Atheism, Openness to Experience and Dogmatism: A Puzzling Relationship

Dogmatism has usually been related in research to low levels of openness to experience, a personality dimension associated with interest in new and non-traditional ideas. Dogmatism has mostly been studied in relation to religious beliefs but some recent research has looked at dogmatism among non-religious people. One surprising finding was that among self-identified atheists, higher levels of openness to experience were actually associated with greater dogmatism, contrary to the usual pattern. This suggests that the personality dimension openness to experience might not be a marker of open-mindedness as such but more of a preference for unconventional and complex ideas. Perhaps there needs to be a distinction made between humble versus arrogant forms of openness to experience.

Some people do not respond well to disagreement. 

Dogmatism refers to rigid certainty about the correctness of one’s views, along with refusal to consider alternatives and a conviction that any intelligent person who has thought things through would agree with one’s own opinions. The opposite of this is the willingness to consider that one’s own views are not the only reasonable way of looking at things and that it is possible that one could be proven wrong. This does not mean that a non-dogmatic person must be wishy-washy, only that they are willing to consider that other people might have good reasons for believing what they do and that it is alright for intelligent people to disagree.

Dogmatism and openness to experience: polar opposites?

People can be dogmatic about any subject, e.g. political and lifestyle views, but dogmatism has mostly been studied among religious believers. Religious beliefs in general tend to be held more dogmatically than other kinds of beliefs, and people with fundamentalist beliefs are generally the most dogmatic of all, virtually by definition. Not surprisingly, religious fundamentalism tends to be associated with low openness to experience (Saroglou, 2010). Openness to experience is a broad and somewhat heterogeneous dimension of personality that refers to the breadth and complexity of a person’s mental life (McCrae & Sutin, 2009). People low in openness to experience tend to prefer rather black-and-white views of the world that are not too complex or intellectually demanding. In contrast, people high in openness prefer more nuanced ways of looking at things, and feel comfortable with complex ideas. Openness to experience encompasses a diverse number of narrower traits, and one of these traits, openness to values, refers to readiness to “re-examine social, political and religious values” and has even been considered to represent “the opposite of dogmatism” (Costa & McCrae, 1992, cited in) (Smith, Johnson, & Hathaway, 2009).

Some atheists can’t stand disagreement

While it seems generally true that people high in openness to experience, particularly in the values facet, are least likely to be dogmatic, there may be some notable exceptions. Re-examining traditional values, for example, does not necessarily guarantee that one will not become tolerant of differences in opinion. Some people might reject traditional values and then become dogmatic adherents of non-traditional ones. One example that I believe fits this description is an online movement called “Atheism Plus”. This movement, which emerged just over a year ago in the atheist blogging community, bills itself as a “positive” approach that aims to combine atheism/scepticism with a variety of left-liberal political causes associated with the term “social justice.” Responses to this movement in the atheist/sceptical community have been less than totally positive. Atheism Plus has been criticised by other atheists as a divisive movement, and a commonly expressed concern is that members of this group have demonstrated intellectual arrogance and intolerance of dissent, even on minor matters.[1] They would seem to be high in openness to values yet appear very dogmatic in their views. A recent research study may sheds some light on when and why high openness to experience and dogmatism sometimes go together.

Parody of Atheism Plus. See here for another good parody.

Dogmatism and openness to experience among the non-religious

Studies on non-religious people have found that they are generally considerably higher in openness to experience than those who are religious (Galen & Kloet, 2011). People who are non-religious vary greatly in how they define their lack of religiosity so it can be useful to make broad distinctions. A recent study did this by comparing people with “no beliefs in particular” (which I will call “nones” for convenience) and those self-identifying as atheists (Gurney, McKeown, Churchyard, & Howlett, 2013). Those who describe themselves as atheists are more likely to identify themselves as members of a specific group, whereas nones have no particular group identity. Membership of a group tends to promote a sense of loyalty to the values of the group along with a sense of separateness from outsiders, and this can foster dogmatism about the beliefs and values of one’s group to some extent. A distinguishing feature of an atheist identity is that qualities associated with openness to experience, such as challenging traditional beliefs and appreciation of intellectual activity, are highly valued. This is in contrast to a religious identity, which is more likely to emphasise conformity to tradition and submission to authority in matters of belief. Individuals atheists vary in how central atheism is to their identity overall. Some regard their atheism as simply an absence of belief in gods, and one attitude among many others they may have. For others though, being an atheist is a more central and defining part of their self-concept tied to their core values, such as a belief in the social importance of scepticism and reason. Gurney et al. therefore argued that insofar as atheists have a social identity that values high openness to experience, dogmatism among them may be positively correlated with openness to experience, as opposed to religious social identities that devalue such openness. They performed a survey to confirm this, so let’s look at what they found.

