CREATIVITY, HYPNOSIS, AND PSYCHEDELICS

Here is part of an article that Sheryl Attig and I wrote about psychedelic, hypnosis, and creativity. For the list of references and the complete article, see Attig, S., & Krippner, S. (2025). Hypnosis, psychedelics, and creativity: An overview and analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 1–24. [Online]. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207144.2025.2555431

CREATIVITY, HYPNOSIS, AND PSYCHEDELICS

Throughout history, people have altered their consciousnesses, using tools such as hypnosis and psychedelics, to foster creativity (Zausner, 2022). Sergei Rachmaninoff, the talented Russian conductor, pianist, and composer, experienced a nervous breakdown at the age of twenty-one because of the unfavorable reception accorded to his poorly performed Symphony No. 1. No amount of subsequent success as a conductor or pianist would revive his morale. For three months, seeking treatment, Rachmaninoff visited Nikolai Dahl daily, who was a physician who specialized in what today would be called hypnotically facilitated psychotherapy. Following preliminary hypnotic instructions, Dahl repeated specific statements such as, “You will begin to write another concerto; you will work with great facility.” The hypnotic suggestions were remarkably effective. Rachmaninoff’s gloom lifted and he began composing again with speed and inspiration, finishing his Concerto No. 2 in C Minor for Piano and Orchestra. Rachmaninoff dedicated the concerto to Dr. Dahl, and it was a critical success and remains a favorite with concert audiences.

Psychedelic (i.e., “mind-manifesting”) substances have also been used to evoke creativity. In 1965, psychiatrist Humphry Osmond and architect Kyo Izumi revealed that they had utilized psychedelics in the design of a mental hospital. Izumi took LSD during visits to traditionally designed mental hospitals to learn of their effect on patients. He found the long corridors and pale colors frightening and bizarre. The result of the Osmond-Izumi collaboration was a decentralized series of unimposing buildings with pleasant colors and no corridors; Izumi recalled that under LSD the corridor had “seemed infinite,” and “it seemed as if I would never get to the end of it” (Izumi, 1966, as cited in Krippner, 1968, p. 50).

Hypnosis and psychedelics both “include significant alterations in perception, dominance of sensation and imagery over verbal-associative thinking, relaxed ego boundaries, changes in bodily feelings, and the suspension of conventional reality-orientation to space, time, and self” (Mogar, 1965, p. 151). We will review both the research literature and first-person accounts on the topic and will suggest possible psychological and psychoneurological mechanisms that explain how creativity is enhanced by hypnosis and psychedelics.

What is creativity? An idea or product must be both original and useful to be considered creative (Runco & Jaeger, 2012). A cat walking across the keyboard produces original work, but it is not useful, so it is not considered creative. Stein (1953) recognized that creative works may be useful only to some groups and sometimes deemed valuable only after time has passed. Torrance (1962), the pioneer of creativity research, described the creative process as one of sensing gaps or missing elements, forming ideas or hypotheses about how to fill those gaps, evaluating the hypotheses, and communicating the results.

Creativity is the result of a multitude of subcomponents and processes (Wallas, 1926), some of which can include opposing forces. For example, convergent thinking requires pursuing a single solution to a well-defined problem (Mednick, 1962), such as identifying what concept the words elephant, house and snow have in common (e.g., white). Divergent thinking entails generating multiple possible solutions to an ill-defined problem (Guilford, 1967), such as identifying the possible uses for a brick. Convergent thinking requires focus and persistence while divergent thinking requires less focus and constraint (Lippelt et al., 2014). The creative process often needs both divergent thinking to generate new ideas, and convergent thinking to evaluate which idea is best. Creativity is an elusive process; one “product” might take years to emerge while another may occur in a “flash of insight.”

Hypnosis

Prior to the practice of hypnosis being developed in the 18th century, hypnotic-like procedures were used for millennia by shamans in tribal rituals, in the court of the Pharaoh, Druid chanting, and in Asclepius’s “temple sleep” (Krippner, 2005). Most indigenous societies still use a variety of methods to alter consciousness (Bourguignon & Evascu, 1977): sacred geography, storytelling, verbal instructions, singing or chanting, percussion or other instruments, ritual objects, olfaction, gustatory stimulation and dietary practices, cleansing, tactile stimulation, movement, body painting, drama, and waking sleeping cycles (Krippner & Kremer, 2010).

