Abstract
Background and aims
Although numerous cultures have used psychoactive substances for spiritual, or entheogenic, purposes, little is known about contemporary entheogenic spirituality, particularly outside of the few traditions that retain sacramental drug use practices.
Method
To better conceptualize contemporary patterns of entheogenic drug use, an international, online study of entheogenic drug users was conducted (n = 684). Hierarchical regression analysis was used to explore entheogenic drug use in relation to measures of spiritual seeking (importance of spirituality in life, mediation practice, openness to experience), self-transcendent experiences (awe-proneness, mystical experiences), psychological well-being (psychological distress, subjective and eudaimonic well-being), and psychospiritual development (quiet ego, self-transcendence/wisdom, and spiritual development). ANOVA was used to compare entheogenic drug users with non-entheogenic drug users and non-drug users to assess differences across these psychospiritual variables.
Results
Of the 12 drug categories assessed, the classic psychedelics were most commonly used as entheogens. Entheogenic classic psychedelic use was associated with all of the assessed psychospiritual variables; entheogenic classic psychedelic users showed higher levels of spiritual seeking, self-transcendence, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development compared to non-entheogenic classic psychedelic users and non-users.
Conclusion
Entheogenic spirituality may be conceptualized as a practice of spiritual seeking or implicit mysticism–the quest for self-transcendence and personal growth.
An entheogen is any psychoactive substance used to evoke an altered state of consciousness interpreted as having religious or spiritual significance (Hoffman, 2015). Although many substances are used for religious/spiritual purposes, the classic psychedelics—such as psilocybin, mescaline, dimethyltryptamine, and LSD—are often used as entheogens given their capacity to evoke self-transcendent states of consciousness (Ferrara, 2021; Móró & Noreika, 2011). Entheogens have had widespread influence on the origins of religion across cultures, including various Indigenous traditions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism (Hoffman, 2015; Hood, Hill, & Spilka, 2009; Nemu, 2019).
Despite their ubiquity of use, Western society has long suppressed entheogens (Rätsch, 2005). While the mid-20th century saw a brief revival of entheogenic spirituality, the association between drug use and the counterculture movement of the 1960s eventually provoked a backlash leading to their criminalization (Blainey, 2015). Strict prohibition has constrained the study of most entheogenic substances, making it difficult to establish a clear understanding of their properties, risks, and benefits (Hood et al., 2009). Although there is growing research on Indigenous entheogenic practices, it cannot be assumed that these findings apply to entheogen use outside these traditions (Johnstad, 2018). Accordingly, entheogen use is now being approached as a modern spiritual endeavor in need of greater study (Blainey, 2015).
Conceptualizing entheogenic drug use
Based on preliminary research, several characteristics of entheogenic drug use can be tentatively inferred. Although non-medically sanctioned drug use is often considered inherently abusive (St. Arnaud, 2023), entheogenic drug use is dissimilar from recreational and addictive drug use (Orsolini, Papanti, Francesconi, & Schifano, 2015). Entheogens are not used to avoid or constrict from life, but to—at times painfully—expand one's perspectives and promote psychological healing and spiritual growth (Friedman, 2006; Johnstad, 2018). As such, neither addiction nor “partying” can explain spiritual drug use (Móró, Simon, Bárd, & Rácz, 2011). Entheogenic practice tends to involve well-planned and infrequent drug use sessions, in controlled settings either alone or with a few trusted companions. Moreover, considerable time is spent reflecting upon and integrating these drug experiences into everyday life (Johnstad, 2015, 2018). As such, entheogens are used as tools for introspection, personal growth, and auto-psychotherapy (Móró et al., 2011; Orsolini et al., 2015). When motivated by such intentions, entheogens may reveal access to hidden aspects of the mind, facilitate encounters with emotionally difficult feelings or past experiences, and provide novel perspectives on self, others, and the world (Johnstad, 2018; Peill et al., 2022; Prepeliczay, 2002).
Entheogenic drug use as spiritual seeking
Entheogen use is typically part of a broader spiritual quest for personal growth (Johnstad, 2018). Accordingly, entheogenic drug use corresponds with spiritual seeking, which involves the pursuit of self-realization (Hood et al., 2009). Spiritual seekers create their own beliefs by incorporating ideas from various religious and philosophical traditions, engage in spiritual practices (e.g., meditation), place emphasis on the importance of spirituality in life, are highly open to experience, and espouse a spiritual but not religious orientation (Wink, Ciciolla, Dillon, & Tracy, 2007; Wink & Dillon, 2003). Entheogenic users similarly emphasize spirituality in their lives without adopting any particularly religious ideology, engage in meditation and other practices, and contend that entheogenic drug experiences leave them feeling more open to aesthetics, their deeper or higher self, others, and the world (Johnstad, 2018; Stasko, Rao, & Pilley, 2012).
Entheogen-assisted self-transcendent experiences
Psychoactive substances can induce non-ordinary states of consciousness involving profound changes in subjective experience (Tart, 2000). When such states are evoked with spiritual or religious intentions, the resulting experiences may be interpreted as deeply meaningful and existentially profound (Móró et al., 2011). These so-called self-transcendent states—including awe and mystical experiences—involve a sense of ego-dissolution and feelings of unity (Yaden, Haidt, Hood, Vago, & Newberg, 2017). Awe involves alterations in one's sense of time, space, and self, including ego diminishment and feelings of connection with something vast (Monroy & Keltner, 2022). Mystical experiences similarly involve a sense of transcending time and space, feelings of oneness, a sense of divinity or sacredness, paradoxicality, and ineffability (Hood et al., 2009). Contemporary research has shown that psychedelics can evoke such self-transcendent states under experimental (MacLean, Johnson, & Griffiths, 2011) and naturalistic conditions (Lerner & Lyvers, 2006).
