Psychedelic Intimacy: Altered States of Consciousness in Romantic Relationships

Romantic relationship quality is strongly linked to individual well-being, and intimacy between partners is a central factor shaping relationship outcomes. Earlier work has conceptualised intimacy as interactional processes characterised by self-exposure, positive involvement, and shared understanding, and recent literature has examined how specific shared practices support couple intimacy. Research on psychoactive substances has shown that MDMA can function as a ‘‘practice of intimacy’’ by enhancing sociability and emotional empathy when taken together by couples, and clinical and experimental studies indicate that classic psychedelics (e.g. psilocybin, LSD, DMT) also increase prosocial behaviours, connectedness and empathy in individuals. Despite anecdotal reports that couples sometimes use classic psychedelics together to improve relationship quality, no prior scientific study had explored how shared psychedelic-induced altered states operate within romantic partnerships. Neubert and colleagues set out to fill that gap by investigating how couples experience classic psychedelics together and how those shared altered states influence intimacy. Using an experiential qualitative approach, the study aimed to describe the phenomenology of shared psychedelic experiences and to consider whether these experiences meet criteria for interactional intimacy or constitute a distinct form of ‘‘psychedelic intimacy’’. The investigation prioritised in-depth, couple-level narratives to capture acute effects during the psychedelic session and to identify patterns across relationships.

The study used an experiential qualitative design combining two online questionnaires and a single semi-structured interview per couple, with reflexive thematic analysis applied to interview transcripts. Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Review Committee of Psychology and Neuroscience at Maastricht University (ERCPN-233_19_02_2021). Participation was voluntary, both partners of each couple gave written informed consent independently, and the research team did not influence participants' decisions to take psychedelics. Twelve participants (six couples) were recruited through word of mouth and social media, including special-interest psychedelic channels. Inclusion criteria required participants to be aged 18 or older, in a committed relationship of at least six months, and to have had at least one experience with a classic psychedelic together with their current partner; microdosing-only experiences were excluded. Eligible substances were defined as LSD, psilocybin (mushrooms or truffles), DMT (including 5‑MeO‑DMT), and mescaline (peyote, san pedro, or synthetic). Data collection began with two Qualtrics questionnaires: one elicited individual history with psychedelics and other psychoactive substances, and the second (completed jointly) documented shared experiences, frequency, typical dose ranges, setting, and the three most recent shared episodes. Questionnaire responses were used to tailor the semi-structured interview guide. Each couple was interviewed together (five interviews via Zoom, one face-to-face); interviews averaged 74.8 minutes (SD = 8.8) and were audio-recorded, anonymised, and manually transcribed. During interviews one partner narrated one to three shared psychedelic experiences uninterrupted, after which the other partner commented, allowing interactional data to emerge. Transcripts were analysed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis with an experiential focus to capture the complexity and felt quality of couples' shared experiences. Theme development centred on how psychedelics influenced interactions that might support intimacy; the analysis made generous use of participant quotations to preserve subjective detail.

