Written by: Elizabeth Aliyeva; Edited by: Elena
Have you ever found yourself sitting alone at midnight, heart racing, as an online quiz claims it can reveal the hidden truths of your mind in just ten questions? Imagine this: You’re scrolling late at night, the glow of your phone illuminating your face as you fall down the rabbit hole of mental health content. A TikTok therapist pops up, listing symptoms of anxiety you swear you’ve felt your whole life. Then another post appears–this one about ADHD. Suddenly, your mind races. Is this me?

You dive deeper, connecting dots you never even knew existed. It’s almost thrilling, uncovering layers of yourself you hadn’t examined before. But here’s the twist: by the time you close the app, you’re left with more questions than answers. Am I just stressed? Overthinking? Or is this a hidden truth about who I really am? Now zoom out. What if this process of self-diagnosis–empowered by endless online information–becomes more than a tool for understanding? What if it starts shaping how we see ourselves, even redefining who we are? Is it a brave new frontier for personal growth–or a dangerous game of pinning labels where they might not belong?
In a new world where “Google it” often replaces “see a doctor”, what does it mean to diagnose yourself? And more importantly, what are we gaining–or losing–in this pursuit of self discovery? As self-diagnosis becomes increasingly common in the digital age, it raises critical questions about the intersection of psychology, technology and identity–challenging us to navigate the fine line between empowering self-awareness and the potential risks of misinterpretation and labeling.
The Science Behind Self-Diagnosis
Self-diagnosis involves identifying psychological or medical conditions in oneself without professional input. While this practice has gained traction with the rise of online mental health resources, it comes with both benefits and risks.

Why We’re Drawn to Self-Diagnosis
Humans are naturally curious about their emotions and behaviours. This curiosity, paired with easy access to online information, creates a perfect storm for self-diagnosis. Cognitive biases, like confirmation bias, play a major role here. This bias causes us to focus on information that aligns with what we already suspect, potentially leading to overconfidence in our self-assessments.
The Benefits of Self-Diagnosis (Farnood et al., 2020)
Awareness and Accessibility: Online resources can provide valuable insights and help people recognize symptoms they might have ignored, encouraging them to seek professional help.
Stigma Reduction: Public discussions about mental health can normalize struggles, making it easier for people to acknowledge and address their concerns.
The Risks of Self-Diagnosis (Farnood et al., 2020)
Overgeneralization: Many mental health conditions share overlapping symptoms. For example, fatigue could stem from depression, anxiety, or simply poor sleep, making accurate self-diagnosis tricky.
Mislabeling: Attaching the wrong label to oneself can lead to unnecessary stress or prevent someone from seeking appropriate treatment.
Undermining Expertise: Relying too heavily on self-diagnosis can discourage people from consulting trained professionals, who use comprehensive tools like diagnostic interviews and standardized assessments.
Research Surrounding Self-Diagnosis
In 2020, Farnood et al. conducted a mixed-methods systematic review of the effects of online self-diagnosis and its influence on the patient-healthcare professional (HCP) relationship. In their research, they shed light on how the internet is transforming the way people approach their health, emphasizing both the benefits and potential pitfalls of this phenomenon.
Trust and Complementarity
Farnood et al. (2020) showed that despite the convenience of online health information, people still trust their HCP’s advice above all else. Online self-diagnosis serves as a complementary tool, not a replacement. Patients use the internet to bridge gaps in accessibility, affordability, and immediacy, especially when waiting for medical appointments (Farnood et al., 2020). Patients essentially demonstrated the adaptive way people use digital resources–not as a substitute for expertise, but as a way to enhance their understanding and engagement.
Productivity in Consultations
Farnood et al. (2020) point to how digital health resources empower patients to be better informed.