The survey compared a group of atheists, nones, and Christians on measures of dogmatism and openness to experience. Additionally, atheists and Christians were asked to rate how strongly they identified with their respective groups. (Nones have no clear group membership, so this question would not be meaningful to them.) The number of atheists in the sample (37) was on the small side, so the study should be seen as a preliminary investigation rather than something definitive. The measure of dogmatism (the DOG scale) used is content neutral in that it includes generic statements like “The things I believe in are so completely true, I could never doubt them” and “It is best to be open to all possibilities and ready to evaluate all your beliefs” (the latter indicates low dogmatism). The openness to experience measure provides an overall score and scores on the subscales of inquisitiveness, aesthetic appreciation, creativity, and unconventionality. The three groups scored similarly on overall openness, although atheists scored significantly higher than Christians on inquisitiveness and unconventionality. Considering atheists’ particular interests, this result is as expected. The Inquisitiveness measure refers to intellectual curiosity, such as interest in science, history and political discussion. Items used to measure it also suggest that is particularly associated with intelligence, e.g. “have a rich vocabulary” and “avoid difficult reading material” (the latter indicating the low end of the trait). Unconventionality indicates non-conformity with social expectations. Unconventionality appears somewhat similar to openness to values as it includes items such as “rebel against authority” and “swim against the current” but also includes several items referencing unusual characteristics, e.g. being eccentric and odd, which may not be quite as relevant to dogmatism though.

On the dogmatism measure, atheists did score slightly higher than nones, although they were substantially lower than Christians. The graph below depicts dogmatism scores for the three groups.

Dogmatism levels among atheists, nones and Christians. Error bars represent standard deviations.

Dogmatism was also positively correlated with group identification in both atheists and Christians. That is the more strongly a person identified as either an atheist or a Christian, the more dogmatic they were about their respective beliefs. So atheists who do not attach much significance to their unbelief were less rigid in their views than those who see atheism as more central to their identity. Additionally and as expected, correlations between dogmatism and openness to experience differed among the three groups. Dogmatism was negatively correlated with openness to experience among nones, and to a lesser extent among Christians. In the latter group, inquisitiveness in particular was significantly negatively correlated with dogmatism, indicating that among Christians, the more dogmatic they were, the less interest they had in intellectual pursuits. This pattern was reversed among atheists, as overall openness to experience, and the facets of inquisitiveness, unconventionality, and creativity were positively associated with dogmatism. That is, atheists who considered themselves more intellectual, more non-traditional, and more creative even, were more dogmatically certain about the correctness of their views and presumably less tolerant of dissenting ones.

Open to experience does not always mean open-minded

The association among atheists between higher dogmatism and higher openness to experience, especially the inquisitiveness facet, is in a way rather surprising. As previously noted, people high in inquisitiveness are comfortable with complex concepts so would be expected to have the cognitive flexibility to steer away from black-and-white thinking usually associated with dogmatism. They also tend to express an interest in science, and one of the guiding principles of science is that one should be willing to question one’s preferred theories rather than cling to them rigidly. Nevertheless, even great scientists sometimes become overly attached to their pet theories and may defend them dogmatically. Furthermore, the unconventionality scale refers to being an unusual person with off-beat ideas but says nothing about the flexibility or rigidity of one’s beliefs. Perhaps it would be fair to say that high openness to experience indicates a preference for complex and unusual ideas, but this does not always mean that one will not be receptive to challenges to these ideas.

Intellectual arrogance versus intellectual humility

Another possibility is that there are different varieties of openness to experience that might be relevant to whether or not a person is dogmatic. Openness to experience comprises a broad array of traits, some of which combine features of openness with traits from other distinctive personality dimensions (Johnson, 1994). For example, openness combined with introversion defines the trait of introspectiveness, whereas openness combined with extraversion defines a preference for variety and originality. Dogmatism implies a lack of humility about the rightness of one’s views, an arrogant assumption that one cannot possibly wrong and that anyone who disagrees is either stupid or evil. There does not appear to be any research that has explored what a combination of high openness to experience with low humility might be, but it sounds like this combination of traits would describe intellectual arrogance. Perhaps openness to experience in atheists who are also dogmatic involves a blend of unconventionality and lack of humility that facilitates an unusual form of dogmatism.

Well, I can think of much more arrogant beliefs...

A limitation of the Gurney et al. study was that it did not address whether identity strength (how strongly a person identified as an atheist) and openness to experience were equally important as predictors of dogmatism or whether one was more crucial than the other. That is, does openness to experience still predict dogmatism in atheists when taking into account identity strength or does it become non-significant? Or conversely, does identity strength still predict dogmatism when taking openness to experience into account? This could be tested statistically with a larger sample of atheists. A more difficult question to answer is why some people have a stronger atheist identity than others. There was a positive correlation between identity strength and openness to experience. Do people identify more strongly as atheists because they are high in openness to experience or does having a strong identity increase openness to experience? And what is the relationship, if any between low humility and identity strength? Does adopting a strong identity lead to an arrogant dismissive attitude towards people who disagree (which I believe to be a problem with Atheism Plus)? Or is it the case that arrogant people are drawn to a polarizing identity? Perhaps it is a combination of both, where adopting such an identity reinforces pre-existing tendencies towards arrogance? Longitudinal research studies would be needed to answer these questions.