Hypnotherapists have utilized artistic creativity during hypnosis to help clients heal, such as Raginsky (1963), who had hypnotized clients sculpt with clay, then interpret the meaning. Another therapist had a severely mentally ill man reflect on his self-portraits to seek their underlying meaning, which led to a breakthrough that four months of therapy had failed to produce (M. K. Bowers, 1966).

In early research on hypnosis and creativity, participants in hypnosis were compared to those doing relaxation exercises with the goal of exploring which type of hypnotic suggestions work best. Effective suggestions for enhancing creativity included telling clients to notice things they previously overlooked, to draw on prior experiences, to perceive in unconventional ways, to not worry about criticism, to remember what it feels like to have insights, and to be confident. However, when suggestions intended to reduce fear and enhance confidence were not included, creativity was not enhanced as much (P. G. Bowers, 1965). There is some evidence that having people pretend to be hypnotized is enough to relax them and have them become more creative (P. G. Bowers, 1967); this has not worked consistently (Gur & Reyher, 1976).

Another approach has been exploring the role of hypnotizability, to determine if people who are more open to suggestions in hypnosis outperform those who are not. The evidence on this matter is mixed, as there are some studies that have found that those high in hypnotizability are more creative (K. S. Bowers & van der Meulen, 1970), especially women (Ashton & McDonald, 1985; K. S. Bowers, 1971; K. S. Bowers & van der Meulen, 1970; Perry et al., 1973), while other evidence indicates a limited or no role in creativity (Ashton & McDonald, 1985; Jackson & Gorassini, 1989; Perry et al., 1973). We should note that correlations in these studies were small to moderate, and creativity was assessed differently from one study to the next, making it impossible to draw firm conclusions about the relationship of hypnotizability to creativity. Further research using the same measures across studies is warranted.

Other factors in the hypnosis-creativity link have been explored. Barber (2000) has described three basic reactions to hypnosis: the initiative-taking, the fantasy-prone, and the hallucinatory. Barber authored a pioneering book (1960) that attempted to dispel incorrect assumptions about LSD, hypnosis, and other topics viewed as “abnormal” and “discontinuous from other psychological phenomenon.” Instead as he pointed out that they were “continuous” and placed them within the context of social psychology using detailed interpretations of the available data. Research supports the intriguing hypothesis that a person’s type of reaction to hypnosis may be more predictive of creativity than the level of hypnotizability. For example, effortless experiencing (i.e., passive receptivity to ideas emerging from the unconscious) in highly hypnotizable individuals predicts enhanced creativity (P. G. Bowers, 1978). Absorption, the tendency to become mentally absorbed and imaginatively involved in stimuli, has also been shown to play more of a role in creativity than hypnotizability (Manmiller et al., 2005). Those who are fantasy-prone, with the ability to create in their head, tend to be more creative (Lynn & Rhue, 1986).

Another line of research has explored using hypnosis for confidence enhancement to increase musical and artistic abilities both during and after hypnosis. In one study, a variety of music students were told during hypnosis that they were well-known musicians, such as Rachmaninov, and then were asked to play while still in hypnosis. Music experts rated the students’ performance in hypnosis as noticeably improved in both technique and emotional depth, but only for those who were highly hypnotizable (Raikov, 1983). In another variation of this experiment (Raikov, 1976), students were told they were famous artists, such as Raphael, and then did a drawing task. Art experts judged their work done in hypnosis to be much improved from that done before hypnosis. In the above studies, most participants reported that they maintained their new musical and artistic skills beyond the hypnotic sessions into everyday waking life, though not always to the same degree experienced in hypnosis.

Psychedelics

Psychedelics have long been used to enhance creativity. Pre-historic artwork from all over the world has been influenced by the use of psychedelics (Lewin, 1991). Indigenous groups that use psychedelics still produce psychedelic-inspired art such as the ayahuasca-inspired textiles of the Shipibo in Peru, the peyote-inspired textiles and bead art of the Huichol in Northern Mexico, and the Acacia tree root inspired dot paintings of the Aboriginal Australians.

