important in the context of 'microdosing' of drugs. People who practice microdosing typically do so with strong expectations of positive effects, making it difficult to determine whether there is a pharmacological effect. To minimize expectancies in the laboratory, participants are usually not told exactly what drug they will receive (i.e., double-blind), but given a range of possibilities. In the present study, the study team will test half the subjects under single-blind conditions, where the participants (but not the research assistant) will know exactly what they are receiving. Other subjects will receive the usual instructions. Healthy volunteers will receive either a marginally detectable dose of LSD (13 micrograms) or placebo, under conditions where they i) know for sure what drug they are receiving or ii) where the identity of the drug is uncertain. Four groups of subjects (N=12 each) will attend single 4-hour laboratory session. The study team will examine subjective and behavioral responses to the drug in each of four conditions (Known-Drug; Known-Placebo; Uncertain-Drug; Uncertain-Placebo).
Expectancies are known to influence responses to psychoactive drugs. The study team and others have shown previously, using a balanced placebo design, that expectancies influence responses to alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, stimulant drugs, and cannabinoids. In these studies subjects are randomly assigned to one of four conditions: Expect the drug and get the drug; Expect the drug and get placebo; Expect placebo and get the drug; Expect placebo and get placebo. This allows researchers to separate pharmacological effects from expectancy effects.
Recently there has been much discussion about the role of expectancies specifically in responses to psychedelic drugs. Expectancies are especially important in the use of very low doses, referred to as 'microdoses'. These doses are typically at or below the threshold of detectability, but users take them with strong prior beliefs that the drugs improve mood and cognition. The beneficial effects have been difficult to demonstrate under laboratory conditions, perhaps because in the laboratory the drugs are administered without the explicit expectation of benefits, and the administration of the drugs is to some extent blinded. The present study is designed to separate the pharmacological effects of a low dose of LSD from effects that are influenced by expectancies.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| LSD (13 micrograms), Identity of substance known | Experimental | LSD tartrate in tasteless solution (0.13 mL). Subjects will receive LSD, and they (but not the research assistant) will be told the identity of the drug. |
|
| LSD (13 micrograms), Identity uncertain | Active Comparator | LSD tartrate in tasteless solution (0.13 mL). Subjects will be told they might receive a stimulant, sedative, low dose of hallucinogen, or placebo, and will receive LSD. |
|
| Placebo, Identity of substance known | Placebo Comparator | Distilled water (0.13 mL). Subjects will receive placebo, and they (but not the research assistant) will be told the identity of the drug. |
|
| Placebo, Identity uncertain | Placebo Comparator | Distilled water (0.13 mL). Subjects will be told they might receive a stimulant, sedative, low dose of hallucinogen, or placebo, and will receive placebo. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LSD | Drug | The serotonin 2A receptor agonist LSD |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Visual Analog Scale (VAS) | Momentary states will be assessed using VAS to measure ratings of 'depressed', 'anxious', 'motivated', and 'energetic', on a scale of 0 (Not at all) to 100 (Very much). | During in-lab session: Pre-drug, and every 60 minutes post-drug from 0-4 hours |
| Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI) | The ARCI is a 53-item true or false questionnaire that assess effects of specific drug classes. It includes scales measuring: amphetamine (A); benzedrine group (BG; energy and intellectual efficiency); morphine-benzedrine group (MBG; euphoric effects); LSD (hallucinogen-like effects); pentobarbital-chlorpromazine-alcohol group (PCAG; sedative effects); and marijuana (M). | During in-lab session: Pre-drug, and every 60 minutes post-drug from 0-4 hours |
| Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ) | The DEQ measures overall drug effects. It consists of questions on a visual analog scale about the subjective effects of drugs. Subjects are asked to rate the extent they feel a drug effect, whether they like or dislike the drug effect, and if given a choice would they want to take more of the drug. Scores range from 0-100. | During in-lab session: Pre-drug, and every 60 minutes post-drug from 0-4 hours |
| 5 Dimensions of Altered States of Consciousness (5D-ASC) scale | The 5D-ASC assesses altered states of consciousness in five domains, and is sensitive to LSD administration (Schmid et al. 2014). Scores range from 0-100. | End of session (4 hours post-drug) |
| Ultimatum Game | In this task, participants play the role of responder in a series of single-shot computer interactions. They engage in 60 trials in which they interact with different computer-simulated proposers. On each trial they are allocated $10 to split between themselves and the participant. Participants will receive 60 different monetary offers ranging from fair (50:50 splits) to increasingly unfair (10:90 splits), presented in random order. For each offer, participants must decide whether to accept the offer, in which case both players receive the proposed amounts, or reject the offer, in which case both players receive nothing. This task will measure how the drug affects perception of fairness, and decision-making in social contexts. The task takes approximately a 30 minutes to complete. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Cardiovascular (Heart rate; beats per minute) | heart rate (HR) will be measured using a portable digital blood pressure monitor. | During in-lab session: baseline (pre-drug), and every 60 minutes post-drug from 0-4 hours |
