CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Concord Prison Experiment

Psychological experiment including prison inmates and the effects of psychedelics

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 31, 2026
Entity authorityQ5158849
Source-derived summary

The Concord Prison Experiment, conducted from 1961 to 1963, was designed to evaluate whether the experiences produced by the psychoactive drug psilocybin, derived from psilocybin mushrooms, combined with psychotherapy, could inspire prisoners to leave their antisocial lifestyles behind once they were released. The efficacy was to be judged by comparing the recidivism rate of subjects who received psilocybin with the average for other Concord inmates.

Staff

The experiment was conducted between February 1961 and January 1963 in Concord State Prison, a maximum-security prison for young offenders, in Concord, Massachusetts by a team of Harvard University researchers. The team were under the direction of Timothy Leary and included Michael Hollingshead, Allan Cohen, Alfred Alschuder, George Litwin, Ralph Metzner, Gunther Weil, and Ralph Schwitzgebel, with Madison Presnell as the medical and psychiatric adviser. The original study involved the administration of psilocybin manufactured by Sandoz Pharmaceuticals to assist group psychotherapy for 32 prisoners in an effort to reduce recidivism rates. The researchers would administer psilocybin to themselves along with the prisoners, on the grounds of "[creating] a sense of equality and shared experience, and to dispel the fear that often accompanies relationships between [experimenters] and [subjects]".

Results

Records at Concord State Prison suggested that 69% of the 32 subjects would return to prison within six months of parole. However, after six months, only 8 (25%) of those on parole had returned, six for technical parole violations and two for new offenses. Few short-term projects with prisoners have been effective to even a minor degree.

In addition, a selection of personality tests were administered to the prisoners both before and after the psilocybin experiences, consisting of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, the California Psychological Inventory, the Maher Sentence Completion Test (designed to measure cynicism in prisoners), and a Thematic Apperception Test (constructed to measure motives).

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Concord Prison Experiment” as psychological experiment including prison inmates and the effects of psychedelics. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Concord, Prison and Experiment.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1961, 1963—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Concord, Prison and Experiment providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Concord Prison Experiment”, the useful work is to connect “psychological experiment including prison inmates and the effects of psychedelics” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 31, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5158849. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1961 and 1963.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Concord Prison Experiment”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Concord Prison Experiment primary sources, Concord Prison Experiment archive and Concord research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Concord Prison Experiment”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Concord Prison Experiment” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.