I want to make it clear that I have no problem with people having a strong atheist identity, or even people combining atheism with particular political views or an interest in social justice. What I am concerned about is when people hold their views in a dogmatic and arrogant manner. One Atheism Plus blogger claimed that atheism implies not just disbelief in gods but a view of reality in which highly specific political and economic beliefs are to be regarded as certain and inconvertible truths. Even in the hard sciences, theories are open to debate, so I find it incredible he would claim to have certain knowledge in highly complex and soft disciplines where experts disagree. I think it is definitely possible for people to have strong well-defined views about things and yet also realise that their own beliefs are ultimately provisional and subject to change according to new evidence. Finally I want to acknowledge that I am aware of many good examples of atheist bloggers[2] who do acknowledge that people who disagree with them are not necessarily stupid or evil and who do understand the meaning of being reasonable. 

---

[1] Well known blogger PZ Myers stated for example that critics of Atheism Plus should call themselves “asshole atheists.” He is also notorious for banning dissenting commenters from his blog, among other things. 

[2] For example, Triangulations, Atheist Revolution, and The A-Unicornist have all been non-dogmatic in my experience. 

Note on layout: Please accept my apologies for any inconsistencies in the appearance of the text. Blogger does strange and unpredictable things to text copied from Word. 

Please consider following me on Facebook, Google Plus, or Twitter.

© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. 

This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else.

Other posts about the psychology of (non-)belief

Reason versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality in Supernatural Belief

Opening the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet  

Belief in God Supports Prejudice against Gays and Atheists

What Oprah doesn’t Understand about Awe and Atheists 

Image credits

Snarling dog image care of The Daily Telegraph. 

Poster created at http://diy.despair.com/

The creator of the A+ parody is currently unknown.

Atheism galaxy poster from Atheist Pictures.

References

Galen, L. W., & Kloet, J. (2011). Personality and Social Integration Factors Distinguishing Nonreligious from Religious Groups: The Importance of Controlling for Attendance and Demographics. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 33(2), 205-228. doi: 10.1163/157361211x570047

Gurney, D. J., McKeown, S., Churchyard, J., & Howlett, N. (2013). Believe it or not: Exploring the relationship between dogmatism and openness within non-religious samples Personality and Individual Differences DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.471

Johnson, J. A. (1994). Clarification of Factor Five with the help of the AB5C Model. European Journal of Personality, 8(4), 311-334. doi: 10.1002/per.2410080408

McCrae, R., & Sutin, A. R. (2009). Openness to Experience. In R. H. H. Mark R. Leary (Ed.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior (pp. 257-273). New York/London: The Guildford Press.

Saroglou, V. (2010). Religiousness as a Cultural Adaptation of Basic Traits: A Five-Factor Model Perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(1), 108-125. doi: 10.1177/1088868309352322

Smith, C. L., Johnson, J. L., & Hathaway, W. (2009). Personality Contributions to Belief in Paranormal Phenomena. Individual Differences Research, 7(2), 85-96.

The Mental Health Troubles of the "Spiritual but not Religious"

Scholars have increasingly investigated the relationship between spirituality and/or religion and mental and physical health in recent years. It almost seems to have become conventional wisdom that spirituality is associated with better health, mental and physical. However, a recently published British study found that people who consider themselves spiritual but not religious are more likely to have a mental disorder compared to conventionally religious people and to those who are neither religious nor spiritual. Conventionally religious people and those who were neither religious nor spiritual did not differ in their mental health status, suggesting that being religious offers few advantages in terms of mental health. The reasons for this are still unclear. Studies on the psychology of spirituality offer some clues as to why spiritual but not religious people might be prone to poorer mental health although more research is needed to fully explain the relationship.

Recent scholarship has criticised claims that “spirituality” is beneficial for mental health (see this article for example) based on the fact that definitions of spirituality have been broadened so much that they imply mental health by definition (Koenig, 2008). Spirituality traditionally had a narrow definition centred on belief in supernatural spirits such as God. However, mental health services  have become increasingly interested in addressing the “spiritual” needs of consumers in recent times, and as a result attempts have been made to redefine the term in a way that would be maximally inclusive, so as to apply to people from diverse religious backgrounds and to those with no religion (Koenig, 2008). Many studies have broadened the term to incorporate a wide range of positive psychological concepts, such as purpose in life, hopefulness, social connectedness, peacefulness and well-being in general. This becomes problematic for research attempting to assess the relationship between “spirituality” and mental health because by most definitions good mental health implies that a person has some purpose in life, is hopeful, socially connected and has peace and well-being. Thus it becomes a meaningless tautology to say that spirituality is associated with better mental health when the term is defined this way (Lindeman & Aarnio, 2007).

A recent British study looked at the relationship between spirituality and mental health using a more traditional understanding of the term to avoid this problem of tautology (King et al., 2013). The study involved in-depth interviews with over 7000 people in England. Participants were sorted into those whose understanding of life was predominantly religious, spiritual, or neither. These terms were explained in the following way:

‘By religion, we mean the actual practice of a faith, e.g. going to a temple, mosque, church or synagogue. Some people do not follow a religion but do have spiritual beliefs or experiences. Some people make sense of their lives without any religious or spiritual belief.’

Participants were also interviewed in depth about their mental health, alcohol and drug use, social support, psychotropic medication usage, gambling, and were asked about their overall happiness. 