| Cardiovascular (blood pressure; mmHg) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Hanna Molla | University of Chicago | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Chicago | Chicago | Illinois | 60637 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Background | Aron, A., Melinat, E., Aron, E. N., Vallone, R. D., & Bator, R. J. (1997). The Experimental Generation of Interpersonal Closeness: A Procedure and Some Preliminary Findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 363-377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297234003 | ||
| Background | Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). In APA PsycTests | ||
| 31331617 | Background | Bershad AK, Schepers ST, Bremmer MP, Lee R, de Wit H. Acute Subjective and Behavioral Effects of Microdoses of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide in Healthy Human Volunteers. Biol Psychiatry. 2019 Nov 15;86(10):792-800. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.05.019. Epub 2019 Jun 3. | |
| 35106880 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Bershad et al., 2019 | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008238 | Lysergic Acid Diethylamide |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008237 | Lysergic Acid |
| D004873 | Ergolines |
| D004876 | Ergot Alkaloids |
| D000470 | Alkaloids |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Placebo | Drug | Distilled water (0.26 mL) |
|
| During in lab session: 1.5 hours post-drug |
Systolic pressure (SP), and diastolic pressure (DP) will be measured using a portable digital blood pressure monitor. |
| During in-lab session: baseline (pre-drug), and every 60 minutes post-drug from 0-4 hours |
| Background |
| de Wit H, Molla HM, Bershad A, Bremmer M, Lee R. Repeated low doses of LSD in healthy adults: A placebo-controlled, dose-response study. Addict Biol. 2022 Mar;27(2):e13143. doi: 10.1111/adb.13143. Epub 2022 Feb 1. |
| 9754838 | Background | Dittrich A. The standardized psychometric assessment of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) in humans. Pharmacopsychiatry. 1998 Jul;31 Suppl 2:80-4. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-979351. |
| Background | Fadiman, J and Gruber, J (2025) Microdosing for Health, Healing, and Enhanced Performance, St Martins Group |
| 1786488 | Background | Fischman MW, Foltin RW. Utility of subjective-effects measurements in assessing abuse liability of drugs in humans. Br J Addict. 1991 Dec;86(12):1563-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01749.x. |
| Background | Güth, W, RSchmittberger, B Schwarze (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume 3, 367-388 |
| 21092089 | Background | Hammami MM, Al-Gaai EA, Alvi S, Hammami MB. Interaction between drug and placebo effects: a cross-over balanced placebo design trial. Trials. 2010 Nov 19;11:110. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-110. |
| 1743824 | Background | Lyvers MF, Maltzman I. The balanced placebo design: effects of alcohol and beverage instructions cannot be independently assessed. Int J Addict. 1991 Sep;26(9):963-72. doi: 10.3109/10826089109058933. |
| 5554941 | Background | Martin WR, Sloan JW, Sapira JD, Jasinski DR. Physiologic, subjective, and behavioral effects of amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, phenmetrazine, and methylphenidate in man. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1971 Mar-Apr;12(2):245-58. doi: 10.1002/cpt1971122part1245. No abstract available. |
| Background | McNair, D., Lorr, M., Droppleman, L., (1971). POMS, Profile of Mood States. E. a. I. T. Services. |
| 22588253 | Background | Metrik J, Kahler CW, Reynolds B, McGeary JE, Monti PM, Haney M, de Wit H, Rohsenow DJ. Balanced placebo design with marijuana: pharmacological and expectancy effects on impulsivity and risk taking. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2012 Oct;223(4):489-99. doi: 10.1007/s00213-012-2740-y. Epub 2012 May 16. |
| 38042914 | Background | Molla H, Lee R, Tare I, de Wit H. Greater subjective effects of a low dose of LSD in participants with depressed mood. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2024 Apr;49(5):774-781. doi: 10.1038/s41386-023-01772-4. Epub 2023 Dec 2. |
| 38280630 | Background | Murphy RJ, Muthukumaraswamy S, de Wit H. Microdosing Psychedelics: Current Evidence From Controlled Studies. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2024 May;9(5):500-511. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2024.01.002. Epub 2024 Jan 26. |
| 31174168 | Background | Palmer AM, Brandon TH. Nicotine or expectancies? Using the balanced-placebo design to test immediate outcomes of vaping. Addict Behav. 2019 Oct;97:90-96. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.04.026. Epub 2019 Apr 26. |
| 12194952 | Background | Skopp G, Potsch L, Mattern R, Aderjan R. Short-term stability of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), N-desmethyl-LSD, and 2-oxo-3-hydroxy-LSD in urine, assessed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Clin Chem. 2002 Sep;48(9):1615-8. No abstract available. |
| 38387698 | Background | Szigeti B, Heifets BD. Expectancy Effects in Psychedelic Trials. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2024 May;9(5):512-521. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2024.02.004. Epub 2024 Feb 20. |
| Dittrich, 1998 | View source |
| Hammami et al., 2010 | View source |
| Metrik et al., 2012 | View source |
| Molla et al., 2024 | View source |
| Murphy et al., 2024 | View source |
| Palmer et al., 2019 | View source |
| Szigeti \& Heifets, 2024 | View source |
| D006571 |
| Heterocyclic Compounds |
| D006576 | Heterocyclic Compounds, 4 or More Rings |
| D000072471 | Heterocyclic Compounds, Fused-Ring |