Psychedelic dose level plays a significant role in how individuals react to psychedelics. In research, dose levels of psychedelics are categorized as moderate, low, and microdose. Moderate doses are the level most used in research. Moderate dosage is also more common in naturalistic settings, as it often gives people the ideal experience: a full range of beneficial psychedelic effects without the increased risk of a bad trip, which is more common at higher doses.

Some of the earliest research administering moderate doses of LSD found that participants compared to those in a placebo control group developed a greater appreciation for art and music, but no increase in measured creative ability, despite many of the participants believing themselves to be more creative (McGlothlin et al., 1967). Zegans et al. (1967) also reported that only some types of creativity were enhanced with LSD. These studies demonstrate the need for objective measures that assess more than one type of creativity.

To address this need, most contemporary research uses measures that capture multiple aspects of creativity, most commonly the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) that measures both divergent and convergent thinking on verbal and visual items. One such study that had a control group used just the visual items (due to the multilingual context of study) to assess creativity in those attending a two-week long series of ayahuasca ceremonies in Brazil (Frecska et al., 2012). One to two days after the ceremony, only those who had drunk ayahuasca were able to draw highly original solutions to unfinished pictures, a measure of divergent thinking. The researchers speculated that this enhanced visual creativity may have been related to increases in phosphenes (i.e., visions that resemble patterns often seen in tribal art), which had measurably increased with ayahuasca use. Phosphenes and the sense of movement are often depicted in cave art, images long believed to be inspired by psychedelic visions had by ancient people.

Some modern researchers have failed to use control groups but have used parallel versions of tasks in randomized orders to limit any order effect. Researchers have also noted that often only some ways of thinking improve from pretest to post test, evidence that the changes are not due to practice effects but rather are due to the psychedelic. These studies have the advantage of capturing naturalistic psychedelic use by finding people who are primarily using psychedelics for personal reasons at retreat centers at a variety of locations around the world where psychedelic use is legal. In one such study Kuypers et al. (2016) examined what happens during the acute phase (i.e., while under the influence of the psychedelic) while people were on the psychedelic ayahuasca. Participants experienced significant enhancement of divergent thinking but significant impairments in convergent thinking as measured by the Picture Concept Test in comparison to pretest assessments. These findings match the subjective experience of psychedelic use for most people in which thoughts speed up, are chaotic, emotions are intense, and focus is difficult if not impossible. However, with repeated psychedelic use individuals typically gain more cognitive control in this state (Bouso et al., 2013). In this study (Kuypers et al., 2016) participants had taken ayahuasca an average of 27 times. Given the possibility of increased cognitive control with extended use researchers could test if lifetime psychedelic use predicts better convergent thinking abilities while under the intense influence of a psychedelic.

Several studies have measured creativity during the sub-acute phase (roughly 24 hours after psychedelic use) for several psychedelics: ayahuasca, 5-MeO-DMT containing toad secretions, and psilocybin truffles (Kiraga et al., 2021; Mason et al., 2019; Uthaug et al., 2018, 2019). In these studies, researchers used the Picture Concept Test with its colorful images to measure creativity, since Kuypers et al. (2016) found that participants improved on this measure, but not on the Pattern/Lines Meaning Task with black-and white drawings that were of little interest to participants on psychedelics. All but one of these studies (Mason et al., 2019) found increases in convergent thinking, instead finding decreases in convergent thinking. This difference could be due to any number of variations across the studies, including differences in psychedelics, participants, environment, social interactions, and goals.

The most common participant goals were to enhance self-understanding, resolve problems, and curiosity, with a small minority stating interest in healing, awakening, spiritual growth, and transcendence (Kiraga et al., 2021; Kuypers et al., 2016; Mason et al., 2019; Uthaug et al., 2018, 2019). Different goals can drive different thought processes. For example, problem solving likely involves a great deal of convergent thinking while awakening likely involves more divergent thinking. Future research could explore correlations between psychedelic users’ personal goals and their creativity.