The results showed that religious participants were similar to non-religious/non-spiritual ones in regards to their mental health in most respects, although the religious were less likely to have used or been dependent on drugs in the last year. However, there were striking differences for those in the spiritual but not religious category. Compared to people who were neither religious nor spiritual, spiritual but not religious people were more likely to take psychotropic medication, to use or be dependent on recreational drugs, to have a generalised anxiety disorder, phobia, or any neurotic disorder, or to have abnormal eating attitudes. These differences still held even when taking into account social support and physical health, as well as age, sex, and ethnicity. None of the groups differed in their overall happiness though.

The authors concluded that people who are spiritual but not religious in their understanding of life are more vulnerable to mental disorders than other people. The nature of the causal relationship between spirituality and mental disorder is currently unknown. An earlier British study had similar findings and the authors noted that it is possible that not having a religious framework for one’s beliefs could lead to mental disorder in people who have a need for a spiritual understanding of life (King, Weich, Nazroo, & Blizard, 2006). Alternatively, having a mental disorder might prompt a person to engage in a spiritual quest in the hope of mental healing or deeper understanding of one’s problems.

Previous findings concerning the personality traits associated with “spirituality” and religiosity might shed some light onto the relationship between spirituality and mental disorder (Saucier & Skrzypińska, 2006). Spirituality in this study was defined as “quest for meaning, unity, connectedness to nature, humanity, and the transcendent.” Note that this definition focuses on subjective and mystical understandings of life, in contrast to more conventional religiosity which emphasises adherence to orthodox belief systems. Although many people describe themselves in terms of both conventional religiosity and subjective spirituality, people who were more focused on subjective spirituality and less interested in religiosity tended to have distinctly different personality characteristics compared to those with a more orthodox religious orientation. People who described themselves in conventional religious terms tended to be fairly conservative in their attitudes and beliefs. Those who were more spiritual and less religious tended to be more non-conforming and even peculiar in their outlook and personal traits. For example, they were more likely than other people to describe themselves as weird and crazy. Additionally, they tended to believe in a range of “alternative” ideas (such as psychokinesis, reincarnation, astrology, witchcraft, and psychic powers), say that they “respect the power of magic,” and scored highly in measures of magical thinking, fantasy proneness, and absorption[1].

"Unfiltered anger" by Louis Dyer

Characteristics such as magical thinking and so on have been linked to a set of traits known as schizotypy, or proneness to mildly psychotic thinking. Schizotypy refers to a cluster of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural traits that are similar to but generally milder than those exhibited in schizophrenia. It is associated with unusual beliefs about reality (e.g. that it is possible to harm other by thinking bad thoughts about them) and the tendency to have odd perceptual experiences (such as feeling that strangers are reading one’s mind). Other research has found that "New Age" beliefs and practices (in this study this term encompassed such things as yoga, Reiki, astrology, and Tarot) are associated with schizotypy (Farias, Claridge, & Lalljee, 2005). Schizotypy tends to be associated with high levels of anxiety and depression (Lewandowski et al., 2006). It could be the case that people with schizotypal tendencies and associated proneness to anxiety and depression may find unconventional spiritual ideas to be particularly appealing. It is also possible (and I admit this is speculation) that adherence to such ideas exacerbates their existing mental imbalances. (It should be noted though that many people with schizotypal tendencies are otherwise well-adjusted. Schizotypy has also been linked to artistic creativity.)

Whether unconventional spiritual pursuits are harmful to mental health is not yet known. In some respects, the association between spirituality and mental disorder seems contrary to the benefits that many spiritual traditions claim to offer. Spiritual fulfilment is supposed to lead to inner peace, even bliss. In fact certain mystics have gone so far as to claim that spiritual “work” can lead to an inner transformation that will result in “True wisdom and perfect happiness”! The very idea of “perfect happiness” seems like an impossible mirage, although a more charitable interpretation is that the term is intended as a poetic metaphor rather than a literal reality. So why are so many spiritual people so troubled? It may be that some people are simply not that successful in pursuing whatever spiritual fulfilment they are seeking. King et al. (2013) found that those who were spiritual but not religious rated the strength of their belief and the importance of the practice of their faith somewhat lower than the religious participants in their study. This might indicate a lack of dedication or self-discipline on the part of those who claim to be spiritual but not religious. More detailed studies are needed to determine if this is the case.

Another limitation of the study by King et al. was that it did not examine the specific content of the beliefs and practices of the spiritual but not religious. The content of one’s spiritual beliefs could well affect one’s mental health. For example, belief in the interconnectedness of things might be relatively beneficial, whereas more “superstitious” beliefs such as in the “evil eye” could be harmful to one’s mental health.  Research could examine whether certain particular spiritual practices are more associated with mental disorder than others. For example, yoga and meditation are generally thought to be beneficial to one’s well-being, but more bizarre practices (such as “regression” to before one’s birth) might encourage a person to hold peculiar ideas that may not serve them well in real life.

An additional puzzle is why the three groups in the King et al. study did not differ in their overall happiness even though one group was more prone to mental disorder. Happiness was assessed with a single question, whereas mental health status was assessed with a clinical interview, so a more detailed assessment of well-being might provide a more nuanced picture.