Entheogens and psychological well-being
Entheogen users attribute improvements to their psychological well-being on account of their drug-facilitated experiences—reduced psychological distress and enhanced self-acceptance, interpersonal relationships, and ability to cope with life (Johnstad, 2015, 2018; Prepeliczay, 2002). Psychedelic-facilitated self-insights have been shown to enhance psychological flexibility and promote mental health (Peill et al., 2022). Hendricks (2018) argues that psychedelic-induced awe may be responsible for psychedelics' acute and enduring beneficial effects through shrinking the ego, while Kałużna, Schlosser, Craste, Stroud, and Cooke (2022) argue that psychedelic experiences involving mystical feelings of connectedness or oneness are particularly salubrious. It has been suggested that awe related processes—including diminished self-focus, increased prosociality and social integration, and a sense of meaning—may mediate the well-established relationship between religion/spirituality and psychological well-being (Monroy & Keltner, 2022). Moreover, enhanced psychological flexibility may mediate the beneficial effect of psychedelic-induced self-transcendent experiences on reductions in psychopathology (Davis, Barrett, & Griffiths, 2020).
Entheogens and psychospiritual development
Entheogen-induced self-transcendent states are believed to have held a function in rituals related to psychospiritual development (Ferrara, 2021; Hoffman, 2015)—the process of transcending, or quieting, the ego and growth toward wisdom (Levenson, Jennings, Aldwin, & Shiraishi, 2005; Maslow, 1971; Wayment, Bauer, & Sylaska, 2015). Research with contemporary entheogen users similarly suggests that entheogen-induced experiences may function as periodic reflection points on the path of long-term growth (Johnstad, 2018). Studies indicate that entheogen use is associated with indicators of psychospiritual development, including self-transcendence (Bouso et al., 2015), presence in the here-and-now (Johnstad, 2015, 2018), feelings of connectedness with nature and a transpersonal meta-perspective (Stasko et al., 2012), as well as psychospiritual changes congruent with Maslow's description of self-transcendence (Orsolini et al., 2015). These characteristics are related to xenosophia—the development of spiritual maturity and wisdom through encounters with the unknown, alien, or strange (Streib, Hood, & Klein, 2016; Streib, Hood, & Klein, 2010). Spiritually developed individuals are not bound to ideology nor fundamentalist, but humble, open, and tolerant of diverse beliefs (Klein, Silver, Streib, Hood, & Coleman, 2016).
Purpose
Complementing the limited number of preliminary studies of entheogenic spirituality, the primary purpose of the present study was to examine entheogenic spirituality utilizing a large sample size and quantitative methods. The first aim was to explore patterns and intentions of entheogenic drug use. The second aim was to explore entheogenic drug use in relation to measures of spiritual seeking, self-transcendence, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development. The final aim was to compare entheogenic drug users with both non-entheogenic drug users and non-drug users to assess differences in spiritual seeking, self-transcendence, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development across these groups.
Method
Participants and procedures
An international sample of participants were recruited through online communities of drug users (e.g., Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, The Psychedelic Society, Erowid, Bluelight) as well as religion and spirituality forums (e.g., Reddit, Facebook). The survey was administered using REDCap, an online survey tool compliant with American and Canadian privacy laws. No incentives were offered to participants. In total, 1,216 individuals consented to and began the survey. Individuals who did not finish the survey had their data removed. In total, 684 participants finished the survey and were included in the analyses. Data from participants who finished the survey but missed a few items were analyzed to determine if the data were missing at random. As Little's test was not statistically significant, it was determined that the missing data were missing completely at random (MCAR). Given that less than 0.5% of data were missing, expectation maximization was used for imputation (Gold & Bentler, 2000) as maximum-likelihood strategies have shown superiority to deletion, nonstochastic, and stochastic regression imputation methods (Schlomer, Bauman, & Card, 2010). The Research Ethics Board at the University of Alberta approved this study.
Measures
Demographics
The online survey included demographic questions assessing age, gender, education, location, self-identified ethnicity, financial stability, religious affiliation, and religious/spiritual orientation. Religious affiliation assessed self-identified religion: Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Other, or no religious affiliation. Religious/spiritual orientation was assessed with one item: religious and spiritual, religious but not spiritual, spiritual but not religious, or neither religious nor spiritual.
Drug use patterns
Twelve drug categories were adapted from the World Health Organization's Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST, Version 3.1) measure of problematic drug use (WHO, 2022). Participants were asked to rate how often their use of each of 12 drug categories (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, MDMA, amphetamines, cocaine, opiates, classic psychedelics, inhalants, sedatives/hypnotics, dissociatives, atypical psychedelics) is motivated by entheogenic intentions using a five-point scale (1 = Never/almost never, 2 = Some of the time, 3 = Half of the time, 4 = Most of the time, 5 = Always/almost always).
For each drug category, participants were also asked about life-time use on an eight-point scale (Never to More than 100 times), frequency of use on an eight-point scale (I no longer use this drug to Once or more per day), average dose size on a five-point scale (Very small to Very large), and social/group use on a five-point scale (Always/almost always alone to Always/almost always in a group).
The six-item ASSIST Problematic Drug Abuse Scale was used to measure the degree to which participants experiences problems stemming from their drug use for each drug category (WHO, 2022). An example item is, “During the past three months, how often have you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of your use of [drug]?” Responses were given on a five-point scale (Never to Daily). Internal consistency was α = 0.54.
A three-item Drug-use Reflection/Integration Scale was developed for this study to measure the degree to which participants reflect on and integrate their drug use experiences into daily life. The three items: 1) “Overall, I try to reflect on my drug experiences”, 2) “Overall, I try to integrate new perspectives gained through my drug experiences into my day-to-day life”, and 3) “Overall, I try to learn from my drug experiences”. Each item was responded to on a five-point scale (Never/almost never to Always/almost always). Internal consistency was α = 0.88.
Drug use motivations/intentions
Based on a review of the literature on drug use motivations/intentions for use (e.g., Hallock, Dean, Knecht, Spencer, & Taverna, 2013; Móró et al., 2011), 11 purposes for drug use were assessed using a five-point scale (Never/almost never to Always/almost always): boredom, socializing, sensation, mind-expansion, creativity, to fit in, experimentation, to relieve negative affect, introspection/personal growth, relaxation, to party.