By learning about their symptoms in advance, patients can ask more targeted questions during consultations. This preparatory step not only makes appointments more efficient, but also enables patients to play a more active role in their care, aligning with modern, patient-centered healthcare models (Farnood et al., 2020).
HCP-Patient Dynamics
The relationship between patients and HCPs plays a critical role in the effectiveness of online self-diagnosis. Farnood et al. (2020) reveal that when HCPs respond positively to patients’ research, it strengthens trust and collaboration. However, negative reactions–such as dismissing the information outright–can create feelings of embarrassment or distrust. This dynamic underscores the importance of open communication and mutual respect in maintaining a healthy relationship between patients and providers.
The Psychological Impact

Online self-diagnosis has psychological implications for patients and HCPs. On one hand, accessing information can be reassuring, helping people feel proactive while awaiting professional health care (Farnod et al., 2020). On the other hand, misinformation or misinterpretation can lead to unnecessary anxiety and even “cyberchondria”, where excessive online health research worsens mental well-being (Starcevic, 2023). For HCPs, balancing patients’ online research with their own expertise can be challenging, particularly when the information is flawed or overvalued by the patient.
In 2024, Underhill & Foulkes explored the contentious practice of self-diagnosing mental disorders, particularly as expressed in discussions on Reddit. They examined the diverse perspectives surrounding self-diagnosis, shedding light on the social, psychological, and moral dynamics at play.
The Debate on Validity and Harms
Underhill & Foulkes (2024) highlight that self-diagnosis of mental disorders is often seen as inaccurate and potentially harmful. Critics argue that it devalues psychiatric terminology, creates skepticism about genuine mental health struggles, and can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies where individuals adopt the symptoms they identify with (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This reflects broader concerns about the reliability of online mental health resources. When people rely on social media or online tools for self-diagnosis, they risk misunderstanding their symptoms or trivializing serious conditions.
The Role of Socioeconomic Barriers
Proponents of self-diagnosis emphasize that financial constraints and long waitlists make professional diagnosis inaccessible for many (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). Self-diagnosis then becomes a coping mechanism to label and manage one’s distress (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This underscores the intersection between healthcare accessibility and digital self-help. It highlights the necessity of making mental health resources more accessible while also guiding individuals toward accurate self-assessment.
Adolescents and Social Media
Adolescents are particularly criticized in this dataset, as users claim that their self-diagnoses are

driven by identity experimentation, peer pressure, or misinformation from social media (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024).
The perceived immaturity of adolescents and the role of social media in shaping their mental health narratives create a unique tension. Adolescence is a period of heightened identity exploration and sensitivity to social cues, which can make teens more vulnerable to the influence of online mental health trends (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). However, dismissing their experiences may exacerbate their distress and discourage them from seeking help.
Diagnostic Possessiveness
The concept of “diagnostic possessiveness” emerges, where individuals feel protective over psychiatric labels and are wary of their misuse (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This possessiveness stems from the belief that these labels hold significant power and should not be diluted by misapplication (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This highlights a broader cultural reverence for professional diagnosis, even as online self-diagnosis becomes increasingly common. The tension between the need for accessible tools and the sanctity of clinical expertise lies at the heart of the online self-diagnosis debate.
The Need for Validation
Underhill & Foulkes (2024) notes that some users defend self-diagnosis by pointing out that mental health diagnoses often rely on self-reported symptoms. Thus, individuals may feel that they are the best authority on their own experiences (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This philosophical defense of self-diagnosis suggests that some people turn to diagnostic labels not to replace professional input, but to validate their feelings (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024). This mirrors why people turn to the internet for self-diagnosis–seeking validation and a sense of control over their mental health in a world where professional support is often inaccessible.
In 2019, Brycz et al. explored the relationship between metacognitive self (MCS) and the desire for self-diagnostic information (SDMS), providing insights into how individuals seek to understand themselves better.
Understanding Metacognitive Self (MCS)