Considering the increasing prominence in modern society of people who consider themselves spiritual but not religious, more in-depth research is needed to understand fully why this group seems to be particularly vulnerable to mental illness.

Follow me on Facebook, Google Plus, or Twitter.

© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. 

This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else. Check out my latest articles!

Other blog posts related to spirituality

Psilocybin and personality

Psilocybin and brain function

Psilocybin for anxiety and depression in cancer

DMT, aliens and reality – part 1

DMT, aliens and reality – part 2

Precognition and the search for the soul – part 1

Precognition and the search for the soul – part 2

The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users

References

Farias, M., Claridge, G., & Lalljee, M. (2005). Personality and cognitive predictors of New Age practices and beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(5), 979-989. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.04.003

King, M., Marston, L., McManus, S., Brugha, T., Meltzer, H., & Bebbington, P. (2012). Religion, spirituality and mental health: results from a national study of English households The British Journal of Psychiatry, 202 (1), 68-73 DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.112003

King, M., Weich, S., Nazroo, J., & Blizard, B. (2006). Religion, mental health and ethnicity. EMPIRIC – A national survey of England. Journal of Mental Health, 15(2), 153-162. doi: doi:10.1080/09638230600608891

Koenig, H. G. (2008). Concerns About Measuring "Spirituality" in Research. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196(5), 349-355 310.1097/NMD.1090b1013e31816ff31796.

Lewandowski, K. E., Barrantes-Vidal, N., Nelson-Gray, R. O., Clancy, C., Kepley, H. O., & Kwapil, T. R. (2006). Anxiety and depression symptoms in psychometrically identified schizotypy. Schizophrenia Research, 83(2–3), 225-235. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2005.11.024

Lindeman, M., & Aarnio, K. (2007). Superstitious, magical, and paranormal beliefs: An integrative model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(4), 731-744. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.009

Saucier, G., & Skrzypińska, K. (2006). Spiritual But Not Religious? Evidence for Two Independent Dispositions. Journal of Personality, 74(5), 1257-1292. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00409.x

---

[1] I discuss absorption and its relationship to mystical experiences occasioned by psychedelic drugs in a previous post.

Spirituality through Psychedelic Drugs

Psychedelic drugs, including LSD, psilocybin, and mescaline, have long had an association with spiritual pursuits. For example, psychedelic plants, such as psilocybe mushrooms, peyote, and ayahuasca have long been used in shamanic traditions in the Americas (Lerner & Lyvers, 2006). Recent research has found that administering psychedelic drugs in a supportive setting can occasion profound mystical experiences. For example, a recent study found that about 60% volunteers in an experiment on the effects of psilocybin, who had never before used psychedelic drugs, had a “complete mystical experience” characterised by experiences such as unity with all things, transcendence of time and space, a sense of insight into the ultimate nature of reality, and feelings of ineffability, awe, and profound positive emotions such as joy, peace, and love (Griffiths, Richards, McCann, & Jesse, 2006).

Image courtesy of dan at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Due to the association between psychedelic drugs and mystical experiences, some recent research has looked at how the spiritual belief and attitudes of psychedelic drug users compare to users of non-psychedelic drugs and to non-drug users. A study by Lerner and Lyvers (2006) compared people who used high doses of classic psychedelic drugs (e.g. LSD, mescaline and psilocybin) with people who used other illegal drugs (mostly marijuana and amphetamines) who had never tried psychedelic drugs, and people who had never used illegal drugs. (Only high-dose psychedelic drug users were included, as high doses are required to induce mystical states. Low dose usage is popular with people who primarily enjoy the perceptual effects such as enhancement of music during raves.) Psychedelic drug users endorsed more mystical beliefs (such as in a universal soul, no fear of death, unity of all things, existence of a transcendent reality, and oneness with God, nature and the universe). Psychedelic drug users also said they placed greater value on spirituality and concern for others, and less value on financial prosperity, than the other two groups. This accords with findings from another study (Móró, Simon, Bárd, & Rácz, 2011) that found that psychedelic drug users regarded spirituality as more personally important compared to users of other drugs and non-drug users. Spirituality in this latter study was defined as “one’s relationship to God, or whatever you perceive to be Ultimate Transcendence.”

These findings do suggest that people who use psychedelic drugs consider themselves more spiritual, and perhaps less materialistic, than people who prefer other drugs or who do not use illegal drugs at all. A more difficult question to answer is whether taking psychedelic drugs induces people to become more open to spiritual beliefs and values, or whether people who already have these beliefs and values are more inclined than others to use these drugs. Lerner and Lyvers suggest that the answer is probably a combination of both as persons on a spiritual quest are more likely to take these drugs and their subsequent experiences may strengthen and deepen their spiritual values and beliefs.