Spiritual seeking
A single item was used to assess spirituality, “Spirituality is important in my life”, using a seven-point scale from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. Although brief, this index predicts spirituality-related constructs in a way that is equivalent to multi-item measures of spirituality (Van Cappellen, Saroglou, Iweins, Piovesana, & Fredrickson, 2013).
A single item was used to assess meditation practice, “How often do you engage in a formal meditation practice?”, using a five-point scale ranging from Never to Daily.
The 10-item Openness to Experience Subscale of the Big Five Inventory-44 was used to assess trait openness (John & Srivastava, 1999). Items begin with the stem “I see myself as someone who…” An example is “likes to reflect, play with ideas”. Responses were made on a seven-point scale from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. Internal consistency was α = 0.78.
Self-transcendent experiences
The six-item Awe Subscale of the Dispositional Positive Emotion Scale was used to assess the degree to which participants experience feelings of awe in their daily lives (Shiota, Keltner, & John, 2006). Responses were made on a seven-point scale from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. An example item is “I feel wonder every day”. Internal consistency was α = 0.80.
The 12-item Mysticism Scale – Short Form was used to assess whether participants have had mystical experiences (Anthony, Hermans, & Sterkens, 2010). Each item is rated on a five-point scale (Definitely not to Definitely yes). An example item is “I have had an experience which I knew to be sacred”. Internal consistency was α = 0.90.
Psychological well-being
The six-item K-6 is a widely used scale screening for transdiagnostic psychological distress (Kessler et al., 2002). Participants are asked to rate how often they experienced psychological distress symptoms over the past month. One item asks “In the past month, how often have you felt so depressed that nothing could cheer you up?” Responses are provided on a five-point scale (None of the time to All of the time). Internal consistency was α = 0.88.
The five-item Satisfaction with Life Scale is a popular measure of subjective well-being (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Respondents are asked to indicate the extent of their agreement with each item using a seven-point scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). An example item reads “In most ways my life is close to my ideal.” Internal consistency was α = 0.90.
The 18-item Scales of Psychological Well-Being was used to measure eudaimonic well-being (Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Each item is rated on a seven-point scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). An example item reads “In many ways, I feel disappointed about my achievements in life”. Internal consistency was α = 0.87.
Psychospiritual development
The 14-item Quiet Ego Scale is a measure of psychological development (Wayment et al., 2015). Items are rated on a seven-point scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). For example, “I have the sense I have developed a lot as a person over time”. Internal consistency was α = 0.81.
The 24-item Adult Self-Transcendence Inventory was used as a measure of wisdom (Koller, Levenson, & Gluck, 2017; Levenson et al., 2005). Items are rated on a seven-point scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). An example item reads “I feel that my individual life is a part of a greater whole”. Internal consistency was α = 0.89.
The five-item Xenosophia Subscale of the Religious Schema Scale was used as a measure of spiritual development (Streib et al., 2010). Each item is rated using a seven-point scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). An example item is “The truth I see in other worldviews leads me to reexamine my current views.” Internal consistency was α = 0.64.
Data analysis
Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 27. Median frequency of entheogenic drug use was calculated for the 12 drug categories to assess each drug's relative rate of use for entheogenic purposes. As the classic psychedelics were most frequently used with entheogenic intentions, further analyses focused on entheogenic classic psychedelic use. Correlation and chi-square analyses were used to compare the relationship between entheogenic classic psychedelic use and demographics, psychedelic drug use parameters, motivations/intentions for using psychedelics, spiritual seeking, self-transcendent experiences, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development.
Hierarchical regression analyses were used to predict entheogenic classic psychedelic use from 1) psychedelic drug use parameters, 2) motivations/intentions for using psychedelics, 3) spiritual seeking, 4) self-transcendent experience, 5) psychological well-being, and 6) psychospiritual development. For each of the six regressions, model fit statistics were reported. Unstandardized coefficients, standardized coefficients, and bivariate correlations were reported for all predictor variables in each of the full models.
Step 1 of each of the six regressions included demographics (age, gender, education, and financial stability) to adjust for these variables. Step 2 in the first of six regressions added drug use parameters (life-time psychedelic use, frequency of psychedelic use, social/group use, average psychedelic dose size, drug use reflection/integration, and psychedelic abuse). Step 2 in the second of six regressions added motivations/intentions for using psychedelics (boredom, socializing, sensation, mind-expansion, creativity, to fit in, experimentation, to relieve negative affect, introspection/personal growth, relaxation, and to party). Step 2 in the third of six regressions added the spiritual seeking variables (importance of spirituality in life, meditation practice, and openness to experience). Step 2 in the fourth of six regressions added the self-transcendent experience variables (awe-proneness and mystical experiences). Step 2 in the fifth of six regressions added the psychological well-being variables (psychological distress, subjective well-being, and eudaimonic well-being). Step 2 in the sixth of six regressions added the psychospiritual development variables (quiet ego, self-transcendence/wisdom, and spiritual development/xenosophia).
Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) were used to compare four groups of participants across the spiritual seeking, self-transcendent experiences, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development variables. These four groups were: non-psychedelic users (n = 173, individuals who have never used psychedelics); non-entheogenic psychedelic users (n = 113, individuals whose psychedelic use is never or almost never motivated by entheogenic intentions); occasional entheogenic psychedelic users (n = 138, individuals whose psychedelic use is motivated by entheogenic intentions some of the time to half of the time); and dedicated entheogenic psychedelic users (n = 260, individuals whose psychedelic use is motivated by entheogenic intentions most of the time to always or almost always). Given unbalanced groups and unequal variances, Welch's adjusted F statistic was used for omnibus tests, and the Games-Howell correction was used for post-hoc comparisons (Moder, 2010).
