Effects of classical psychedelics on implicit and explicit emotional empathy and cognitive empathy: a meta-analysis of MET task
This meta-analysis (s=5, n=158) of classic psychedelic effects on empathy using the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET) finds significant enhancement of explicit and implicit emotional empathy, with no effect on cognitive empathy. The analysis covers studies up to November 2023 examining LSD, psilocybin, and ayahuasca.
Authors
- Olami, A.
- Peled-Avron, L.
Published
Abstract
This meta-analysis investigates the effect of classic psychedelic drugs on empathy and focuses on cognitive and emotional empathy measured using the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET). Empathy entails the ability to understand and share the feelings of another and is a significant component of social interaction. Several studies have examined the effects of psychedelic drugs such as LSD, psilocybin and ayahuasca on empathy, yet their overall effect has not been studied so far. In this meta-analysis, we reviewed data from studies up to November 2023 with the aim of examining the effects of various psychedelic drugs on empathic abilities broadly. Our findings suggest that classical psychedelics significantly enhance explicit and implicit emotional empathy without affecting measures of cognitive empathy. The results emphasize the need to continue testing the therapeutic potential of classic psychedelic drugs.
Research Summary of 'Effects of classical psychedelics on implicit and explicit emotional empathy and cognitive empathy: a meta-analysis of MET task'
Introduction
Empathy is a multifaceted social-cognitive capacity encompassing cognitive empathy (understanding another's mental states) and emotional empathy (sharing another's feelings), with the latter often divided into implicit (automatic arousal) and explicit (deliberate self-report) components. Earlier experimental studies reported mixed findings on how classical psychedelics—principally LSD, psilocybin and ayahuasca, all 5-HT2A receptor agonists—affect social cognition: some work found increases in emotional empathy and sociality, while effects on cognitive empathy have been inconsistent. No previous meta-analysis had synthesised results across a single standardised task to clarify the overall pattern of effects across these substances. In response to that gap, Olami and colleagues conducted a PRISMA-guided meta-analysis restricted to studies that used the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET), a validated task that provides measures of cognitive empathy (accuracy in identifying emotions from photos), explicit emotional empathy (self-report ratings) and implicit emotional empathy (arousal ratings). By limiting synthesis to one task, the researchers aimed to improve comparability across studies that varied in drug type, dose, setting and timing of assessment, and to estimate the pooled effects of LSD, psilocybin and ayahuasca on the MET-derived empathy outcomes.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Full Text PDF
Full Paper PDF
Pro members can view the original manuscript directly in the browser.
Study Details
- Study Typemeta
- Journal
- Compounds
- Topic
- APA Citation
Olami, A., & Peled-Avron, L. (2024). Effects of classical psychedelics on implicit and explicit emotional empathy and cognitive empathy: a meta-analysis of MET task. Scientific Reports, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-74810-w
References (22)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Uthaug, M. V., Mason, N. L., Toennes, S. W. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2021)
Kiraga, M. K., Mason, N. L., Uthaug, M. V. et al. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2021)
Preller, K. H., Vollenweider, F. X. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2019)
Vollenweider, F. X., Vollenweider-Scherpenhuyzen, M. F. I., Bäbler, A. et al. · NeuroReport (1998)
Halberstadt, A. L., Geyer, M. A. · Neuropharmacology (2011)
Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R. · Neurotherapeutics (2017)
Thomas, G., Lucas, P., Rielle Capler, N. et al. · Current Drug Abuse Reviews (2013)
Oehen, P., Traber, R., Widmer, V. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2012)
Nour, M. R., Evans, J., Nutt, D. J. et al. · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (2016)
Mason, N. L., Mischler, E., Uthaug, M. V. et al. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2019)
Show all 22 referencesShow fewer
Pokorny, T., Preller, K. H., Kometer, M. et al. · International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2017)
Domínguez-Clavé, E., Soler, J., Elices, M. et al. · Brain Research Bulletin (2016)
Dolder, P. C., Schmid, Y., Müller, F. et al. · Neuropsychopharmacology (2016)
Aday, J. S., Bloesch, E. K., Wood, J. R. et al. · Reviews In The Neuroscience (2021)
Muthukumaraswamy, S. D., Carhart-Harris, R. L., Moran, R. J. et al. · Journal of Neuroscience (2013)
Griffiths, R. R., Johnson, M. W., Richards, W. A. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2011)
Maclean, K. A., Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2011)
Rodríguez-Fornells, A., Ribeiro, S., Sanches, R. F. et al. · European Neuropsychopharmacology (2015)
Johnstad, P. G. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2020)
´dric, C., Hysek, M., Schmid, Y. et al. · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (2013)
Holze, F., Avedisian, I., Varghese, N. et al. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2021)
Rocha, J. M., Rossi, G. N., de Lima Osório, F. et al. · Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology (2021)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.