There does seem to be evidence that there may be a two-way relationship between psychedelic drug use and having spiritual and mystical beliefs. A study on psilocybin by Griffiths et al. (2011) found that people who had never used psychedelic drugs before reported long-term (assessed over a period of 14 months) increases in “death transcendence”. That is, participants expressed an increased belief that there is continuity after death, e.g. belief that death is not an ending but a transition to something even greater than this life. One of the core features of mystical experience is “an intuitive belief that the experience

is a source of objective truth about the nature of reality” (MacLean, Johnson, & Griffiths, 2011). As noted earlier, about 60% of volunteers in the Griffiths et al. study reported a complete mystical experience, which they regarded as having sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance months later. From this it seems reasonable to think that one of the outcomes of the mystical experience was to convince volunteers that consciousness does continue after death. Additionally, as noted in a previous post, volunteers who experienced a complete mystical experience on psilocybin had a subsequent increase in the personality domain of openness to experience. People high in openness to experience also tend to endorse more mystical and spiritual beliefs, although they may also endorse less conventional religious belief.

On the other hand, a person’s motives for taking psychedelic drugs in the first place are most probably related to their pre-existing beliefs and values. There is a subculture of people called “psychonauts” who are interested in taking psychedelic drugs for purposes of self-exploration, which can include religious and spiritual motives. Móró et al. referred to such purposes as autognosis (self-knowledge) and found that autognosis was one of the main motives for using psychedelic drugs and for preferring them to other drugs. Furthermore, as noted elsewhere, people who are high in a personality trait known as absorption (a tendency to “lose oneself” when focused on something of particular interest, within or without oneself) have a much stronger response to psychedelic drugs and are more likely to have a mystical experience compared to people low in capacity for absorption. This would seem to indicate that some people are more likely than others to “benefit” from psychedelic drugs, in terms of having a profound spiritual experience. Hence, people with certain personality traits as well as the desire for autognosis are probably more predisposed than others to seek some sort of spiritual awakening through psychedelic drugs. 

Having considered that psychedelic drugs may be conducive to mystical and spiritual beliefs and experiences, it may be worth considering what benefits psychedelic drug use might have. Griffiths et al. (2008) found that fourteen months after taking psilocybin for the first time nearly two-thirds of volunteers rated the experience as in the top five for both most personally meaningful and most spiritually significant experience in their entire lives. About 64% said the experience had increased their personal well-being and life satisfaction over the fourteen month period. Having a mystical experience while on psilocybin appeared to play a central role in these high ratings of personal meaning and spiritual significance. Additionally, volunteers said that they experienced positive changes in their attitudes towards life and to the self, as well as increased positive mood and a sense of greater altruism (Griffiths, et al., 2006). These self-ratings were confirmed by people who knew the volunteers well. The finding of increased altruism seems to concur with the finding by Lerner and Lyvers that psychedelic drug users reported greater concern for others compared to users of other drugs and non-drug users. Additionally, a study I discussed elsewhere suggested that psilocybin could reduce anxiety and depression in people with terminal cancer. 

On the other hand, it might be tempting to expect too much from psychedelic drugs. Lerner and Lyvers noted that they were expecting that psychedelic drug users might cope better with stress than non-drug users because they believed that mystical and spiritual experiences would act as a buffer against stressful events. On the contrary they found that psychedelic drug users did not differ from non-drug users in their self-reported ability to cope with stress. Interestingly, both of these groups did report better coping than users of other drugs. This seems to suggest that users of non-psychedelic drugs do not cope well with stress, and this may well be a factor in their drug use. Móró et al. also found that psychedelic drug users did not differ from others (including users of other drugs as well as non-drug users in this study) in their apparent ability to cope with stress or in their sense of having a purpose in life. Additionally, I think it worth noting that Móró et al. found that their spirituality measure had only quite weak positive correlations with coping ability and purpose in life. This seems to suggest that one’s spirituality (i.e. one’s relationship to God or “ultimate transcendence”) may make little practical difference to one’s ability to cope with daily life or to conceive a sense of purpose in one’s life. I am inclined to speculate that mystical and spiritual beliefs might be of particular benefit when dealing with ultimate concerns such as dying, but may have considerably less practical value when dealing with more mundane concerns or even in relation to deciding one’s life direction. More research may help to make these issues clearer.

Additionally, Lerner and Lyvers were somewhat surprised to find that psychedelic drug users did not differ from the other groups in the value they placed on humility. Mystical experiences tend to be associated with a sense of self-transcendence that the authors initially thought might induce people to feel more humble about their place in the greater scheme of things and to attach less importance to their own ego. However, this notion is debatable. Sceptical writer John Horgan considers that in some people mystical experiences could actually inflate their egos leading to grandiose beliefs about their superiority to others. That is, a person having a mystical experience might come away convinced that they are a prophet or a guru, or otherwise feel that they are more “enlightened” than other people.  

One final note of caution I want to make is of a more philosophical nature. I think psychedelic drugs have great potential value, both as therapeutic tools and in research about the nature of the mind and consciousness. Mystical experiences induced by these drugs appear to have quite profound personal significance for those who experience them. One of the apparent features of the psychedelic mystical experience is that people experience, at least temporarily, a sense that deep truths about the nature of objective reality are being revealed to them. After the psychedelic trip ends some people might come away convinced that these experiences are genuine indicators of something real, whereas others may conclude that the experiences are an illusion. I don’t think research has clarified the proportion of people who find these “insights” convincing” compared to those who have doubts, so I think this is worth further study.[1] My own belief is that while such experiences may indeed be wonderful and worthwhile, they do not provide valid evidence about the nature of reality. I agree with Sam Harris who has stated that we need to make a distinction between describing the nature of the psychedelic experience and making claims about the nature of reality. He says we should be very slow to extrapolate from what one experiences in the darkness of one’s closed eyes to what is true of the universe. He goes on to say that we need to be interested in the full spectrum of human experience and to be able to speak about it rationally without engaging in pseudoscience. Perhaps, future research might consider what benefits psychedelic drugs might have for people who are open to the full psychedelic experience, yet willing to remain sceptical about their ability to reveal “ultimate truths”.

