Global Trends in Psychedelic Microdosing: Demographics, Substance Testing Behavior, and Patterns of Use
This online survey (n=6,193; 2,488 microdosers) examines differences between exclusive microdosers and those who use both micro and macrodoses of psychedelics. The study finds exclusive microdosers were typically older, more likely to be female and non-Caucasian, with psilocybin (74.5%) and LSD (34.4%) being the most commonly used substances, primarily for general wellbeing (73.0%).
Authors
- Philippe Lucas
- Muhammad Ishrat Husain
- Rotem Petranker
Published
Abstract
Despite psychedelic microdosing being a growing practice, the research on the topic is still in its infancy. While several studies have described the characteristics, motivations and practices of microdosers, the differences between individuals that only microdose and those that use both micro and macrodoses of psychedelics remain unexplored. In an online survey, we collected data of 6193 psychedelic consumers of which 2488 were microdosers of up to 11 different classical and atypical psychedelics. In comparison to respondents that use both microdoses and macrodoses, exclusive microdosers were older in age (46.4 vs. 42.0 years), had a larger proportion of females (68.4% vs. 44.7%), were non-Caucasian (25.4% vs. 14.7%), urban residents (43.9% vs. 38.5%), and had a lower average lifetime use of non-psychedelic substances (3.8 vs. 4.7 substances). Most consumers (52.5%) microdosed psychedelics multiple times a month, commonly using psilocybin(74.5%), LSD (34.4%), and ketamine (15.8%), with most users (64.6%) not testing their substances. The most common reason for microdosing was improving general wellbeing (73.0%), and psychedelics were used for treating several physical and mental health conditions. Additional analyses examined spending habits of consumers. This study adds to the growing literature on the naturalistic use of psychedelic microdosers.
Research Summary of 'Global Trends in Psychedelic Microdosing: Demographics, Substance Testing Behavior, and Patterns of Use'
Introduction
Syed and colleagues situate microdosing within the broader recent revival of psychedelic research, noting that clinical work has chiefly focused on moderate-to-large doses that produce pronounced subjective effects. They point out a parallel, growing public practice of taking sub-hallucinogenic ‘‘microdoses’’ with reported cognitive and psychological benefits, but emphasise that rigorous evidence is limited: randomized controlled trials and self-blinded studies have produced mixed or null findings, while much of the existing literature remains cross‑sectional and survey‑based. This study aims to fill a specific gap by distinguishing people who exclusively microdose from those who both microdose and take larger, hallucinogenic doses. The investigators set out to (1) validate prior findings about microdosing frequency and substance-testing behaviour in a large global sample, and (2) characterise demographic differences, practices, motivations, and perceptions between exclusive microdosers and those who combine micro- and macrodoses. Four pre-registered hypotheses addressed typical frequency, reasons for use, rates of substance testing, and relative lifetime use of non-psychedelic substances between the two groups.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Study Details
- Study Typeindividual
- Journal
- Compounds
- Topic
- Authors
- APA Citation
Syed, O. A., Petranker, R., Fewster, E. C., Sobolenko, V., Beidas, Z., Husain, M. I., Lake, S., & Lucas, P. (2026). Global Trends in Psychedelic Microdosing: Demographics, Substance Testing Behavior, and Patterns of Use. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 58(1), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2024.2424284
References (24)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Anderson, T., Petranker, R., Rosenbaum, D. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2019)
Bonnelle, V., Cavarra, M., Kryskow, P. et al. · British Journal of Pain (2022)
Bornemann, J., Spriggs, M. J., Carhart-Harris, R. L. et al. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2021)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Goodwin, G. M. · Neuropsychopharmacology (2017)
Cavanna, F., Muller, S., de la Fuente, L. A. et al. · Translational Psychiatry (2022)
Garcia-Romeu, A., Barrett, F. S., Carbonaro, T. M. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2021)
Goldberg, S. B., Pace, B. T., Nicholas, C. R. et al. · Psychiatry Research (2020)
Griffiths, R. R., Richards, W. A., Mccann, U. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2006)
Hartong, V., van Emmerik, A. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2022)
Hutten, N. P. W., Mason, N. L., Dolder, P. C. et al. · International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2019)
Show all 24 referencesShow fewer
Johnstad, P. G. · Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (2018)
Kuypers, K. P. C. · Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology (2020)
Kuypers, K. P. C., Erritzoe, D., Knudsen, G. M. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2019)
Lake, S., Lucas, P. · Psychedelic Medicine (2023)
Lea, T., Amada, N., Jungaberle, H. et al. · International Journal of Drug Policy (2020)
Lyes, M., Yang, K. H., Castellanos, J. P. et al. · PAIN (2022)
Mithoefer, M. C., Wagner, M. T., Mithoefer, A. T. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2010)
Polito, V., Stevenson, R. J. · PLOS ONE (2019)
Prochazkova, L., Lippelt, D. P., Colzato, L. S. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2018)
Rootman, J. M., Kiraga, M., Kryskow, P. et al. · Scientific Reports (2022)
Rootman, J. M., Kryskow, P., Harvey, K. et al. · Scientific Reports (2021)
Rosenbaum, D., Weissman, C. R., Anderson, T. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2020)
Giribaldi, B., Lyons, T., Rosas, F. E. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2022)
Szigeti, B., Kartner, L., Blemings, A. et al. · eLife (2021)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.