In the studies that included follow-ups (i.e., one week to one month later; Kiraga et al., 2021; Uthaug et al., 2018, 2019), convergent thinking increased over time. In each study, positive affect – not typically associated with increases in convergent thinking – also increased over time. Convergent thinking may have been driven by changes in brain entropy, which is at a high level while under the influence of a psychedelic but then gradually decreases. Convergent thinking may also have increased due to environmental factors. There is not much need to be focused during a psychedelic retreat, but there is once people return and go back to work and other adult responsibilities that require focus. Additionally, the increase in convergent thinking may have been driven by a need for understanding, to make sense of what occurred while on a psychedelic and determine how to implement what was learned into one’s life. The biggest limitation to these studies is that in each one roughly half of participants participated in the follow-up. It is likely that the people who could not focus, who decreased in convergent thinking, would be the most likely candidates for not following through with the research protocols. Future research could include more incentives and reminders for participants to increase adherence rates.

Mason et al. (2021) conducted a well-designed double-blind study that measured the acute and long-term effects of psilocybin on creativity. For participants taking psilocybin but not the control group, during the acute phase convergent thinking and some aspects of divergent thinking decreased though the participants’ subjective experience included that of increased insights. However, at the seven-day follow-up assessment, divergent thinking was enhanced in the psilocybin group. Mason et al.’s findings differ from Kuypers et al. (2016), in which divergent thinking increased during the acute phase of psychedelic use. Why? For one, participants in Mason et al. (2021) were taking a psychedelic primarily to be part of a study, not for self-knowledge and introspection like the majority of the participants in Kuypers et al. (2016); therefore, the participants’ goals could have driven divergent thinking. Another factor which loomed larger in Mason et al. (2012) was the use of MRIs to track brain activity during the acute phase. Having to be completely still in a confined, noisy space while on a psychedelic likely interfered with participants relaxing enough to let creativity flow.

The use of MRIs may reduce the overall enhancements of creativity but help reveal some brain mechanisms associated with creativity and psychedelic use (Mason et al., 2012). Lasting decreases in convergent thinking were associated with increased connectivity between the default mode network (DMN) and the frontoparietal network (not associated with experience of ego dissolution), while disintegration of the DMN (associated with ego dissolution) during the acute phase was associated with insight fulness and lasting increases in the generation of novel ideas, i.e., divergent thinking. In the Uthaug et al. (2019) study, the subjective experience of ego-dissolution was associated with long-term increases in convergent thinking while Mason et al. (2012) found it to be associated with immediate and lasting decreases in convergent thinking. The first obvious difference here is that Uthaug et al. (2019) assessed ego-dissolution by subjective criteria while Mason et al. (2012) inferred it from brain activity. The studies also differed in the type of psychedelics used, research goals, participants, and environment. At retreat centers it is common for participants to socialize and discuss their experiences, something which could facilitate convergent thinking and something which would not be part of a lab experiment where individuals were not part of groups.

Low doses of a psychedelic were used to look at general creativity in only one research study. The acute effects of low doses of LSD (50 mg.) were increases in novelty, surprise, originality and symbolic thinking with reduced organization, utility and convergent thinking (Wiebner et al., 2022). This pattern of increased divergent thinking and decreased convergent thinking during the acute phase of psychedelic use was also seen with the use of a moderate dose in Kuypers et al. (2016).

Microdoses are doses of psychedelics so small that there are typically no noticeable psychedelic effects. Prochazkova et al. (2018) investigated the effects of microdoses of psilocybin truffles on creativity in 38 participants at a microdosing event organized by the Dutch Psychedelic Society. Participants completed three creativity tasks before and roughly 90 minutes after ingestion, and they showed improvements in both convergent and divergent thinking. Other work shows that self-reports from people who microdose indicate increases in motivation and focus (Fadiman & Krob, 2017), and both motivation and focus are known to enhance creativity.

The small body of research on these dose levels suggests that microdoses and low doses enhance divergent thinking, but even low doses can disrupt convergent thinking (whereas microdoses do not). However, the research base is small, and more research is needed on psychedelics at lower doses.

In one of the earliest studies to examine the effects of psychedelics on artistic creativity, four graphic artists created paintings while under the influence of mescaline or LSD (Berlin et al., 1955). While the artists’ technical proficiency was somewhat impaired, their use of vivid colors and bolder lines became more common. In contrast, another study examined highly creativ people who produced art while under the influence of psilocybin (Barron, 1963). While experiencing the acute effects of the psilocybin, some were wildly enthusiastic, believing their enhanced sensitivity was allowing them to create great art, only to discover upon sobering up that there was no artistic merit to their creations.