 This article has previously appeared on Psychology Today on my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else.

Follow me on Facebook, Google Plus, or Twitter.

© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided.  

Other posts about psychedelic drugs and/or spirituality

Psilocybin and personality

Psilocybin and brain function

Psilocybin for anxiety and depression in cancer

DMT, aliens and reality – part 1

DMT, aliens and reality – part 2

DMT: Gateway to Reality, Fantasy or What?

Troubled Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard

Peak Experiences in Psilocybin Users 

 

References

Griffiths, R., Johnson, M., Richards, W., Richards, B., McCann, U., & Jesse, R. (2011). Psilocybin occasioned mystical-type experiences: immediate and persisting dose-related effects. Psychopharmacology, 218(4), 649-665. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2358-5

Griffiths, R., Richards, W., Johnson, M., McCann, U., & Jesse, R. (2008). Mystical-type experiences occasioned by psilocybin mediate the attribution of personal meaning and spiritual significance 14 months later. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 22(6), 621.

Griffiths, R. R., Richards, W. A., McCann, U., & Jesse, R. (2006). Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance. Psychopharmacology, 187(3), 268-283. doi: 10.1007/s00213-006-0457-5

Lerner M, & Lyvers M (2006). Values and beliefs of psychedelic drug users: a cross-cultural study. Journal of psychoactive drugs, 38 (2), 143-7 PMID: 16903453

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. doi: 10.1177/0269881111420188

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 (3), 188-98 PMID: 22111402

---

[1] In a previous article I noted that many users of the drug DMT experience striking visions of non-human entities, and that some users were left convinced that these were somehow objectively real. 

Psilocybin could improve quality of life in the terminally ill

A recent study of people with advanced-stage cancer found that a single dose of psilocybin led to improvements in anxiety and depression. Psilocybin might enhance mood by shifting attention away from negative and towards positive emotional information. Mystical experiences occurring under the influence of psilocybin could help ease existential anxiety by changing a person’s attitudes towards death and dying. Research studies in this area have not used adequate experimental controls and therefore these results should be considered tentative until more rigorous research has been conducted. 

A pioneering studies in the 1970s found that psychotherapy combined with the use of psychedelic drugs such as LSD appeared to help to reduce depression, physical pain and anxiety about death in people with terminal cancer (Grof, Goodman, Richards, & Kurland, 1973). The authors’ impression was that the patients who made the most dramatic changes were those who had a “peak mystical experience” of oneness with the universe usually preceded by an experience of spiritual “death and rebirth”. Profound experiences of this nature were seen in 25% of sessions. The authors argued that profound religious and spiritual experiences, such as a “peak mystical experience” were particularly effective in helping patients accept death. However, they also noted that other kinds of emotional improvements frequently occurred even without the presence of a mystical experience.

This study was of an exploratory nature and due to the absence of any control group it is not possible to know whether the effects observed were specifically due to drug effects, the psychotherapy, or even placebo effects. In spite of these promising results, psychedelic drug research was effectively banned when these substances were made illegal. In recent years there has been something of a revival of interest in this area. A 2011 study again examined the use of psychedelic drugs in people with advanced-stage cancer (Grob et al., 2011). This study used psilocybin rather than LSD because research suggests that the effects of psilocybin are more euphoric and less likely to produce panic or paranoid reactions than LSD. The drug produced no adverse medical effects and was well-tolerated.

The treatment appeared to have beneficial effects on depression and anxiety. Six months after taking psilocybin, the patients had a significant reduction in depression. What I found particularly interesting was that they also showed a reduction in trait anxiety that was significant at 1 and 3 months after treatment. Trait anxiety refers to how much anxiety a person generally feels and is usually considered a stable feature of one’s personality, closely related to a broader trait called neuroticism. The results of this study might seem to suggest that psilocybin could produce a lasting change in this feature of personality. As noted in a previous article, another study using healthy volunteers found that psilocybin produced lasting changes in the personality trait of openness to experience (MacLean, Johnson, & Griffiths, 2011). However, this study found no change in other personality traits, including neuroticism. It seems plausible that when people have advanced-stage cancer their ratings of their general levels of anxiety would be elevated compared to healthy people due to their illness. If this is the case, perhaps psilocybin helped reduce their heightened anxiety to more normal levels. However, without knowing the patients’ levels of trait anxiety before their illness it is not possible to draw any definite conclusions.