Effect sizes were used to assess practical significance. Cohen (1988) and Field (2013) provide tentative guidelines for considering the magnitude of an effect. For Cramér's V, <0.2, 0.2–0.6, and >0.6 denote small, medium, and large effects. For Pearson's r and standardized regression coefficients β, 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 denote small, medium, and large effects. For the coefficient of determination R2, 0.02, 0.13, and 0.26 represent small, medium, and large effects; for omega-squared ω2, 0.01, 0.06, 0.14 denote small, medium, and large effects.
Results
Demographics
The median age of the sample was 25–34 years, with 38.2% of participants identifying as female, 57.3% as male, and 3.7% as Other. The majority (77.5%) of participants were located in North America, self-identified as White (82.7%), and had at least some college education (81%). In total, 58.8% of the sample identified as “spiritual but not religious,” 28.5% as “neither spiritual nor religious,” 11.8% as “equally religious and spiritual,” and 0.9% as “religious but not spiritual.” In total, 67.4% reported No Religion, 14.2% Christian, 10% Other, and 4.8% Buddhist.
Entheogenic drug use
All 12 drug types were used with entheogenic intentions by at least some participants. For 10 of the 12 substances, median entheogenic use was 1 (Never or almost never). For the atypical psychedelics, median entheogenic use was 2 (Some of the time), while for the classic psychedelics, median entheogenic use was 4 (Most of the time).
Entheogenic classic psychedelic drug use
Of those who reported using classic psychedelics (n = 511), 113 reported that their psychedelic use was never or almost never motivated by entheogenic intentions, 72 reported that their psychedelic use was motivated by entheogenic intentions some of the time, 66 reported that their psychedelic use was motivated by entheogenic intentions half of the time, 107 reported that their psychedelic use was motivated by entheogenic intentions most of the time, and 153 reported that their psychedelic use was always or almost always motivated by entheogenic intentions.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use showed a small correlation with education, r (502) = 0.09, p < 0.041, but was not significantly related to age, r (508) = 0.08, p = 0.073, financial stability, r (509) = 0.09, p = 0.054, or gender, χ2 (8) = 14.08, p < 0.08. Entheogenic classic psychedelic use showed a small association with religious affiliation, χ2 (24) = 41.01, p < 0.017, V = 0.14, and a moderate association with religious/spiritual orientation, χ2 (12) = 92.40, p < 0.001, V = 0.24. Those who always or almost always approached their classic psychedelic use with entheogenic intentions had a greater likelihood of identifying as “Buddhist” and “spiritual but not religious, and a lower likelihood of identifying with “no religion” and “neither religious nor spiritual.”
Entheogenic classic psychedelic drug use parameters
For those whose use of classic psychedelics was always or almost always motivated by entheogenic intentions, median life-time psychedelic use was 10–19 times, median frequency of psychedelic use was 3–4 times per year, median dose size was moderate, median social/group use was half the time alone/half the time in a group, and median drug-use reflection/integration was always/almost always. The median problematic psychedelic abuse score was 4; the ASSIST measure suggests brief clinical intervention for those with scores above 3 (WHO, 2022).
Step 1 of the regression model included demographics; Step 2 added the psychedelic drug use parameters and was statistically significant, F (11, 492) = 13.108, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.227, denoting a medium/large effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (6, 492) = 20.924, p <. 001, ΔR2 = 0.197 was also significant. Statistically significant predictors in Step 2 included age (β = 0.12, p = 0.008), Other gender (β = −0.09, p = 0.022), dose size (β = 0.18, p < 0.001), and drug use reflection/integration (β = 0.29, p < 0.001). Drug-use reflection/integration and dose size represent medium and small/medium effects, whereas age and gender denote small effects. See Table 1.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and drug use parameters
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | −0.27 | 0.44 | − | − |
| Age | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.12** | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.11 | 0.14 | −0.03 | −0.03 |
| Other | −0.84 | 0.37 | −0.09* | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.08* |
| Life-Time Psychedelic Use | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.20*** |
| Frequency of Psychedelic Use | 0.10 | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.25*** |
| Psychedelic Use in a Group | −0.09 | 0.05 | −0.08 | −0.16*** |
| Psychedelic Dose Size | 0.28 | 0.07 | 0.18*** | 0.30*** |
| Drug-Use Integration | 0.16 | 0.02 | 0.29*** | 0.36*** |
| Problematic Psychedelic Abuse | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.15*** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic drug use motivations/intentions
Step 1 of the regression included demographics; Step 2 added the psychedelic drug use motivations/intentions and was statistically significant, F (16, 487) = 13.266, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.304, denoting a large effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (11, 487) = 17.433, p <. 001, ΔR2 = 0.274 was also significant. Statistically significant predictors in Step 2 included: age (β = 0.13, p = 0.003), creativity (β = 0.09, p = 0.045), introspection/personal growth (β = 0.35, p < 0.001), relaxation (β = 0.10, p = 0.032), and to party (β = −0.10, p = 0.048). Introspection/personal growth represents a medium effect, whereas age, creativity, relaxation, and to party denote small effects. See Table 2.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and drug use intentions
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | 0.23 | 0.41 | − | |
| Age | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.13** | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.15 | 0.13 | −0.05 | −0.03 |
| Other | −0.61 | 0.35 | −0.07 | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.08* |
| Boredom | −0.11 | 0.08 | −0.06 | −0.09 |
| Socializing | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.02 |
| Sensation | −0.01 | 0.05 | −0.01 | 0.08 |
| Mind-Expansion | 0.17 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.42*** |
| Creativity | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.09* | 0.25*** |
| To Fit In | −0.11 | 0.08 | −0.06 | −0.14*** |
| Experimentation | −0.05 | 0.04 | −0.05 | 0.03 |
| To Relieve Negative Affect | −0.05 | 0.06 | −0.04 | 0.04 |
| Personal Growth | 0.45 | 0.08 | 0.35*** | 0.49*** |
| Relaxation | 0.13 | 0.06 | 0.10* | 0.12** |
| To Party | −0.13 | 0.07 | −0.10* | −0.18*** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic drug use and spiritual seeking
Step 1 of the regression included demographics; Step 2 added the spiritual seeking variables and was statistically significant, F (8, 495) = 27.525, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.308, denoting a large effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (3, 495) = 66.41, p <. 001, ΔR2 = 0.279, was also significant. Statistically significant predictors in Step 2 included female gender (β = −0.08, p = 0.045), Other gender (β = −0.09, p = 0.013), importance of spirituality in life (β = 0.46, p < 0.001), and meditation practice (β = 0.16, p < 0.001). Importance of spirituality in life denotes a large effect, whereas meditation, age, female, and Other gender reflect small effects. See Table 3.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and spiritual seeking