Janiger and Dobkin de Rios (1989) had 60 professional artists paint or draw a Hopi deer kachina (i.e., a painted carving of a deer spirit) before taking LSD and again two hours after. Most artists maintained their initial technical skills but went from their typical conventional, realistic styles to more vibrant, expressionistic ones. The artists reported feeling free of mental sets, rules, inhibitions, and they had a heightened perception of color, details, and emotion. Many years later one participant described the experience of painting while on LSD this way: “The color used became alive on the brush. All self-consciousness, value and judgment disappeared. Paint became like shining liquid metal and ink like expanding jewels.” The researchers (Janiger & Dobkin de Rios, 1989) noted changes in the artwork produced on LSD, namely that it was more inspired by internal exploration, was more symbolic, had a sense of movement, and was more abstract with a greater intensity of color. An art history professor, recruited to judge the artwork, similarly noted the artwork to be more expressive, freer, and more emotionally evocative. Several of the participants were interviewed many years later (Dobkin de Rios & Janiger, 2003; Doblin et al., 1999), and the majority of those interviewed described the experience as extraordinary and as the most important experience in their development as an artist, enhancing their ability, insights, and creativity long after the experiment had ended.

Other research has utilized interviews to understand how psychedelic experiences have influenced professional artists and musicians. Krippner (1977, 2017) interviewed and analyzed data from 210 professional artists (e.g., film makers, poets, painters, photographers, and musicians) who had psychedelic-type experiences at least once through taking psychedelics, other mind-altering substances, through other means like yoga and self-hypnosis. These artists reported that after the psychedelic experience, 64% of them began to use the contents of their visions as the subject matter of their art, and 76% improved their techniques, some with their use of color, while others reported greater access to their emotions and more depth as they approached their work. As one participant explained, “I have found that I can flow through my pen and brush; everything I do becomes a part of myself – an exchange of energy . . . My art attempts to express or reproduce my inner state” (as cited in Krippner, 2017, p. 423). The musicians reported that they changed the texture and mood of their music to capture the feelings experienced after taking a psychedelic out of a desire to share their experience and uplift listeners. Some musicians also claimed that their lyrics began to reflect their experiences. Most chose to work after the psychedelic experience, not during it when they tended to feel overwhelmed. None of the artists reported that their work suffered as the result of these experiences.

One of the best studies to date, though not being placebo- controlled or double blind, explored how psychedelics enhance work creativity (Harman et al., 1966). Low doses of mescaline were given to 26 professionals (architects, engineers, designers, physicists, and theoretical mathematicians), 19 of whom had never had a psychedelic (Fadiman, 2011; Fadiman et al., 1966; Harman et al., 1966). They were coached on how to work with the mescaline and were told it would make them more creative. Three tests that measured divergent and convergent thinking (the Purdue Creativity Test, the Millar Object Visualization Test and the Witkin Embedded Figures Test) were given to the participants several days before taking mescaline, and then again two hours into their mescaline session. Participants performed significantly better on all three tests while under the influence of mescaline showing enhancements in both divergent and convergent thinking. At an 8-week follow-up interview, the participants reported having solved nearly all the work problems and reported lasting increases in creativity.

Several participants were interviewed again years later, when they were advanced in age, and the majority reported that they remained extremely successful in their careers. However, participants were selected for their creative abilities, so caution is warranted when interpreting the results. Fadiman noted that replications of this study failed. What was it that made this one so successful? Fadiman (2011) believes there were several factors that contributed to the success of this study including participant motivation, having well defined problems to work on, coaching, a comfortable setting, being quiet while working on the problems, encouragement from facilitators, attentiveness to appropriate music or the need for silence, time spent together in which participants bounced ideas off of each other as they sobered up while not encouraging people to talk too soon when they are not yet ready.

