How psychedelic researchers’ self-admitted substance use and their association with psychedelic culture affect people’s perceptions of their scientific integrity and the quality of their research

Introduction

Forstmann and colleagues frame their work around the persistence of negative stereotypes about psychedelic substances and their users that originated in the 1960s and were amplified by sensational media coverage and political campaigns. Although contemporary scientific evidence no longer supports the idea that psychedelic use is broadly harmful—and some large-sample work finds no association with poorer mental health—the authors note that visual and contextual cues (for example, stereotypical imagery or visible association with a countercultural milieu) could still activate residual stereotypes and influence how lay people judge scientists who study these drugs. Building on historical accounts of auto-experimentation by early psychedelic researchers and anecdotal reports that some contemporary researchers privately use psychedelics but avoid public disclosure, the study asks whether two attributes of scientists—self-admitted personal psychedelic use and association with psychedelic culture—affect public perceptions. Specifically, Forstmann and colleagues test whether these attributes change evaluations of (a) a researcher's scientific integrity (e.g. professionalism, impartiality) and (b) the quality and perceived value of their research, and whether these effects are moderated by participants' own experience with psychedelics. The investigation comprises three experimental vignette studies with US participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk, using standardised attention checks and moderation analyses (PROCESS in SPSS).