Examining Volunteer Bias in Psychedelic Research

Since its resurgence, psychedelic research has garnered considerable attention, especially in mental health. Preliminary findings have indicated positive results regarding psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. Despite promising findings, various researchers have voiced concerns regarding psychedelic research and its potential for volunteer bias. Participants willing to participate in clinical trials, for example, might differ dramatically from the general population. The current study attempts to identify the potential volunteer bias that might contribute to current results. Participants recruited on MTurk (<i>N</i> = 702) provided demographic information as well as self-reported psychedelic use. We used binary logistic regressions to assess whether demographic and reported psychedelic use variables predicted willingness to participate in six hypothetical psychedelic studies. Results indicated that psychedelic use increased willingness to participate in a single unpaid survey, multiple unpaid surveys presented longitudinally, as well as an unpaid administration study. No demographic variables predicted volunteering consistently. Differences between paid and unpaid participation suggested that compensation might help reach broader samples. Given the implications related to volunteer bias and impeded generalizability, these findings indicate a need for further research to fully address the concern of volunteer bias in psychedelic research. Reaching those with less psychedelic experience will likely be imperative to investigations of clinical implications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Psychoactive Drugs
Published
2025-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2025.2570936
Primary Topic
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Examining Volunteer Bias in Psychedelic Research

Samantha G. Gomez, Fiona Low, Mitch Earleywine
Journal of Psychoactive Drugs
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
article

Examining Volunteer Bias in Psychedelic Research

Samantha G. Gomez, Fiona Low, Mitch Earleywine
article en

Abstract

Since its resurgence, psychedelic research has garnered considerable attention, especially in mental health. Preliminary findings have indicated positive results regarding psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. Despite promising findings, various researchers have voiced concerns regarding psychedelic research and its potential for volunteer bias. Participants willing to participate in clinical trials, for example, might differ dramatically from the general population. The current study attempts to identify the potential volunteer bias that might contribute to current results. Participants recruited on MTurk (<i>N</i> = 702) provided demographic information as well as self-reported psychedelic use. We used binary logistic regressions to assess whether demographic and reported psychedelic use variables predicted willingness to participate in six hypothetical psychedelic studies. Results indicated that psychedelic use increased willingness to participate in a single unpaid survey, multiple unpaid surveys presented longitudinally, as well as an unpaid administration study. No demographic variables predicted volunteering consistently. Differences between paid and unpaid participation suggested that compensation might help reach broader samples. Given the implications related to volunteer bias and impeded generalizability, these findings indicate a need for further research to fully address the concern of volunteer bias in psychedelic research. Reaching those with less psychedelic experience will likely be imperative to investigations of clinical implications.

Journal of Psychoactive Drugs
Johns Hopkins University (US), Johns Hopkins Medicine (US), University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.