There are a few examples in which scientists have enhanced their creative problem-solving with psychedelics. Anthropologist Jeremy Narby (2001) went to the Amazon with three molecular biologists who all participated in ayahuasca ceremonies led by a shaman. All three scientists reported receiving visions during the ceremony that were later useful and relevant to their work. However, they also described how ayahuasca was a more difficult path of discovery than their usual mode of working because of the ceremony’s intense emotions, unpredictability of experience, and their inability to replicate such subjective, unusual experiences. American biochemist Kary Mullis (Doyle, 2002) credits LSD with his Nobel Prize-winning work on the polymerase chain reaction, explaining that it allowed him to see himself sitting on a DNA molecule where he could watch the polymerase go by. Astrobiologist Brue Damer (2022) worked for many years trying to understand how life began on planet Earth. Since childhood, Damer intentionally developed his inner visioning capacities, and then as an adult he combined this capacity with ayahuasca, with a system of gradually tapering the ayahuasca dose and allowing his mind to meet the psychedelic halfway. In doing so, Damer experienced a sense of traveling back in time to when he was conceived. Then, he questioned if he could travel even further back, back to the beginning of life on earth; Damer experienced himself as the first inert substance on earth to come to life in a hot spring on the side of a volcano. Three months of contemplation on this vision and a breathwork session finally produced his hot spring hypothesis which has since been featured on the covers of both Scientific American and Astrobiology.

In the time since this discovery, Damer has worked further with psychedelics and suggests we think of psychedelics as “elixirs of discovery,” capable of facilitating “creative breakthroughs in science, technology, design, leadership, and other fields” (Damer, 2024a). To this end Damer (2024b) has co-founded the Center for Multidisciplinary Investigations into Novel Discoveries and Solutions (MINDS; centerforminds.org).

The existing research on scientific breakthroughs is limited, but intriguing. There is some support in the research for general creativity and for art and music. We have touched on some of the ways in which psychedelics and hypnotism enhance creativity. Now let us look at some of the mechanisms that may be behind all this. Just how do psychedelics work their magic?

Mechanisms

Happiness often fuels creativity. Mozart conceptualized most of his musical ideas when he was alone and in a good mood – for example, “traveling in a carriage, or walking after a good meal, or during the night when I cannot sleep” (as cited in Andreasen, 2005, p. 76). Tchaikovsky felt an “immeasurable sense of bliss” when an idea awakened in him and began to take form, saying, “I forget everything and behave like a madman” (as cited by Maisel, 1992, p. 7). The artists who painted the kachina on LSD reported being completely absorbed in the joy of creating their artwork (Dobkin de Rios & Janiger, 2003). When joy is present, fear and worries that restrict cognitive processing disappear, allowing new ways of thinking (Knox et al., 2008).

People often experience immense joy while under the influence of psychedelics, especially if they have mystical experiences. However, intensely negative emotional experiences (“bad trips”) may occur as well. Yet there is often an afterglow, a sense of joy, renewed energy, and mindfulness that persists for days to weeks after the initial 24 hours of exhaustion has subsided (Majic et al., 2015). There are also long-term reductions in negative emotion with psychedelic use. One dose of psilocybin has been shown to immediately and significantly reduce depression and anxiety for up to five years (Harrison, 2023), and microdosing is associated with more positive moods (Anderson et al., 2019). Hypnosis and psychedelic use enhances creativity by making participants feel more confident and less worried, thereby enhancing mood. Positive moods, with their sense of expansiveness, often improve divergent thinking, but not convergent thinking (Baas et al., 2008). However, the positive moods that follow moderate doses of psychedelics and that accompany microdosing are associated with increases in convergent thinking. Perhaps there is a dosing effect with intensely positive moods blocking convergent thinking, and less intense ones enhancing it.

States encountered on psychedelics and in hypnosis often have features that overlap with a flow state, a state which is conducive to creativity (Csikszentmihalyi, 2008). Flow states often include a complete absorption in the experience, clear goals, intense concentration, a loss of self-consciousness and ego, and changes in time whether that be the sense that it is speeding up, slowing down, or nonexistent. Individuals who are the most in the moment, in the most intense flow state, on psychedelics or in hypnosis have the largest increases in creativity. R. Carhart-Harris (2013) has pointed out that psychedelics cause internal and external phenomena to appear profoundly more significant. This increased fascination lends itself to more absorbed, less self-conscious states “magnifying the perceived significance of creative challenges and insights” (Hartogsohn, 2018, p. 3). Increased fascination surely allows people to focus on one thing for much longer than they might normally, which can facilitate creativity.