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | 1.11 | 0.48 | − | − |
| Age | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.26 | 0.13 | −0.08* | −0.03 |
| Other | −0.86 | 0.34 | −0.09* | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.08* |
| Spirituality Importance | 0.34 | 0.03 | 0.46*** | 0.52*** |
| Meditation Frequency | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.16*** | 0.35*** |
| Openness to Experience | −0.001 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 0.13** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use and self-transcendent experiences
Step 1 of the regression model included demographics; Step 2 added the self-transcendent experience variables and was statistically significant, F (7,496) = 16.98, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.193, denoting a medium effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (2,496) = 50.427, p <. 001, Δ R2 = 0.164. Statistically significant predictors included female gender (β = −0.08, p = 0.05), Other gender (β = −0.11, p = 0.014), awe-proneness (β = 0.14, p = 0.002), and mystical experiences (β = 0.33, p < 0.001). Mystical experiences denote a medium effect, whereas awe-proneness, female gender, and Other gender denote small effects. See Table 4.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and self-transcendent experiences
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | −1.36 | 0.47 | − | − |
| Age | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.27 | 0.14 | −0.08* | −0.03 |
| Other | −1.01 | 0.37 | −0.11** | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.08* |
| Awe-Proneness | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.14** | 0.29*** |
| Mystical Experiences | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.33*** | 0.39*** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use and psychological well-being
Step 1 of the regression included demographics; Step 2 added the psychological well-being variables and was statistically significant, F (8,495) = 4.17, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.063, denoting a small effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (3,495) = 5.95, p < 0.001, ΔR2 = 0.034, was also significant. Other gender was the only statistically significant predictor (β = −0.10, p = 0.026), which denotes a small effect. See Table 5.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and psychological well-being
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | 1.59 | 0.77 | − | − |
| Age | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.25 | 0.15 | −0.08 | −0.03 |
| Other | −0.89 | 0.40 | −0.10* | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | −0.04 | 0.08 | −0.03 | 0.08* |
| Psychological Distress | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.00 | −0.17*** |
| Subjective Well-Being | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.09 | 0.19*** |
| Eudaimonic Well-Being | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.13 | 0.20*** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use and psychospiritual development
Step 1 of the regression included demographics; Step 2 added the psychospiritual development variables and was statistically significant, F (8,495) = 14.19, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.187, denoting a medium effect. The change from Step 1 to Step 2, ΔF (3,495) = 31.92, p <. 001, Δ R2 = 0.157, was also significant. Female gender (β = −0.09, p = 0.042), Other gender (β = −0.09, p = 0.027), self-transcendence/wisdom (β = 0.24, p < 0.001), and spiritual development/xenosophia (β = 0.19, p < 0.001), were statistically significant predictors of entheogenic classic psychedelic use. Self-transcendence/wisdom and spiritual development represent small/medium effects, whereas female gender and Other gender denote small effects. See Table 6.
Associations between entheogenic psychedelic use and psychospiritual growth
| B | SE | β | r | |
| Intercept | −1.77 | 0.54 | − | − |
| Age | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.08* |
| Female | −0.28 | 0.14 | −0.09* | −0.03 |
| Other | −0.82 | 0.37 | −0.09* | −0.11** |
| Education | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.09* |
| Financial Stability | −0.00 | 0.07 | −0.00 | 0.08* |
| Quiet Ego | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.29*** |
| Wisdom/Self-transcendence | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.24*** | 0.37*** |
| Spiritual Development | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.19*** | 0.31*** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use group comparisons on psychospiritual variables
Statistically significant group differences were found for all spiritual seeking, self-transcendent experience, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development variables across the four comparison groups (Table 7). Post-hoc comparisons revealed that the dedicated entheogenic psychedelic users had the highest levels of spiritual seeking, self-transcendent experiences, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development. This pattern was followed by the occasional entheogenic psychedelic users, non-entheogenic psychedelic users, and non-psychedelic users, respectively. Mean group differences for mystical experiences and importance of spirituality in life denote very large effects, while mean group differences for self-transcendence/wisdom and meditation denote large effects. Quiet ego, spiritual development, and awe-proneness group differences denote medium effects.
Comparisons of entheogenic psychedelic drug users and non-psychedelic users
| Non-Psychedelic Users | Never/Almost Never Entheogenic Use | Some of the Time/Half the Time Entheogenic Use | Mostly/Always, Almost Always Entheogenic Use | F | ω2 | |||||
| M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | |||
| Spiritual Seeking | ||||||||||
| Spirituality Importance | 3.65a | 2.28 | 3.04a | 2.04 | 4.39b | 1.88 | 5.59c | 1.53 | 74.06*** | 0.243 |
| Meditation Frequency | 2.08a | 1.28 | 2.13a | 1.21 | 2.70b | 1.34 | 3.30c | 1.39 | 37.30*** | 0.137 |
| Openness to Experience | 50.85a | 8.56 | 53.85b | 8.29 | 55.34bc | 7.50 | 56.16c | 6.63 | 16.56*** | 0.064 |
| Self-Transcendent Experiences | ||||||||||
| Awe-Proneness | 28.68a | 7.68 | 29.14a | 6.97 | 32.79b | 5.81 | 34.10b | 5.18 | 31.12*** | 0.117 |
| Mystical Experiences | 40.38a | 11.85 | 45.70b | 9.98 | 51.64c | 7.38 | 54.14d | 6.48 | 77.18*** | 0.250 |
| Psychological Well-Being | ||||||||||
| Psychological Distress | 16.14a | 5.93 | 15.83a | 5.27 | 14.07b | 4.77 | 13.46b | 4.93 | 11.02*** | 0.042 |
| Subjective Well-Being | 18.72a | 8.39 | 18.11a | 7.97 | 21.17b | 7.91 | 22.05b | 7.85 | 9.63*** | 0.036 |
| Eudaimonic Well-Being | 82.61a | 17.95 | 84.58a | 14.23 | 91.25b | 15.71 | 92.72b | 14.92 | 17.20*** | 0.066 |
| Psychospiritual Growth | ||||||||||
| Quiet Ego | 67.42a | 11.65 | 68.91a | 11.20 | 74.41b | 9.05 | 76.47b | 9.47 | 30.75*** | 0.115 |
| Wisdom/Self-Transcendence | 112.44a | 21.66 | 115.57a | 20.09 | 123.78b | 17.37 | 132.04c | 16.95 | 42.33*** | 0.153 |
| Spiritual Development | 23.89a | 5.64 | 23.89a | 5.21 | 26.01b | 4.37 | 27.45c | 4.57 | 22.80*** | 0.087 |
Note: ***p < 0.001. Superscripts represent post-hoc mean comparisons with the Games-Howell correction. Means in the same row with different superscripts differ from each other with statistical significance at the 0.05 level.
