A Qualitative Study of Intention and Impact of Ayahuasca Use by Westerners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ayahuasca has gained the attention of researchers over the past decade as psychedelic-assisted therapy for MDMA and psilocybin have progressed through FDA approved clinical trials. In spite of the increase in research, there are relatively few clinical studies of ayahuasca and little qualitative research on the therapeutic or healing uses of psychedelics in general. The present study included 41 Western participants who were interviewed about their participation in facilitated group ayahuasca experiences (e.g. in shamanic, neoshamanic, spiritual, and religious settings). Participants were interviewed about their intentions for participating, along with the perceived impact of the experiences. In particular, we focused on impacts that participants perceived to be sustained and enduring. We identified an impressive range of beneficial impacts, including improvements in areas that are often a focus of psychotherapy, such as mental health and substance use, health behaviors, interpersonal relationships, sense of self, attitude. Extratherapeutic effects were also observed in areas such as changes in creativity, somatic sensations, physical health/pain, sense of connection to nature, spirituality, and concern for the greater good. Two participants also reported problematic experiences, apparently related to set and setting. Implications for research and practice, along with a humanistic framework for interpreting these findings is provided.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".