Another limitation of this study, like the 1970s study cited earlier, is that there was no comparison group of patients who did not receive psilocybin to serve as an experimental control. For this reason, it is not possible to rule out the possibility that the beneficial effects observed were due to placebo effects. For example, the patients might have benefited simply from the care and attention they received from the researchers during the study. The authors of the study acknowledged this limitation and explained that they believed that it would have been unethical to withhold a potentially beneficial treatment from the terminally ill. One possible response to this is that the psilocybin treatment could have been compared to a more conventional treatment such as psychotherapy. If a single-dose of psilocybin could be shown to be as or even more beneficial than more costly and intensive treatment strategies such as psychotherapy then care of the terminally ill could be enriched.

In spite, of these limitations, the study results remain suggestive. Studies with healthy volunteers have found that after a single dose of psilocybin, volunteers reported improvements in mood, attitudes to life and the self, positive behaviour changes including improved relationships, and increased spirituality, as well as increased satisfaction with life that persisted for months afterwards (Griffiths et al., 2011; Griffiths, Richards, McCann, & Jesse, 2006). Interestingly, Griffiths et al. (2011) found that volunteers reported increases in “death transcendence”. That is, participants expressed an increased belief that there is continuity after death, e.g. belief that death is not an ending but a transition to something even greater than this life. It seems worth noting that all the participants in this study were involved in religious or spiritual activities prior to the study. Thus, they might have been especially receptive to the idea that “spiritual” experiences induced by the drug could represent real insights into reality.

A forthcoming paper on the effects of psilocybin on attention provides insights into why psilocybin might have beneficial effects on mood and relieving depression (Kometer et al., 2012). People who are depressed show a bias towards paying more attention to negative than to positive stimuli. Depressed people find it harder to recognise happy facial expressions and respond more slowly to positive compared to negative words in emotional tasks. This emotional bias has been linked to problematic functioning in the serotonin system in the brain. Psilocybin and LSD produce their hallucinogenic effects by acting on the serotonin system, and Kometer et al.’s study found evidence that psilocybin can influence attentional biases in a positive way. In this study, volunteers under the influence of psilocybin experienced increased positive mood and took longer to react to negative or neutral words compared to positive ones. Interestingly, these effects did not occur when participants had been administered a drug called ketanserin, which blocks serotonin receptors[1], before being given psilocybin. This suggests that psilocybin can induce biases of attention towards positive and away from negative emotional stimuli. Additionally, these effects appear to be due to the action of psilocybin on the serotonin system. If it is true that psilocybin treatment can be effective in reducing depression, these findings seem to suggest a plausible mechanism. This might explain why volunteers in the studies by Griffiths et al. reported persistent positive changes in their attitudes to many aspects of their lives.

The findings from these studies seem very promising. The research cited does seem to suggest that mystical experiences induced by psilocybin can help a person overcome the fear of death. Additionally, psilocybin seems to have a generally positive effect on mood and attitude that could alleviate depression. A limitation of the studies cited is that they did not use no-drug control groups for comparison to show that the effects were actually due to the drug rather than other factors such as placebo effects. Thus, it would be premature to definitely conclude that psilocybin is an effective treatment for depression and existential anxiety in people with cancer, even though the results seem very suggestive. More rigorous research designs are needed to provide more conclusive evidence. Additionally, it would be interesting to examine whether psilocybin might help a person with cancer accept death if they do not have any religious or spiritual beliefs. 

---

[1] For those who are interested, ketanserin specifically blocks 5-HT_2A receptors. The 5-HT_2A receptor system has been implicated in depressive pessimism and is known to be affected by antidepressant drugs.  

This post has previously appeared on Psychology Today in my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else

Follow me on Facebook, Google Plus, or Twitter.

© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided.  

Other posts about psychedelic drugs and/or spirituality

Psilocybin and personality

Psilocybin and brain function

DMT, aliens and reality – part 1

DMT, aliens and reality – part 2

DMT: Gateway to Reality, Fantasy or What?

Troubled Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard

The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users 

Peak Experiences in Psilocybin Users

References

            Griffiths RR, Johnson MW, Richards WA, Richards BD, McCann U, & Jesse R (2011). Psilocybin occasioned mystical-type experiences: immediate and persisting dose-related effects. Psychopharmacology, 218 (4), 649-65 PMID: 21674151

           Griffiths RR, Richards WA, McCann U, & Jesse R (2006). Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance. Psychopharmacology, 187 (3) PMID: 16826400

            Grob CS, Danforth AL, Chopra GS, Hagerty M, McKay CR, Halberstadt AL, & Greer GR (2011). Pilot study of psilocybin treatment for anxiety in patients with advanced-stage cancer. Archives of general psychiatry, 68 (1), 71-8 PMID: 20819978

Grof, S., Goodman, L. E., Richards, W. A., & Kurland, A. A. (1973). LSD-Assisted Psychotherapy in Patients with Terminal Cancer. Int. Pharmacopsychiat., 8, 129-144.

            Kometer M, Schmidt A, Bachmann R, Studerus E, Seifritz E, & Vollenweider FX (2012). Psilocybin biases facial recognition, goal-directed behavior, and mood state toward positive relative to negative emotions through different serotonergic subreceptors. Biological psychiatry, 72 (11), 898-906 PMID: 22578254

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. doi: 10.1177/0269881111420188