Discussion
Although various psychoactive substances were used with spiritual intentions, the classic psychedelics were most commonly used as entheogens. For individuals whose psychedelic use was always or almost always motivated by entheogenic intentions, use of these substances tended to be modest and infrequent. On average, these participants reported using psychedelics 10–19 times total, with roughly 3–4 uses per year, in group or solitary contexts, using moderate to large doses, and always reflecting upon and integrating their drug experiences into daily life. However, the median score on the ASSIST scale of psychedelic abuse suggests that for some individuals, their entheogenic psychedelic use may negatively impact psychosocial functioning. The small, predictive association between age and entheogenic use intentions suggests that as psychedelic users increase in age, their motivation for using psychedelics may become more spiritually oriented. The finding that those who identify as female or Other gender may be less likely than those who identify as men to use entheogens needs further investigation as the effects were small, though consistent with previous research (Johnstad, 2015; Orsolini et al., 2015).
Entheogenic classic psychedelic use was correlated with life-time psychedelic use, frequency of psychedelic use, psychedelic dose size, drug-use reflection/integration, and problematic psychedelic abuse, and negatively correlated with the use of psychedelics in a group setting. However, only drug-use reflection/integration and dose size, along with age and other gender, predicted entheogenic psychedelic use in the regression model. Of the psychedelic drug-use parameters, drug-use reflection/integration was the most meaningful predictor of entheogenic use. Entheogenic classic psychedelic use was also correlated with mind-expansion, creativity, introspection/personal growth, and relaxation psychedelic use intentions, and negatively correlated with partying and fitting in with a group use motivations. However, only introspection/personal growth, creativity, relaxation, and partying use intentions, as well as age, predicted entheogenic psychedelic use. Introspection/personal growth was the most meaningful psychedelic use intention associated with entheogenically motivated use.
In terms of spiritual seeking, entheogenic psychedelic use showed a moderate association with a “spiritual but not religious” orientation, and a small association with a Buddhist religious affiliation. Moreover, 73% of entheogen users identified with “Other” or “no religion.” Entheogenic psychedelic use was correlated with importance of spirituality in life, meditation frequency, and openness to experience, although only importance of spirituality in life and meditation predicted entheogenic use in the regression model. Importance of spirituality in life was the most meaningful spiritual seeking variable to predict entheogenic psychedelic use. With regard to the self-transcendent experience variables, entheogenic classic psychedelic use was correlated with, and predicted by, awe-proneness and mystical experiences, consistent with previous literature (Hendricks, 2018; Johnstad, 2018; Lerner & Lyvers, 2006). However, mystical experiences were the most meaningful predictor of entheogenic psychedelic use.
Although entheogenic classic psychedelic use was negatively correlated with psychological distress and positively correlated with subjective and eudaimonic well-being, none of these variables predicted entheogenic psychedelic use in the regression model. This finding is in partial agreement with Johnstad (2018) though will require further exploration. Finally, entheogenic psychedelic use was correlated with all indices of psychospiritual development, but only self-transcendence/wisdom and spiritual development predicted entheogenic psychedelic use in the regression. Of these psychospiritual variables, self-transcendence/wisdom was the most meaningful predictor of entheogenic classic psychedelic use.
When taken together, these findings are generally congruent with previous research and help to provide a general outline of entheogenic spirituality (e.g., Bouso et al., 2015; Ferrara, 2021; Johnstad, 2015, 2018, 2020; Móró & Noreika, 2011; Prepeliczay, 2002). Entheogenic spirituality tends to involve the infrequent use of classic psychedelic substances, with moderate to large doses, and the deliberate reflection upon, and integration of, drug experiences into everyday life. Entheogenic drug use is not an experimental or recreational endeavor but motivated primarily by the desire for personal growth. In such a way, entheogenic drug use is a form of spiritual seeking, which involves the pursuit of direct, spiritual experiences and self-realization. Indeed, entheogenically motivated psychedelic use is associated with greater reports of mystical experiences and heightened levels of self-transcendent wisdom. However, although entheogenic spirituality is distinct from problematic drug abuse, some individuals may experience strong desires for the spiritual experiences that psychedelics can evoke, which may lead to psychosocial disruptions.
Group comparisons further support the regression analyses and previous research, revealing that both dedicated and occasional entheogenic psychedelic users demonstrate higher levels of spiritual seeking, self-transcendent experiences, psychological well-being, and psychospiritual development when compared to those whose use of psychedelics is not motivated by entheogenic intentions and those who do not use psychedelic drugs. In particular, mystical experiences and importance of spirituality in life showed the largest meaningful differences between groups, followed by self-transcendence/wisdom, meditation frequency, quiet ego, spiritual development, and awe-proneness.
