<p>In terms of measurement methodology, research is divided into the standard quantitative, and alternative, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_research" rel="nofollow noreferrer">qualitative research</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Qualitative research relies on data obtained by the researcher from
first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires (on which
participants write descriptively), focus groups,
participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings,
documents, case studies, and artifacts. The data are generally
nonnumerical. ... Qualitative research methods have been used in
sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, social work,
and educational research.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Examples of techniques within the field of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_psychological_research" rel="nofollow noreferrer">qualitative psychological research</a> that are applicable to the study of psychoactive drug experiences, include <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_analysis" rel="nofollow noreferrer">thematic analysis</a> (TA):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>... one of the most common forms of analysis within qualitative
research.  It emphasizes identifying, analysing and interpreting
patterns of meaning (or &quot;themes&quot;) within qualitative data. ... Coding
is the primary process for developing themes by identifying items of
analytic interest in the data and tagging these with a coding label.
... there is a long tradition of using thematic analysis in
phenomenological research.  A phenomenological approach emphasizes the
participants' perceptions, feelings and experiences as the paramount
object of study.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretative_phenomenological_analysis" rel="nofollow noreferrer">interpretative phenomenological analysis</a> (IPA):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>... an approach to psychological qualitative research ... that ...
aims to offer insights into how a given person, in a given context,
makes sense of a given phenomenon. ... One might use IPA if one had a
research question which aimed to understand what a given experience
was like (phenomenology) and how someone made sense of it
(interpretation). ... After transcribing the data, the researcher
works closely and intensively with the text, ... the researcher
catalogues the emerging codes, and subsequently begins to look for
patterns in the codes. These patterns are called 'themes'. Themes are
recurring patterns of meaning (ideas, thoughts, feelings) throughout
the text.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Other common techniques that employ the analysis of free-form verbal reports include the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_apperception_test" rel="nofollow noreferrer">thematic apperception test</a> (TAT), and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104622" rel="nofollow noreferrer">computer-aided text analysis</a> (CATA).  However, due to the nature of the phenomenology of psychedelics, it is also common to use a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics#Psychology_and_cognitive_science" rel="nofollow noreferrer">hermeneutic</a> (interpretive) approach in that particular sub-field, rather than a thematic one.</p>
<p>For the example of what <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_experience" rel="nofollow noreferrer">psychedelic experience</a> is like, qualitative methods were more common in the early history of psychedelic research - &quot;The Varieties of Psychedelic Experience&quot; by <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&amp;lr=&amp;id=M1soDwAAQBAJ&amp;oi=fnd&amp;pg=PT4&amp;ots=1O2RINi0ea&amp;sig=cKkZ9-ga8wqSify1W__x6JEvucA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Masters &amp; Houston (1966)</a> is a book full of free-form verbal reports collected and analyzed for this purpose.  For more modern examples using qualitative methods to evaluate psychedelic experiences, see this <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40263-020-00748-y/tables/4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">list of papers</a> from 2014-2019, using primarily TA and IPA (source: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-020-00748-y" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Breeksema et al, 2020</a>).</p>
<p>I would speculate several reasons why qualitative research is less common in psychedelic research today than it was early on:</p>
<ul>
<li>Qualitative methods are useful in basic research for generating more specific research questions.  As the effects of psychedelics on experiences are quite well-known by now, the need for such research has declined.</li>
<li>As with most psychoactive drugs, psychedelic research is mostly focused on its potential therapeutic value, where quantitative methods are required for regulatory approval.</li>
<li>Psychedelics remain tightly controlled substances, limiting funding for basic research on questions that do not have direct practical applications.</li>
<li>Even in the relatively small sub-field of psychedelic research interested in experience (eg, to learn about how the mind works), quantitative methods are often preferred as they are less time-consuming (costly) to administer, and less challenging to validate, relative to qualitative ones.</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-08T16:52:50.813Z
Thank you, this is a very good answer.
Julius Hamilton
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-07T05:31:51.057Z
2022-08-07T05:31:51.057Z
Arnon Weinberg
<p>I think to publish a subjective approach as you describe here in the scientific, peer-reviewed literature is going to be difficult. For one, people may have wildly differing subjective experiences to psychoactive compounds, and even within-subject experiences can differ on a day-to-day basis, dependent on mental well being, amount of sleep, ingestion of other active compounds, state of mind etc. Further, the legal status of psychoactive substances greatly inhibits research in the field. There is ongoing research despite regulatory restrictions, yet the main focus of these studies on psychoactive substances like MDMA are their use as treatment for mental ailments such as PTSD and depression (<a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hallucinogens-as-medicine/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Griffiths &amp; Grob, 2020</a>).</p>
<p>Nonetheless, I think reporting subjective experiences to hallucinogens and related compounds is an interesting approach. It can hold scientific potential, especially when you start classifying and categorizing subjective experiences as you suggest.</p>
<p>A good place to start reading on documenting subjective experiences during and after the ingestion of psychoactive compounds are the works of the late <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Shulgin" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Alexander Shulgin</strong></a>.</p>
<p><sub><strong>References</strong><br />
<strong>-</strong> <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hallucinogens-as-medicine/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Griffiths &amp; Grob, <em>Sci Am</em> (December 2020 issue)</a><br />
<strong>-</strong> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PiHKAL" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Shulgin &amp; Shulgin, PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story. Transform Press (1991)</a><br />
<strong>-</strong> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TiHKAL" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Shulgin &amp; Shulgin, TIHKAL: The Continuation. TransformPress (1997)</a></sub></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-07T15:20:22.680Z
Psychoactive, or *psychedelic*? There's a lot of work going on right now with psilocybin and LSD, not just MDMA, and narrative research is a pretty common qualitative research approach, that has certainly been applied to psychedelic research. I think OP is probably not appreciating how much these approaches have been used to build subsequent standardized questionnaires.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-06T14:26:44.823Z
I would love if you could elaborate on that. In other words, you think “questionnaires” are redeemed, because they are deeply epistemologically justified, in other words?
Julius Hamilton
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-06T22:08:37.383Z
@PeterElbert I mean simply that, if you are referring to *psychedelics* as opposed to *psychoactive* compounds, the psychedelic questionaires I'm aware of were developed based on free reporting of psychedelic experiences.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-06T13:00:42.657Z
2022-04-07T07:11:24.173Z
2022-04-07T07:11:24.173Z
AliceD
<p>If one wished to study the effects of a psychoactive drug such as LSD, what strikes me as a natural primary starting point would be to ask participants what they actually experienced.  For example, they could write a page in response to a simple question about what the experience was like.</p>
<p>The results could then be analyzed using an approach such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">natural language processing</a>, to find common themes in reported effects.  This analysis would then be open to peer-review and replication.</p>
<p>Is this a method of research that anyone currently practices in psychology?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-05T22:19:40.737Z
What prior research have you done, what did you find, and where are you still stuck and wondering?
Bryan Krause
<measurement><methodology><experimental-psychology><psychopharmacology><drugs>
Are there methods of evaluating the effects of psychoactive drugs that use free-form verbal reports?
Julius Hamilton
# Are there methods of evaluating the effects of psychoactive drugs that use free-form verbal reports?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-04-05)

