In the first large real-world study of microdosing, people reported feeling better on dosing days and lower depression and stress over six weeks — but with no control group and strong expectations in play
A 2019 study followed 98 people who were already microdosing psychedelics on their own, tracking their mood and thinking day by day for six weeks to see what actually changed.
Microdosing means taking psychedelic doses too small to cause a full trip, and many people say it steadily lifts mood, focus, and wellbeing. This was the first large study to track that in real life. Ninety-eight people already microdosing on their own gave daily ratings for six weeks, and 63 also filled out mood and personality questionnaires at the start and end. On dosing days people reported a general lift across their ratings, but it mostly did not carry into the next day. Over the six weeks, reported depression and stress went down and people felt less distractible, while one personality trait, neuroticism, went up. A separate survey of 263 people found everyone expected far bigger benefits than actual microdosers reported. Because there was no comparison group, the authors say these early findings can't separate real effects from expectation.
In this prospective, longitudinal observational study — the first large empirical study of real-world microdosing — the investigators tracked 98 self-selected microdosers recruited from online forums (reddit.com/r/microdosing, bluelight.org, Facebook groups) who submitted daily ratings of psychological functioning while microdosing a serotonergic psychedelic over roughly six weeks; 63 also completed a psychometric battery (mood, attention, wellbeing, mystical experience, personality, creativity, sense of agency) at baseline and completion. Daily ratings showed a general increase in reported psychological functioning across all measures on dosing days, but limited evidence of residual effects on the following days. Baseline-to-completion measures showed reductions in reported depression and stress, lower distractibility, increased absorption, and increased neuroticism. A second study surveyed 263 naive and experienced microdosers on expectations: all anticipated large, wide-ranging benefits exceeding the limited outcomes actual microdosers reported, and the effects expected most were unrelated to the observed pattern.
The authors are explicit that this is a preliminary, exploratory study from which they cannot draw strong conclusions. They describe it as a self-reported observational study dependent on participants' accuracy, honesty, and continued responsiveness; they note recruitment through online forums that were mainly very positive about microdosing, so results may reflect sampling bias and under-represent negative or ambivalent experiences; and they flag concurrent use of higher-dose or non-psychedelic substances that may have influenced results. They state that a controlled study with known doses and a placebo comparison would be the better design, and that untangling the role of expectation — reinforced by the Study Two expectancy findings — is a priority for future work. Design-inherent: there was no control group and no placebo, so the pre/post changes cannot be separated from expectation, regression to the mean, or natural change; the sample was self-selected general-population microdosers, not a clinical or veteran population; doses and substances were self-administered and self-reported rather than verified. The authors declared no competing interests.
This was an observational investigation of individuals who microdose in which 98 participants provided daily ratings of psychological functioning over a six-week period, and analyses revealed a general increase in reported psychological functioning on dosing days but limited evidence of residual effects on following days (Polito & Stevenson, 2019).
Read the full paper →