Can psychedelics help train the brain? Scientists have begun to explore whether pairing psilocybin microdosing with neurofeedback training can improve cognitive function. A new study offers early signs that the approach is safe, tolerable, and feasible—but it remains unclear whether it actually enhances thinking skills. The research has been published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.
Psilocybin is the active compound found in certain psychedelic mushrooms. At higher doses, it can cause altered states of consciousness, but at very low “microdoses,” it does not produce hallucinations. Growing research suggests microdosing may subtly enhance mood and cognition, possibly by promoting the brain’s ability to change and adapt.
Neurofeedback, on the other hand, is a technique that uses real-time displays of brain activity—usually via electroencephalography (EEG)—to teach people how to control specific patterns of neural activity.
The researchers from the University of Groningen wanted to explore whether psilocybin could enhance neurofeedback training by increasing the brain’s plasticity, making it more receptive to learning. Their goal was to examine whether this combined approach could improve executive functions, which include skills like working memory, flexible thinking, and self-control.
To test this, the team conducted a small, early-phase study involving 37 participants. These volunteers were recruited from a microdosing workshop in the Netherlands and were not new to the idea of using psychedelics to support mental functioning. Eighteen were randomly assigned to the experimental group, and 19 to a passive control group. The control group did not receive any training during the core part of the study.
The experimental group first completed a week-long period to adjust to microdosing, using low amounts of Psilocybe mexicana truffles. They then participated in three sessions of neurofeedback training, spaced across one week. Before each neurofeedback session, they took a microdose of psilocybin. During the sessions, participants sat in a lab and received visual feedback based on the level of a specific brain rhythm called frontal-midline theta, which is linked to executive function. The goal was to increase this rhythm over time. Participants used self-chosen mental strategies to try to “turn the feedback square red,” which indicated successful upregulation of the target brain activity.
Both before and after the training period, participants completed a battery of cognitive tests and questionnaires. The researchers looked at both lab-based executive function tasks and self-reported assessments of how well participants managed these skills in daily life. Participants also set personalized goals—such as improving focus, reducing anxiety, or feeling more present—and rated their progress.
The study’s main goal was to test whether this kind of training was practical and safe. On that front, the results were promising. No one dropped out, no one reported negative psychological effects, and participants generally rated the sessions as engaging and meaningful. Most reported a strong sense of connection to the study and were motivated to complete the training, despite finding the neurofeedback somewhat difficult.
In terms of brain activity, the researchers observed a trend toward increased frontal-midline theta across sessions, with a large effect size, although the result was just shy of statistical significance. Within individual sessions, changes were more modest. The findings suggest that participants may have started to learn how to self-regulate the target brain rhythm, but three sessions may have been too few to produce consistent changes.
When it came to standard lab tests of executive function, such as tasks that measure memory updating or response inhibition, the results were mixed. There were no clear improvements in reaction times or accuracy that could be attributed to the training. However, participants in the experimental group reported improvements on questionnaires that asked about real-world executive functioning. These self-reported gains were seen across all four areas measured: working memory, mental flexibility, self-monitoring, and inhibition.
Despite these encouraging findings, the study was focused on determining whether psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback is safe and feasible. Because of this, there are several limitations. Most notably, the study lacked an active control group, which makes it difficult to determine whether the observed improvements were truly due to the neurofeedback and psilocybin, or simply the result of participating in an engaging new experience. Participants also knew they were receiving the active intervention, which could have influenced their expectations and self-reports. Although the study included measures of suggestibility and optimism, which were similar between groups, the researchers acknowledge that subtle placebo effects cannot be ruled out.
Moving forward, the research team recommends that future studies include an active control condition, a longer training period, and a larger sample size to test the durability and specificity of the effects. They also suggest exploring the best timing between psilocybin intake and training, as the acute effects of the substance may temporarily reduce the very brain activity participants are trying to increase.
In sum, this early research shows that psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback is feasible and well-tolerated. But it is still unclear whether it results in improved cognitive functioning. While the study cannot yet prove that the intervention improves brain function in an objective sense, it lays important groundwork for future trials. If confirmed, this novel approach could open new possibilities for treating cognitive symptoms that cut across many mental health conditions.
The study, “Psilocybin-assisted neurofeedback for the improvement of executive functions: a randomized semi-naturalistic-lab feasibility study,” was authored by S. Enriquez-Geppert, J. Krc, F. J. O’Higgins, and M. Lietz.