A depression score on a clinical scale can tell us a number went down. It cannot tell us what it felt like to notice, for the first time in months, the desire to call a friend back. Numbers are necessary, but they are not the whole story. So when researchers who had just completed a landmark LSD microdosing trial for depression sat down with their participants and simply asked, “What was this actually like for you?” — they opened a window into something the rating scales alone could never fully capture.
WHAT HAPPENED
Following their quantitative trial of LSD microdosing for major depressive disorder, the same University of Auckland research team conducted in-depth interviews with participants and published a thematic analysis of their experiences in Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology in 2025. Rather than asking only whether symptoms improved, researchers explored how participants made sense of the experience in their own words. Several recurring themes emerged: many participants described a renewed sense of self-determination and motivation to engage in activities they had previously found difficult to approach. Importantly, the researchers were careful to include the full range of experiences — not everyone benefited, and some participants reported no noticeable change or, in some cases, difficult experiences, underscoring that this approach is not a universal solution.
THE SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE
Qualitative research uses structured methods — in this case, thematic analysis of in-depth interviews — to identify recurring patterns in how people describe a lived experience. It’s a different but complementary tool to quantitative measures like symptom rating scales. Where a depression score tells researchers how much something changed, qualitative interviews help explain why and how it changed, from the participant’s own perspective.
In this study, “enhanced self-determination” was one of the clearest themes: several participants described feeling more able to make choices aligned with their own values, rather than feeling passively carried along by depressive inertia. Others described renewed motivation toward previously avoided activities — work, relationships, simple daily routines. Crucially, the researchers also documented participants for whom microdosing made no meaningful difference, or who found the process unhelpful or even uncomfortable. This honest range matters scientifically: it helps prevent overstated claims and supports a more accurate, person-by-person understanding of who this approach might serve.
DID YOU KNOW?
Not every participant in this trial benefited — some reported no change or difficult experiences, a reminder that microdosing research takes the full range of human response seriously rather than only highlighting success stories.
THE DSS PERSPECTIVE
Self-determination is, in many ways, a clinical term for something contemplative traditions have always pointed toward: the felt sense of agency over one’s own inner life. These findings invite us to consider that healing from depression isn’t only about symptom reduction — it may also involve a quiet return to feeling like the author of one’s own choices, rather than a passenger in one’s own mind. This is sovereignty in its most personal form: not freedom from all difficulty, but a restored capacity to choose, to act, to engage. And the researchers’ honesty about what didn’t work for everyone reflects something DSS holds close — that no single tool, however promising, is a universal answer. Each person’s path toward wholeness is its own.
WHY THIS MATTERS
As psychedelic-assisted therapies move toward broader clinical use, qualitative research like this will shape something rating scales alone cannot: how therapy is actually delivered, supported, and personalized. Understanding what restores a person’s sense of agency — and what doesn’t — can help clinicians design more meaningful integration support, rather than treating dosing schedules as the whole of the work. It’s a reminder that good science listens not just to outcomes, but to people.
“What would it mean to measure healing not only by symptom scores, but by how connected we feel to our own choices?”
THE DSS REFLECTION
This research offers a meaningful corrective to a common misunderstanding about psychedelic medicine: that its value lies primarily in the molecule itself. What these interviews reveal is something closer to the heart of DSS’s perspective — that transformation is relational and experiential, not purely chemical. The same compound, in the same dose, touched different people differently. Some found renewed motivation and agency. Others found nothing, or found it difficult. This range isn’t a flaw in the research; it’s an honest reflection of how consciousness work has always behaved.
As we collectively explore the future of mental wellness, this kind of nuanced, person-centered listening will matter as much as any neuroimaging study. It reminds us that awakening, healing, and self-determination cannot be reduced to a single curve on a graph. They are lived, felt, and deeply individual. The task ahead — for researchers, clinicians, and communities alike — is to keep building space for both forms of knowing: the rigorous data and the human story behind it. Real integration happens at the intersection of the two.
Looking to explore more? Our Knowledge Library contains dozens of additional articles, resources, and educational content. You can browse it anytime HERE!
REFERENCES
1. Donegan CJ, Daldegan-Bueno D, Sumner RL, et al. What is it like to microdose LSD for depression? A thematic analysis of participant interviews from an open-label trial. Ther Adv Psychopharmacol. 2025. doi:10.1177/20451253251396253