This article was taken from PsyPost, a psychology news website, and focuses on reporting some interesting findings from a new research study that found psychedelic drugs could reduce alcohol consumption. The news article prefaces with an adequate amount of context and explains the study’s purpose in testing new treatment options for alcoholism, which is “responsible for untold human suffering and costs society billions of dollars”. The author of this article presents the study results in an objective manner, even mentioning results where no effect was found and acknowledging the limitations of the study results and the use of preclinical animal models. Overall, the article was well-written and seems credible, thus, I thought it deserved a 5 out of 5.
As mentioned previously, I thought that the news article’s telling of the research was accurate; however, if I were to think of a limitation, it would be that the author only pulled perspectives from the original research article. The claims made were based on either the research results or an interview conducted with the study author. This could cause the presentation of the results in this article to be a little biased, though I believe the article to still be credible because it mentions that there is still a lot more to learn about a possible relationship between psychedelics and alcohol consumption.
Furthermore, the presentation of the article is clean, with no advertisements and only one pop-up at the beginning for the option to get notifications from the website. As well, the article author’s other articles and contact information are clearly linked. Finally, the original research article is clearly linked at the bottom of the article, however, it is not open access.
Published in January 2020, PsyPost, a website reporting on advancements in psychology and neuroscience, examines recent findings on the effects of 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and alcohol consumption. PsyPost does an excellent job in explaining the research, using direct quotes from the authors to ensure the correct message is reported.
The format of the article follows that of a typical scientific report, explaining the purpose of the experiment, a summarized methods section, major results found, and conclusions and applications of the study. One major pro to this article is its explanations of the methods and results of the experiment. The methods section was well-summarized in only two sentences, capturing all important details concisely. Furthermore, results were simplified very well in that major results were explained in a manner the lay audience can interpret. In addition to this, the article even acknowledged non-major results from the study, such as how the application of DOI had no effects on overall fluid intake in mice.
One limitation to this review was the lack of outside sources used. While results and conclusions from the study were included with perspectives from the study’s authors, an outside perspective would have been useful in verifying the significance of the results without any bias (intentional or not) that the authors may carry. Furthermore, the original research is paywalled which limits readers from verifying what’s true of the review.
Despite the minor limitations, this review was written with high quality and effectively reports the findings and applications of DOI and is hence deserving of a 5/5.
The views expressed by the reviewers for this article are not endorsed or shared by SciFeye. The interpretation of the review of the news story using the SciFeye Index was done independently by two SciFeye reviewers. We encourage you to conduct your own evaluation of the accuracy and quality of the news story using the Index.