Multimodal creativity assessments following acute and sustained microdosing of lysergic acid diethylamide.

A randomized controlled trial gave 80 healthy adult males 10 µg doses of LSD or placebo every third day for six weeks and tested creativity with the Alternate Uses Test, Remote Associates Task, Consensual Assessment Technique, and an Everyday Problem-Solving Questionnaire. No drug effect was found on any creativity measure at the first dose or after six weeks, despite participants reporting feeling more creative on dose days. Baseline vocabulary skill significantly influenced scores on two tests. The null findings may reflect that laboratory testing misses naturalistic creative differences, available tests do not capture the facets of creativity anecdotally affected, or reported enhancements are placebo effects.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Enhanced creativity is often cited as an effect of microdosing (taking repeated low doses of a psychedelic drug). There have been recent efforts to validate the reported effects of microdosing, however creativity remains a difficult construct to quantify. The current study aimed to assess microdosing's effects on creativity using a multimodal battery of tests as part of a randomised controlled trial of microdosing lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Eighty healthy adult males were given 10 µg doses of LSD or placebo every third day for six weeks (14 total doses). Creativity tasks were administered at a drug-free baseline session, at a first dosing session during the acute phase of the drug's effects, and in a drug-free final session following the six-week microdosing regimen. Creativity tasks were the Alternate Uses Test (AUT), Remote Associates Task (RAT), Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT), and an Everyday Problem-Solving Questionnaire (EPSQ). No effect of drug by time was found on the AUT, RAT, CAT, or EPSQ. Baseline vocabulary skill had a significant effect on AUT and RAT scores. Despite participants reporting feeling more creative on dose days, objective measurement found no acute or durable effects of the microdosing protocol on creativity. Possible explanations of these null findings are that laboratory testing conditions may negatively affect ability to detect naturalistic differences in creative performance, the tests available do not capture the facets of creativity that are anecdotally affected by microdosing, or that reported enhancements of creativity are placebo effects.