Reflexive thematic analysis produced three overarching themes with multiple subthemes relating to couples' shared experiences under the influence of classic psychedelics: (a) Navigating Anxiety (novelty, preparation, shifting environment, calming presence), (b) Reshaping Practices (excessive worrying, spirited discussions, straight talking), and (c) Encountering Bliss (leaving the everyday behind, meeting the unexpected, the beauty around us, breaking through). Navigating Anxiety appeared across all couples. Many participants reported uneven prior experience with psychedelics within couples; about half of participants had their first psychedelic experience with their partner and, in four couples, a more experienced partner assumed a mentoring or trip‑sitter role. Preparation practices ranged from choosing a free day to extensive environmental and social planning (cleaning, food, playlists, booking locations). Despite planning, sudden changes in setting or interactions with others could precipitate anxiety; four out of six couples reported at least one anxiety episode linked to setting. Partners described the other’s presence as repeatedly calming and reassuring, with instances where a partner soothed anxiety through physical comfort, chanting, verbal reassurance or by taking an active caregiving role during the session. The Reshaping Practices theme captured how ordinary interactional patterns could re-emerge in altered form. One couple described a practice of excessive worrying whereby a partner habitually monitored the other's safety; during truffle experiences this pattern sometimes loosened, enabling the worrying partner to let go. Another couple reported that their habitual ‘‘spirited discussions’’ persisted under psychedelics but were less likely to become fights; both partners described greater openness and listening during these conversations. A third couple characterised communication problems in everyday life as delayed ‘‘straight talking’’ that produced frustration; during a mushroom session this pattern shifted, with one partner reporting increased confidence and clearer emotional expression that reduced conflict. Encountering Bliss summarised positive shared states valued by all participants. Several couples likened trips to a ‘‘vacation of the mind’’ that removed daily responsibilities and created rare, special time for bonding. Encounters with unexpected events were often experienced as shared adventures, enhancing a feeling of ‘‘one team’’. Participants frequently reported intensified appreciation of beauty in nature or surroundings, and in one dyad a DMT ‘‘breakthrough’’ experience produced reports of profound peace and transcendence that the observing partner found moving and that increased closeness. Overall, while anxiety was a recurring possibility, couples emphasised the predominance and importance of joyous, bonding experiences.

Neubert and colleagues interpret the findings as evidence that shared classic psychedelic experiences can instantiate the components of interactional intimacy—self-exposure, positive involvement, and shared understanding—while also having distinct phenomenological qualities that justify the label ‘‘psychedelic intimacy’’. They propose that a psychedelic‑induced altered state constitutes a fourth, facilitating condition for interactional intimacy in this context. The theme Navigating Anxiety exemplified self-exposure, as participants willingly entered vulnerable states and disclosed private material; Encountering Bliss illustrated positive involvement through mutually absorbed, pleasurable engagement; and Reshaping Practices captured instances where partners developed insight into each other's inner experience, supporting shared understanding. The authors situate these results alongside prior work showing MDMA and classic psychedelics increase trust, openness, connectedness and empathy, and they suggest that combined effects on openness, present‑centred awareness (mindfulness), and empathy may create fertile conditions for intimate relating. Clinical implications discussed include the potential to explore psychedelic‑assisted couples therapy to promote relationship quality and to consider involving romantic partners in preparatory sessions to mitigate anxiety. The authors note that joint processing or integration of psychedelic sessions might be beneficial, as clinical trial participants have described peer conversations as helpful for making sense of experiences; they reference an ongoing clinical trial (clinicaltrials ID: NCT05670184) as an example of work in this area. Several limitations are acknowledged. The sample was small and self-selected, so couples with neutral, negative, or less memorable experiences may have been underrepresented; conversely, some participants intentionally sought psychedelics to enhance intimacy, which could bias findings. The study’s cross-sectional, retrospective design and recruitment of couples currently in ongoing relationships preclude conclusions about long‑term effects on relationship longevity. Finally, the authors concede that some benefits may stem from dedicating uninterrupted quality time together rather than the pharmacological effects per se. They recommend future research to directly test whether shared psychedelic experiences causally improve relationship quality and to examine integration processes.

This study is the first to examine how romantic couples experience classic psychedelics together and to characterise the interactional processes that occur in shared altered states. Three themes—Navigating Anxiety, Reshaping Practices, and Encountering Bliss—summarise how couples prepare for, negotiate, and value psychedelic sessions; these processes met the criteria for interactional intimacy while also exhibiting drug‑induced features such as increased openness, connectedness, and empathy. On that basis the authors propose the term ‘‘psychedelic intimacy’’ to describe interactional intimacy achieved within a psychedelic‑induced altered state of consciousness, and they suggest that such experiences could inform future therapeutic approaches aimed at promoting relationship quality.