Isness: Using Multi-Person VR to Design Peak Mystical Type Experiences Comparable to Psychedelics

This was an observational study of an art/experimental VR installation run at a psychedelics and consciousness conference in 2019. Sixty-four healthy adults participated across 16 sessions held over three days; groups were led by one of three trained guides. All participants were adult, provided written and verbal consent, and were screened verbally for potential contraindications (e.g., epilepsy, light sensitivity, medications). Fifty participants completed reflective writing; 57 completed the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ30) after the session. The investigators followed established VR safety guidance to minimise risk. Isness was implemented on the Narupa multi-person VR platform and combined: a narrated, pre-recorded soundtrack played over a four-channel speaker array; a set of reproducible "aesthetic hyperparameters" that defined scene features (colour, density, latency, heart-centre lighting, rendering of an "energetic thread", interaction forces, global light levels); and custom conductive "mudra gloves" that registered a thumb–finger contact gesture to produce light in the environment. The extracted text reports the journey as composed of a sequence of states (the manuscript inconsistently refers to 13 states in one place and 15 in another) with the full journey varying 25 hyperparameters and synchronised to the soundtrack. The session was framed as a three-phase process: a 15–20 minute preparation led by a drama therapist-style guide; a 35-minute multi-person VR phase (participants kneeling in corners of a mat, wearing mudra gloves and HMDs); and a 10–15 minute integration period with guided breathwork, group discussion and reflective writing. Outcome measurement focused on the MEQ30, a validated 30-item questionnaire developed to quantify MTEs across four factors: Ineffability (I), Mystical (M: unity, noetic quality, sacredness), Positive Mood (P), and Transcendence of time/space (T). Responses to the 6-point items were averaged within factors and reported as percentages of the maximum possible score; a "complete MTE" was defined as ≥60% on each factor. Quantitative comparisons were carried out against previously published MEQ30 datasets from 26 YD experiments using independent-sample t-tests (α = 0.05) following Barsuglia et al.'s approach; supplemental analyses reported in the SM used non-parametric tests and normality checks. Qualitative data comprised ~150 minutes (~14,000 words) of transcribed group discussions and ~3,600 words of reflective writing, analysed by inductive thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke.

Participant flow and adverse events: All 64 participants completed the three Isness phases. One participant reported a brief period of nausea. Fifty participants produced reflective writing, and 57 completed the MEQ30; seven did not, for reasons including an expert who declined and a few who preferred not to answer quantitative items post-experience. MEQ30 quantitative outcomes: The MEQ30 factor scores showed different distributional properties. The Ineffability (I) factor was noisier and lower than the other factors, a pattern the authors attribute in part to the timing of questionnaire administration (after group discussion and reflective writing), which may have given participants time to find words for previously ineffable material. Because of these distribution issues, inferential statements were restricted to the Mystical (M), Positive Mood (P), and Transcendence (T) factors. Analysis comparing Isness MEQ30 scores to previously published YD studies (26 experiments) was performed using independent-sample t-tests; the authors report that Isness produced stronger responses than previously published baseline (pre-drug) studies (statistical detail referenced in supplemental tables), noting an extremely small p-value in at least one baseline comparison (reported as p < 1E-12). Complete MTE rates: Using the conventional threshold of ≥60% on each MEQ30 factor, 44% of the 57 Isness respondents qualified as having had a "complete MTE." For context, the manuscript cites prior reported rates of 57% for a high-dose psilocybin (30 mg/70 kg) sample (meta-analysed by Barrett and Griffiths) and 75% for a 5‑MeO‑DMT study; Isness's 44% is thus lower than some high-dose YD reports but substantial compared to lower-dose or baseline groups. Qualitative findings: Thematic analysis of group conversations and reflective writing identified multiple recurrent themes aligned with MTE constructs: noetic quality (insight and "felt knowledge"), transcendence of space and time, positive emotions and beauty, insights for everyday life, comparisons to other altered states (participants frequently compared Isness to experiences on DMT, ayahuasca, psilocybin and 5‑MeO‑DMT), childlike enchantment, metaphors for day-to-day life (e.g., co-creation and letting go of control), reflections on death and afterlife, and the importance of a supportive setting. Participants described ego-dissolution and reported experiences the authors likened to a peaceful death; several explicitly said the experience felt profound and meaningful, and some reported intentions to adopt practices inspired by the session (for example, using mudras). A small number reported immediate somatic after-effects such as transient dizziness. Additional analyses and caveats: The authors performed normality tests on the factor score distributions and supplemental non-parametric tests (detailed in the SM) because individual previous-study datasets were not available. They note that group-based delivery could induce within-group correlation in outcomes, and that comparisons to prior YD studies rely on the assumption that the Isness sample's baseline MEQ30 responses are not anomalous.

Glowacki and colleagues interpret their findings as evidence that, within a carefully structured set and setting, multi-person VR can be designed to create phenomenological conditions conducive to MTEs from which participants derive insight and personal meaning. They emphasise that Isness operationalised concepts from YD research — for example, preparing participants (set), constructing a supportive physical and social environment (setting), and deliberately inducing unity, noetic quality, ego-dissolution, and transcendence — and that both quantitative (MEQ30) and qualitative data support the claim that VR can occasion experiences comparable in some respects to those reported after moderate-to-high YD doses. The authors position their work relative to earlier research by noting differences in modality and practical advantages: VR does not carry pharmacological side effects, regulatory complexities, or long-duration acute risks characteristic of many YDs. At the same time, they acknowledge important differences from psychedelic psychotherapy studies, including much shorter preparation and experience duration (~70 minutes total vs many hours for psilocybin/LSD), the group rather than individual format, and the limited preparatory therapy compared with clinical protocols. These differences may influence both phenomenology and comparability to YD data. Several limitations are explicitly acknowledged. The study lacked a control condition, so causal inferences about the VR content versus expectancy or selection bias cannot be made. Participants were recruited from a psychedelic conference, raising potential sample bias and heightened familiarity or expectations about MTEs. Timing of the MEQ30 administration (after group discussion and reflective writing) may have affected the Ineffability scores. Statistical comparisons to prior studies relied on aggregated literature means and (in some supplemental tests) assumptions about distributions because raw individual-level data from prior studies was not available. The group design raises the possibility of intra-group correlations that were not modelled here. The authors also raise the possibility of inflated early effect sizes (a "winner's curse") and the difficulty of defining an appropriate placebo for collective, narrative-driven VR experiences. For future research, the team suggests several directions: running controlled experiments (including appropriate comparators or blinding where feasible), exploring variants of the aesthetic hyperparameter space to map different phenomenological classes of experience, extending outcome measurement beyond MEQ30, conducting longer-term follow-up to assess persistence and behavioural impact, and investigating neurophysiological correlates (e.g., EEG, fMRI) to compare VR-occasioned states with YD-induced brain states. They also discuss conceptual implications, proposing that head-mounted VR may be one among many ‘‘psychedelic’’ or ‘‘numedelic’’ technologies (e.g., rituals, meditation, myth) that can occasion meaningful altered states and suggesting that precise tuning of phenomenological parameters might complement pharmacological approaches.

The investigators conclude that, when embedded in a supportive set and setting and presented within a coherent conceptual framework, multi-person VR can be engineered to induce peak experiences that participants characterise as mystical and meaningful. They suggest coining the term "numedelic" to describe technologies that manifest spiritual or awe-inspiring experiences and propose that such digital approaches might one day complement or provide alternatives to psychedelic psychotherapy in addressing existential concerns at both individual and cultural levels. Future work is recommended to refine measurement, establish controls, explore neurophysiology, and evaluate longer-term effects.