It is ambiguously worded, I agree. I'm on mobile so I've only cursorily scanned the article. Looking at subfig E in figure 1, it seems that differences between

It is ambiguously worded, I agree. I'm on mobile so I've only cursorily scanned the article. Looking at subfig E in figure 1, it seems that differences between active and placebo were minimal. I haven't checked their stats relating to those differences. So I think the effect the authors found does seem small. However, usual caveats: very small study, etc. I'd want to review the reliability and sensitivity of the questionnaires they used. Subjective experiences are of course difficult to capture reliably. Having said that, and considering I've only scanned this briefly, it seems like a well designed study - for what it's doing. Adding the quantitative elements of EEG etc is nice. The discussion section is good, the authors acknowledge several possible weaknesses and explore explanations. So overall, looks interesting, but it's not definitive (and the authors don't claim it is). It's not a refutation of microdosing, it just adds to the literature, and perhaps offers things for future researchers to explore/control.