People on LSD often, with eyes open, perceive the world in much the same way that it has been depicted by Van Gogh, Matisse, Klimt and Picasso, namely, as magical and alive (Grof, 1975). Heightened senses can bring about childlike wonder, openness, and playfulness, all of which contribute to creativity (Andreasen, 2005). Enhanced beauty can facilitate sustained attention. An engineer who took LSD to solve his work problems reported, “the drug appears to maintain motivation to pursue what is aesthetically intriguing to a point far beyond what I would normally do” (Fadiman, 2011, p. 166). Often senses are heightened for some time after taking a psychedelic (Fadiman, 2011) with a growing number of reports that psychedelics can even permanently cure color blindness (Anthony et al., 2020).

Psychedelics and hypnosis facilitate access to the unconscious, specifically forgotten memories, suppressed feelings, and unconsciously held beliefs that when brought to the surface can be “an infinite reservoir of creative potential” (Vaughn as cited in Fadiman, 2011, p. 64). Artist Sherana Frances (2001) describes numerous types of unconscious material as coming to the surface while using psychedelics and during hypnosis; this material inspired her to have insights, heal, and create beautiful drawings. Another person, through hypnosis, revisited beautiful lakes at a summer resort he had been at when he was a small child, something which inspired him to begin authoring novels in which summer resorts played a central role (Greeley, 1991). Psychedelics increase primary process thinking which is emotion-driven, automatic, analogical, and is typically image based (R. L. Carhart-Harris et al., 2014), and hypnosis has a similar effect (De Pascalis, 2024). This is the realm of the unconscious mind – not under our control, emotion-based and populated with images. This increased access to the unconscious is likely the reason that Westerners claim that their number one reason for taking a psychedelic is for enhanced self-awareness (Wolff & Passie, 2018).

Einstein recognized that “We cannot solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them” (cited in Hickman & Banister, 2005, p. 24). Psychedelics shift thinking patterns so that we can think in new ways. In a relaxed waking state, our minds are often focused on beliefs and assumptions, a state of consciousness associated with increased activity in the default mode network (DMN). On psychedelics, however, beliefs and assumptions often seem less important and there is reduced DMN activity (R. L. Carhart-Harris & Friston, 2019), just as those deeply absorbed in hypnosis have reduced DMN activity (Deeley et al., 2012). This shift away from DMN activity allows more attention to be given to emotions and sensory experiences, broadening the scope of consciousness to facilitate new perspective and insights (R. L. Carhart-Harris & Friston, 2019). This reduced DMN activity is associated with enhanced creativity in both psychedelic use (Mason et al., 2021) and with hypnosis (Manmiller et al., 2005).

The brain becomes more interconnected and differently connected on psychedelics and with hypnosis. Heilman et al. (2003) suggested that creativity requires a variety of brain regions to be active and for regions that do not normally communicate to do so; this is precisely what occurs under the acute influence of a psychedelic (R. L. Carhart-Harris et al., 2014) and during hypnosis (McGeown et al., 2015). Parts of the resting state network that do not normally connect become connected on psychedelics (R. L. Carhart-Harris et al., 2016) and remain connected for at least one month afterward (Barrett et al., 2020). Meditation research demonstrates that when there is increased gamma-oscillation synchronization in the brain (i.e., enhanced connectivity) there is a heightened awareness of external stimuli (Lutz et al., 2004). Perhaps the source of creativity is similar in the case of hypnosis and psychedelics, with enhanced sensitivity to external stimuli providing more content to inspire creativity.

Research has consistently shown that creative thinking is accompanied by the coordination of three resting-state networks: the DMN (which creates new ideas), the frontoparietal control network (FPN; which evaluates ideas), and components of the salience network (which helps people to switch between the DMN and FPN as needed; Beaty et al., 2015). The DMN and FPN are usually opposing neural processes, but during creative thinking, individuals often shift back and forth between the two (Beaty et al., 2015). This switching behavior has led to the Dynamic Framework of Thought (DFT) theory.