Moreover, individuals who use psychedelics with non-entheogenic intentions differed from individuals who do not use psychedelics drugs only on trait openness and mystical experiences, which is consistent with previous research (Erritzoe et al., 2019; Lerner & Lyvers, 2006). The finding that the non-entheogenic psychedelic users did not have higher levels of the other psychological and spiritual variables compared to those who do not use psychedelics is congruent with Smith (1964), “drugs appear to induce religious experiences; it is less evident that they can produce religious lives” (p. 529). Thus, while psychedelics may evoke powerful changes in consciousness, and may promote greater openness to experience, without a clear growth or spiritually oriented motivation for use, such changes in and of themselves are unlikely to foster psychological or spiritual development (see also Haijen et al., 2018). It is not enough to simply take psychedelic drugs to incur benefits from use. The positive effects that may derive from taking psychedelics are fundamentally reliant on context—the set and setting of the user (Carhart-Harris et al., 2018).
Limitations
Since a representative sample was not used, the results of this study cannot be assumed to be representative of the broader population of contemporary entheogenic drug users. Given the overarching demographic uniformity of the sample, caution must be taken with respect to generalizing these findings to all psychedelic users. Future research should aim to recruit from under-represented communities and ethnicities (see Williams & Labate, 2020). Given the self-report and self-selected nature of this sample, positivity or social-desirability bias may influence these findings. In addition, given that a digital (e.g., online) survey was used for this study, potential threats to data integrity (e.g., botting) may also impact these findings. As this study used a cross-sectional design, causation cannot be drawn. Given the exploratory nature of this research, future studies should use experimental and longitudinal designs to assess causality and changes over time. Future cross-sectional designs should utilize representative samples, though this is particularly challenging when studying illicit substance use (Barratt, Ferris, & Lenton, 2015).
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the present study in conjunction with previous research, contemporary entheogenic drug use may be conceptualized as spiritual seeking or implicit mysticism (Streib et al., 2016; Wink & Dillon, 2003). Hood et al. (2009) note that spiritual seeking involves a quest for spiritual experiences and self-realization, while Atchley (1997) similarly contends that mysticism involves the pursuit of self-transcendence and psychospiritual development. Growing research—both historic and contemporary—suggests that entheogenic classic psychedelic use may indeed aid these very purposes (Ferrara, 2021; Johnstad, 2018). Although currently an illicit and culturally unacceptable practice, entheogenic spirituality may thus advance salubrious and even prosocial aims (e.g., xenosophia is negatively associated with religious fundamentalism and right-wing authoritarianism; Streib et al., 2010). Given these positive implications, researchers, clergy, and policy makers should consider how to regulate and reincorporate entheogen spirituality into contemporary society.
Data availability and replication statement
Interested parties should contact the lead author if they would like access to the dataset used to produce the findings reported in this article.
Funding information
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
References
Anthony, F. V., Hermans, C. A. M., & Sterkens, C. (2010). A comparative study of mystical experience among Christian, Muslim, and Hindu students in Tamil Nadu, India. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(2), 264–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2010.01508.x.
Atchley, R. C. (1997). Everyday mysticism: Spiritual development in later adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 4(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02510085.
Barratt, M. J., Ferris, J. A., & Lenton, S. (2015). Hidden populations, online purposive sampling, and external validity: Taking off the blindfold. Field Methods, 27, 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x14526838.
Blainey, M. G. (2015). Forbidden therapies: Santo Daime, ayahuasca, and the prohibition of entheogens in Western society. Journal of Religion and Health, 54(1), 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-014-9826-2.
Bouso, J. C., Palhano-Fontes, F., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., Ribeiro, S., Sanches, R., Crippa, J. A. S., Hallak, J. E., de Araujo, D. B., & Riba, J. (2015). Long-term use of psychedelic drugs is associated with differences in brain structure and personality in humans. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 25(4), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2015.01.008.
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Roseman, L., Haijen, E., Erritzoe, D., Watts, R., Branchi, I., & Kaelen, M. (2018). Psychedelics and the essential importance of context. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 32(7), 725–731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881118754710.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
Davis, A. K., Barrett, F. S., & Griffiths, R. R. (2020). Psychological flexibility mediates the relations between acute psychedelic effects and subjective decreases in depression and anxiety. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 15, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2019.11.004.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.
Erritzoe, D., Smith, J., Fisher, P. M., Carhart-Harris, R., Frokjaer, V. G., & Knudsen, G. M. (2019). Recreational use of psychedelics is associated with elevated personality trait openness: Exploration of associations with brain serotonin markers. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 33(9), 1068–1075. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881119827891.
Ferrara, M. S. (2021). Peak-experience and the entheogenic use of cannabis in world religions. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 4(3), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2020.00122.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). Sage.
Friedman, H. (2006). The renewal of psychedelic research: Implications for humanistic and transpersonal psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 34, 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15473333thp3401_5.
Gold, M. S., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Treatments of missing data: A Monte Carlo comparison of RBHDI, iterative stochastic regression imputation, and expectation-maximization. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(3), 319–355. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0703_1.
Haijen, E. C., Kaelen, M., Roseman, L., Timmermann, C., Kettner, H., Russ, S., Nutt, D., Daws, R. E., Hampshire, A. D., Lorenz, R., & Carhart-Harris, R. L. (2018). Predicting responses to psychedelics: A prospective study. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 9, 897. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00897.
Hallock, R. M., Dean, A., Knecht, Z. A., Spencer, J., & Taverna, E. C. (2013). A survey of hallucinogenic mushroom use, factors related to usage, and perceptions of use among college students. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 130(1–3), 245–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.11.010.
Hendricks, P. S. (2018). Awe: A putative mechanism underlying the effects of classic psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. International Review of Psychiatry, 30(4), 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2018.1474185.
Hoffman, M. A. (2015). Entheogens (psychedelic drugs) and the ancient mystery religions. In P. Wexler (Ed.), History of toxicology and environmental health: Toxicology in antiquity (Vol. II, pp. 126–135). Academic Press.