If one wished to study the effects of a psychoactive drug such as LSD, what strikes me as a natural primary starting point would be to ask participants what they actually experienced. For example, they could write a page in response to a simple question about what the experience was like.

The results could then be analyzed using an approach such as [natural language processing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing), to find common themes in reported effects. This analysis would then be open to peer-review and replication.

Is this a method of research that anyone currently practices in psychology?

**Tags:** measurement, methodology, experimental-psychology, psychopharmacology, drugs

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: What prior research have you done, what did you find, and where are you still stuck and wondering?  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-08-07. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

In terms of measurement methodology, research is divided into the standard quantitative, and alternative, [qualitative research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_research):

> Qualitative research relies on data obtained by the researcher from
> first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires (on which
> participants write descriptively), focus groups,
> participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings,
> documents, case studies, and artifacts. The data are generally
> nonnumerical. ... Qualitative research methods have been used in
> sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, social work,
> and educational research.

Examples of techniques within the field of [qualitative psychological research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_psychological_research) that are applicable to the study of psychoactive drug experiences, include [thematic analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_analysis) (TA):

> ... one of the most common forms of analysis within qualitative
> research. It emphasizes identifying, analysing and interpreting
> patterns of meaning (or "themes") within qualitative data. ... Coding
> is the primary process for developing themes by identifying items of
> analytic interest in the data and tagging these with a coding label.
> ... there is a long tradition of using thematic analysis in
> phenomenological research. A phenomenological approach emphasizes the
> participants' perceptions, feelings and experiences as the paramount
> object of study.