MCS refers to the capacity to monitor, evaluate and regulate one’s own thoughts, beliefs, and knowledge (Brycz et al., 2019). It forms the foundation for individuals to engage in self-reflection and self-assessment (Brycz et al., 2019). In the context of mental health self-diagnosis, individuals high in MCS may be more likely to seek diagnostic labels or explanations for their symptoms because they value understanding their internal states (Brycz et al., 2019).
Link to Self-Diagnosis
Brycz et al. (2019) showed that individuals with higher MCS consistently demonstrated a stronger desire for self-diagnostic information, including details that could help them interpret their mental states or performance. This aligns with why some people turn to self-diagnosis. They may seek to clarify their distress, trying to make sense of their experiences in the absence of professional guidance. This is particularly relevant for those who face barriers to accessing mental health care.
Persistence and Intrinsic Motivation
Brycz et al. (2019) suggest that those with high MCS are persistent in their pursuit of self-knowledge, even across time. This persistence could explain why some individuals are drawn to online communities (e.g. Reddit) or self-assessment tools to explore potential mental health diagnoses. Self-diagnosis, in this sense, may be seen as a form of self-regulation and self-motivation, driven by an intrinsic need to understand one’s psychological struggles.
Diagnostic Information and Cognitive Regulation
Brycz et al. (2019) links MCS to improved learning and decision making, as individuals high in MCS use diagnostic information to refine their understanding of themselves. While the desire for self-diagnostic information can lead to greater self-awareness, it can also lead to reliance on inaccurate sources or mislabeling of normal distress as pathological (Brycz et al., 2019). Adolescents, in particular, may lack the cognitive maturity to critically evaluare the information they find online (Underhill & Foulkes, 2024).

What Needs to Be Done Next?
The topic of self-diagnosis, especially in relation to mental health, is critically important because it highlights the intersection of psychological self-awareness, information access and the potential risks of misdiagnosis. In today’s digital age, individuals are increasingly turning to the internet to seek out answers for their symptoms, which can lead to both positive and negative outcomes. On the one hand, greater self-awareness can encourage individuals to seek professional help or make changes to improve their mental well-being.
The goal is to foster a balanced approach to mental health self-awareness so that we can empower individuals to critically assess their symptoms, seek reliable information, and make informed decisions about their mental health. Education can help individuals between helpful self-reflection and potentially harmful over-diagnosis or reliance on unverified online sources. Ultimately, I hope to encourage a more informed, nuanced conversation about mental health that reduces stigma and promotes seeking professional support when necessary.
The Role of Metacognition in Understanding One’s Mental State
Schools, workplaces, and public health organizations should implement programs to educate individuals on recognizing mental health issues and understanding the limits and benefits of self-diagnosis. This includes promoting mental health resources that are scientifically validated and professional led. Canada and the United States offer numerous mental health resources, from national programs such as CMHA and NMIH, to specific tools like the Mindshift app and Betterhelp. Integrating metacognitive practices into these resources empowers individuals to develop a deeper understanding of their mental health and improve emotional regulation.
Improve Access to Professional Mental Health Support
Efforts should be made to remove barriers to accessing mental health care, such as cost, stigma and lack of availability. Providing more affordable and accessible counseling services can reduce the temptation for individuals to rely solely on self-diagnosis.
Encourage Critical Thinking and Media Literacy
We need to empower individuals to critically evaluate online health information. Teaching media literacy and how to identify untrustworthy sources is crucial in ensuring that self-diagnosis does not turn into misinformation.
Promote Open Conversations about Mental Health
Encouraging open, supportive dialogues about mental health can reduce stigma and create environments where individuals feel safe seeking professional help. This includes fostering an understanding that mental health is complex and that self diagnosis, while potentially helpful in some cases, is not a substitute for professional assessment.

SUMMARY
TOPIC | KEY POINTS |
Importance of Self-Diagnosis |
|
Psychological Concepts |
|
Social Media Influence |
|
Professional Perspectives |
|
Ethical Concerns |
|
Implications for Support |
|
Call to Action |
|

References
Brycz, H., Kleka, P., Fanslau, A., & Pilarska, A. (2019). Metacognitive Self and Motivation to Seek Diagnostic Information About the Self: A Longitudinal Study. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00117
Farnood, A., Johnston, B., & Mair, F. S. (2020). A mixed methods systematic review of the effects of patient online self-diagnosing in the “smart-phone society” on the healthcare professional-patient relationship and medical authority. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01243-6
Starcevic, V. (2023). Keeping Dr. Google under control: how to prevent and manage cyberchondria. World Psychiatry, 22(2), 233–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.21076
Underhill, R., & Foulkes, L. (2024). Self-Diagnosis of Mental Disorders: A Qualitative Study of Attitudes on Reddit. Qualitative Health Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241288785
Comments