Hood, R. W., Hill, P. C., & Spilka, B. (2009). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach. Guilford Press.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138). Guilford Press.
Johnstad, P. G. (2015). User perceptions of mental health consequences of hallucinogen use in self-identified spiritual contexts. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 32(6), 545–562. https://doi.org/10.1515/nsad-2015-0053.
Johnstad, P. G. (2018). Entheogenic spirituality: Exploring spiritually motivated entheogen use among modern Westerners. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 12(4), 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2022.2148060.
Johnstad, P. G. (2020). Entheogenic experience and spirituality. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 33(5), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-12341512.
Kałużna, A., Schlosser, M., Craste, E. G., Stroud, J., & Cooke, J. (2022). Being no one, being One: The role of ego-dissolution and connectedness in the therapeutic effects of psychedelic experience. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 6(2), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2022.00199.
Kessler, R. C., Andrews, G., Colpe, L. J., Hiripi, E., Mroczek, D. K., Normand, S. L., Walters, E. E., & Zaslavsky, A. M. (2002). Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine, 32(6), 959–976. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291702006074.
Klein, C., Silver, C. F., Streib, H., Hood, R. W., & Coleman, T. J., III (2016). “Spirituality” and mysticism. In H. Streib, & R. W. Hood (Eds.), Semantics and psychology of spirituality (pp. 165–187). Springer.
Koller, I., Levenson, M. R., & Gluck, J. (2017). What do you think you are measuring? A mixed-methods procedure for assessing the content validity of test items and theory-based scaling. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00126.
Lerner, M., & Lyvers, M. (2006). Values and beliefs of psychedelic drug users: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 38(2), 143–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2006.10399838.
Levenson, M. R., Jennings, P. A., Aldwin, C. M., & Shiraishi, R. W. (2005). Self-transcendence: Conceptualization and measurement. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 60(2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.2190/xrxm-fyra-7u0x-grc0.
MacLean, K. A., Johnson, M. W., & Griffiths, R. R. (2011). Mystical experiences occasioned by the hallucinogen psilocybin lead to increases in the personality domain of openness. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 25(11), 1453–1461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881111420188.
Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. Viking Press.
Moder, K. (2010). Alternatives to F-test in one way ANOVA in case of heterogeneity of variances (a simulation study). Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52(4), 343–353.
Monroy, M., & Keltner, D. (2022). Awe as a pathway to mental and physical health. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(2), 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221094856.
Móró, L., & Noreika, V. (2011). Sacramental and spiritual use of hallucinogenic drugs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(6), 319–320. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x11000768.
Móró, L., Simon, K., Bárd, I., & Rácz, J. (2011). Voice of the psychonauts: Coping, life purpose, and spirituality in psychedelic drug users. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 43, 188–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2011.605661.
Nemu, D. (2019). Getting high with the most high: Entheogens in the Old Testament. Journal of. Psychedelic Studies, 3(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2019.004.
Orsolini, L., Papanti, G. D., Francesconi, G., & Schifano, F. (2015). Mind navigators of chemicals’ experimenters? A WEB-based description of e-psychonauts. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(5), 296–300. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0486.
Peill, J. M., Trinci, K. E., Kettner, H., Mertens, L. J., Roseman, L., Timmermann, C., Rosas, F. E., Lyons, T., & Carhart-Harris, R. L. (2022). Validation of the psychological insight scale: A new scale to assess psychological insight following a psychedelic experience. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 36(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/02698811211066709.
Prepeliczay, S. (2002). Socio-cultural and psychological aspects of contemporary LSD use in Germany. Journal of Drug Issues, 32(2), 431–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/002204260203200207.
Rätsch, C. (2005). The encyclopedia of psychoactive plants: Ethnopharmacology and its applications .Park Street Press.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719.
Schlomer, G. L., Bauman, S., & Card, N. A. (2010). Best practices for missing data management in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018082.
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760500510833.
Smith, H. (1964). Do drugs have religious import? The Journal of Philosophy, 61(18), 517–530. https://doi.org/10.2307/2023494.
St. Arnaud, K. O. (2023). Toward a positive psychology of psychoactive drug use. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 30(1), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2021.2002816.
Stasko, A., Rao, S. P., & Pilley, A. (2012). Spirituality and hallucinogen use: Results from a pilot study among college students. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 31(2), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2012.31.2.23.
Streib, H., Hood, R. W., Jr, & Klein, C. (2010). The Religious Schema Scale: Construction and initial validation of a quantitative measure for religious styles. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 20(3), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2010.481223.
Streib, H., Hood, R. W., & Klein, C. (2016). Religious schemata and “spirituality”. In H. Streib, & R. W. Hood (Eds.), Semantics and psychology of spirituality (pp. 205–218). Springer.
Tart, C. T. (2000). States of consciousness. Backinprint.com.
Van Cappellen, P., Saroglou, V., Iweins, C., Piovesana, M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). Self-transcendent positive emotions increase spirituality through basic world assumptions. Cognition & Emotion, 27(8), 1378–1394. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.787395.
Wayment, H. A., Bauer, J. J., & Sylaska, K. (2015). The quiet ego scale: Measuring the compassionate self-identity. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(4), 999–1033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-014-9546-z.
Williams, M. T., & Labate, B. C. (2020). Diversity, equity, and access in psychedelic medicine. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 4(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2019.032.
Wink, P., Ciciolla, L., Dillon, M., & Tracy, A. (2007). Religiousness, spiritual seeking, and personality: Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal of Personality, 75(5), 1051–1070. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00466.x.
Wink, P., & Dillon, M. (2003). Religiousness, spirituality, and psychosocial functioning in late adulthood: F indings from a longitudinal study. Psychology and Aging, 18(4), 916–924. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.18.4.916.
World Health Organization (2022). The alcohol, smoking and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST v3.1). Retrieved August 26, 2022, from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/978924159938-2.
Yaden, D. B., Haidt, J., Hood, R. W., Jr, Vago, D. R., & Newberg, A. B. (2017). The varieties of self-transcendent experience. Review of General Psychology, 21(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000102.