And [interpretative phenomenological analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretative_phenomenological_analysis) (IPA):

> ... an approach to psychological qualitative research ... that ...
> aims to offer insights into how a given person, in a given context,
> makes sense of a given phenomenon. ... One might use IPA if one had a
> research question which aimed to understand what a given experience
> was like (phenomenology) and how someone made sense of it
> (interpretation). ... After transcribing the data, the researcher
> works closely and intensively with the text, ... the researcher
> catalogues the emerging codes, and subsequently begins to look for
> patterns in the codes. These patterns are called 'themes'. Themes are
> recurring patterns of meaning (ideas, thoughts, feelings) throughout
> the text.

Other common techniques that employ the analysis of free-form verbal reports include the [thematic apperception test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_apperception_test) (TAT), and [computer-aided text analysis](http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104622) (CATA). However, due to the nature of the phenomenology of psychedelics, it is also common to use a [hermeneutic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics#Psychology_and_cognitive_science) (interpretive) approach in that particular sub-field, rather than a thematic one.

For the example of what [psychedelic experience](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_experience) is like, qualitative methods were more common in the early history of psychedelic research - "The Varieties of Psychedelic Experience" by [Masters & Houston (1966)](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=M1soDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT4&ots=1O2RINi0ea&sig=cKkZ9-ga8wqSify1W__x6JEvucA) is a book full of free-form verbal reports collected and analyzed for this purpose. For more modern examples using qualitative methods to evaluate psychedelic experiences, see this [list of papers](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40263-020-00748-y/tables/4) from 2014-2019, using primarily TA and IPA (source: [Breeksema et al, 2020](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-020-00748-y)).

I would speculate several reasons why qualitative research is less common in psychedelic research today than it was early on:

* Qualitative methods are useful in basic research for generating more specific research questions. As the effects of psychedelics on experiences are quite well-known by now, the need for such research has declined.
* As with most psychoactive drugs, psychedelic research is mostly focused on its potential therapeutic value, where quantitative methods are required for regulatory approval.
* Psychedelics remain tightly controlled substances, limiting funding for basic research on questions that do not have direct practical applications.
* Even in the relatively small sub-field of psychedelic research interested in experience (eg, to learn about how the mind works), quantitative methods are often preferred as they are less time-consuming (costly) to administer, and less challenging to validate, relative to qualitative ones.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you, this is a very good answer.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-04-06. Score: 1

I think to publish a subjective approach as you describe here in the scientific, peer-reviewed literature is going to be difficult. For one, people may have wildly differing subjective experiences to psychoactive compounds, and even within-subject experiences can differ on a day-to-day basis, dependent on mental well being, amount of sleep, ingestion of other active compounds, state of mind etc. Further, the legal status of psychoactive substances greatly inhibits research in the field. There is ongoing research despite regulatory restrictions, yet the main focus of these studies on psychoactive substances like MDMA are their use as treatment for mental ailments such as PTSD and depression ([Griffiths & Grob, 2020](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hallucinogens-as-medicine/)).

Nonetheless, I think reporting subjective experiences to hallucinogens and related compounds is an interesting approach. It can hold scientific potential, especially when you start classifying and categorizing subjective experiences as you suggest.

A good place to start reading on documenting subjective experiences during and after the ingestion of psychoactive compounds are the works of the late [**Alexander Shulgin**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Shulgin).

**References**  
**-** [Griffiths & Grob, *Sci Am* (December 2020 issue)](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hallucinogens-as-medicine/)  
**-** [Shulgin & Shulgin, PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story. Transform Press (1991)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PiHKAL)  
**-** [Shulgin & Shulgin, TIHKAL: The Continuation. TransformPress (1997)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TiHKAL)

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Psychoactive, or *psychedelic*? There's a lot of work going on right now with psilocybin and LSD, not just MDMA, and narrative research is a pretty common qualitative research approach, that has certainly been applied to psychedelic research. I think OP is probably not appreciating how much these approaches have been used to build subsequent standardized questionnaires.  
> **username_0**: I would love if you could elaborate on that. In other words, you think “questionnaires” are redeemed, because they are deeply epistemologically justified, in other words?  
> **username_1**: @PeterElbert I mean simply that, if you are referring to *psychedelics* as opposed to *psychoactive* compounds, the psychedelic questionaires I'm aware of were developed based on free reporting of psychedelic experiences.  

---

