We report here for the first time the potential energy surfaces (PES) of phenyletilamine (PEA) and meta‐tyramine (m‐OH‐PEA) at the D2 dopamine receptor (D2DR) binding site. PESs not only allow us to observe all the critical points of the surface (minimums, maximums, and transition states), but also to note the ease or difficulty that each local minima have for their conformational inter‐conversions and therefore know the conformational flexibility that these ligands have in their active sites. Taking advantage of possessing this valuable information, we analyze how accurate a standard docking study is in these cases. Our results indicate that although we have to be careful in how to carry out this type of study and to consider performing some extra‐simulations, docking calculations can be satisfactory. In order to analyze in detail the different molecular interactions that are stabilizing the different ligand‐receptor (L‐R) complexes, we carried out quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) computations and NMR shielding calculations. Although some of these techniques are a bit tedious and require more computational time, our results demonstrate the importance of performing computational simulations using different types of combined techniques (docking/MD/hybrid QM‐MM/QTAIM and NMR shielding calculations) in order to obtain more accurate results. Our results allow us to understand in details the molecular interactions stabilizing and destabilizing the different L‐R complexes reported here. Thus, the different activities observed for dopamine (DA), m‐OH‐PEA, and PEA can be clearly explained at molecular level.