Agents and Actions

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 48–51 | Cite as

Psychophysics of psilocybin and 48-148-148-1

  • Jay H. Shaffer
  • Richard M. Hill
  • Roland Fischer
Other Topics


Visual, tactile and intermodal sensory magnitude estimations were performed by college students prior to and after the oral administration of either 160 μg/kg psilocybin or 30 mg Δ9-THC. Although the drugs induce inversely related changes in the exponent of the psychophysical power function (R=kS n ), the straight line relationship between log S (Stimulus) and log R (Response) is altered by neither psilocybin nor Δ9-THC. The remarkable consistency of magnitude estimations in the face of a changing exponent and constant may be interpreted as a demonstration of ‘state boundness’ (i.e., performance that is consistently changed and characteristic of a particular state of consciousness).


State Boundness College Student Oral Administration Power Function Magnitude Estimation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. S. Stevens,Issues in Psychophysical Measurement, Psychol. Rev.78, 426–450 (1971).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. Fischer,A Cartography of the Ecstatic and Meditative States, Science174, 897–904 (1971).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Cotten,Symposium: Marihuana and Its Surrogates, Pharmac. Rev.23, 263–380 (1971).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    E. Poulton,The New Psychophysics: Six Models for Magnitude Estimation, Psychol. Bull.69 (1), 1–19 (1968).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. C. Baird,Psychophysical Analysis of Visual Space (Pergamon, Oxford 1970).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. S. Stevens,To Honor Fechner and Repeal His Law, Science133, 80–86 (1961).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    R. Fischer andG. Landon,On the Arousal State-Dependent Recall of ‘Subconscious’ Experience: Stateboundness, Br. J. Psychiat.120, 159–172 (1972).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    E. Poulton,Choice of First Variables for Single and Repeated Multiple Estimates of Loudness, J. exp. Psychol.80, 249–253 (1969).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. C. Baird,A Cognitive Theory of Psychophysics, Scand. J. Psychol.II, 89–102 (1970).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. Fischer, F. Griffin, R. Archer, S. Zinsmeister andP. Jastram,The Weber-Ratio in Gustatory Chemoreception; an Indicator of Systemic (Drug) Reactivity, Nature207, 1049–1053 (1965).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    R. Fischer andR. Kaelbling Increase in Taste Acuity with Sympathetic Stimulation, in:Recent Advances in Biological Psychiatry (Ed. J. Wortis; Grune and Stratton, New York 1967), p. 183–195.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    W. Hess,Das Zwischenhirn und die Regulierung von Kreislauf und Atmung (Thieme, Leipzig 1938);Das Zwischenhirn (Schwabe, Basel 1949).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Gellhorn,Further Studies on the Physiology and Pathophysiology of the Tuning of the Central Nervous System, Psychosomatics10, 94 (1969).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    H. von Foerster,Computing in the Semantic Domain, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.184, 239 (1971).PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jay H. Shaffer
    • 1
  • Richard M. Hill
    • 1
  • Roland Fischer
    • 2
  1. 1.College of Medicine and College of OptometryThe Ohio State UniversityColumbus
  2. 2.Drug Treatment and Research CenterVeterans Administration HospitalWashington, D. C.

Personalised recommendations