The DFT theory proposes that creativity requires both constraint and variability of thought (Christoff et al., 2016). There is not one ideal state for creativity, but rather a multitude of states with varying levels of spontaneity and constraint, each state conducive to different types of creative production and evaluation (Girn et al., 2020). The acute phase of a psychedelic is marked by low constraint (R. L. Carhart-Harris et al., 2014) that allows for increases in divergent thinking. After the acute phase there is more constraint, allowing for more convergent thinking to narrow down solutions that have been generated in the divergent thinking phase. This theory matches many people’s subjective experience of psychedelics, though some question the strength of the evidence to support claims about DMN activity (Abraham, 2024), and others recognize that there are not always reductions in DMN on psychedelics (Vollenweider et al., 1997).

Many people believe creativity has a spiritual source. Playwright Henrik Ibsen called creativity “the spark of the divine fire.” Creative people frequently feel as though they go into another reality when they create, a state “analogous to the altered states described by the great mystics” (Andreasen, 2005, p. 37). Several ancient religions had a belief in daimons, powerful spiritual beings capable of influencing human thoughts, emotions, and behaviors (Abraham, 2024). Plato believed that a muse or other deity would possess a person in an altered state and create songs and poetry through them. Puccini said that the music for his opera Madame Butterfly “was dictated to me by God. I was merely instrumental in putting it on paper and communicating it to the public” (as cited in Abell, 1994/1995, p. 117).

Those who have mystical experiences while using a psychedelic have significant increases in creativity (Kangaslampi et al., 2020). Sometimes, with high doses of a psychedelic, people encounter creatures, people, and places that provide insights (Wolff et al., 2019), just as Posford allegedly received song advice from alien creatures when he was on DMT. Another example is Chris Isner, an artist (Instagram@isnerart), who began carving wood after going to the Amazon to drink ayahuasca (Horicatha, 2021) (Figure 4 and 5). A curandero who was singing for him while he was on ayahuasca appeared to him as an anaconda teaching him how to carve wooden bowls in the same way they did in prehistoric times.

Limitations and Future Directions

An increasing amount of research shows both hypnosis and psychedelics can enhance creativity, yet more research is needed. Much of the research thus far has been with small sample sizes, lacks randomized controlled trials, and has a variety of methodological challenges such as quantifying the subjective experience of art and music in meaningful ways. Most research has looked at a narrow use of creativity using validated measures, rather than examining how creativity takes place in the real world and in domains specific to those in the study. People who choose to participate in psychedelic research are often high in Openness and Extraversion and low in anxiety (Almeida et al., 2008), all of which is conducive to creativity, limiting the generalizability of the findings. Some researchers (Harman et al., 1966) recognize that there are elements of psychedelic experiences that may hinder creativity including a reduced capacity for logical thought, difficulty concentrating, inability to control what is happening, anxiety and agitation, reduced ability to communicate, tendency to focus on personal problems, experiences being so beautiful that there is less need to create beautiful things afterward, absorption in the experience, and the fact that from that vantage point solutions and other worldly tasks might seem unimportant, thereby reducing motivation. Intense emotions and unpredict ability of experience can also be challenging (Narby, 2001). Much of this can be avoided by using low, rather than high doses of psychedelics, and by using experienced participants who have more control over their minds while on a psychedelic (Bouso et al., 2013). More research needs to be conducted to determine which psychedelics and hypnotic suggestions are best suited for various creative pursuits. Psychedelic dose and frequency of use also need to be explored further as does combining it with meditation, mindfulness practices, and hypnosis as Ludwig and Levine (1967) did when they successfully combined LSD and hypnosis to treat drug addiction. Combining LSD with hypnosis and therapists gave people more control over their LSD experience, reducing mind wandering, and making its therapeutic effects stronger than LSD use alone.

Interdisciplinary research between neuroscientists, clinical psychologists, anthropologists, scientists, musicians, and artists could produce a more integrated understanding of how both hypnosis and psychedelics can be used to enhance creativity. Large-scale, double blind, placebo-controlled studies on psychedelics and carefully controlled hypnotic interventions are needed to validate and expand upon existing research. Hypnosis and psychedelics both show great promise for enhancing creativity. If researchers can determine how to use them best and publish their results, we could have much underutilized tools become better utilized.