In today’s digital landscape, access to mental health resources is abundant. From social
media posts to blog articles and self-help videos, individuals experiencing distress
often seek reassurance, understanding, and a sense of relatedness. However, while this wealth of information can be validating, it also presents a significant challenge: the risk of confirmation bias reinforcing unhelpful or
limiting beliefs.
Good examples are the widespread and often oversimplified narratives around addiction,
anxiety, challenging emotions and neurodivergences. Consider a scenario where a person struggling with substance abuse, watches a video in which the speaker
passionately argues that addiction stems from self-harm and a need for control.
While this may be true for the speaker, another individual who developed an
addiction due to peer pressure, social demands, or genetic predisposition may
inadvertently adopt this perspective, distracting themselves from the real
factors they need to address for recovery.
Another good example of how dangerous general narrativescan be seeing in when we only see anxiety as a disorder, or when walks and distractions are effective to address its symptoms. We miss out on the chance
to use it as a helpful tool. Lazarus (1991), a well-known psychologist, actually saw anxiety as a signal that something’s off — it’s our body’s way of pointing out stress or threats. But too often, we’re told to just focus on the
symptoms, like the racing thoughts or that tight feeling in your chest, instead of looking at why we’re feeling anxious in the first place. This can lead to a cycle where we’re just trying to feel better in the moment, rather than
actually figuring out what the anxiety is trying to tell us. If we shift our focus and see anxiety as a way to better understand what’s going on in our lives, we can start addressing the real issues — whether it’s stress, unmet needs, or relationship problems — and build healthier ways to cope in the long run.
More broadly, mental health narratives that gain traction online often present oversimplified explanations for complex issues. For example, social media discussions frequently reduce anxiety to trauma responses, label all mood fluctuations as symptoms of undiagnosed disorders, or encourage self-diagnosis without professional evaluation. While these discussions can provide awareness
and a sense of validation, they also risk steering individuals toward conclusions that may not accurately reflect their experiences.
Understanding Confirmation Bias in Mental Health
Confirmation bias refers to the tendency to seek, interpret, and recall information in ways
that confirm pre-existing beliefs while disregarding contradictory evidence
(Nickerson, 1998). In the realm of mental health, this can lead individuals to
latch onto narratives that feel personally validating but may not be accurate
for their unique situation.
For instance, an individual who believes that their addiction stems solely from trauma may exclusively consume content that supports this view while ignoring
evidence suggesting genetic or environmental contributions. Similarly, a person
struggling with feelings of sadness may encounter online discussions that
suggest they have clinical depression, even when their distress is situational
and temporary. This selective information processing can create roadblocks in
therapy, where clients may resist alternative explanations that challenge their
preferred narrative.
Popular Mental Health Narratives and Their Risks
Certain mental health themes have gained widespread popularity online, shaping how
individuals interpret their own struggles. While these themes can foster
awareness, they can also be misleading when taken as universal truths. Some common examples include:
Trauma as the Root of All Issues: While trauma plays a significant role in many mental health conditions, not all psychological distress stems from past trauma. Attributing every struggle to trauma can lead individuals to overlook other contributin factors, such as lifestyle, coping mechanisms, neurobiological predispositions.
Toxicity of All NegativeEmotions: Social media often promotes the idea that experiencing negative emotions is inherently unhealthy. In reality, sadness, anger, and frustration are normal and necessary emotional responses that contribute to persona growth and resilience.
Self-Diagnosis and Pathologizing Normal Experiences: Increased access to psychological terminology has led many to self-diagnose based on online checklists or anecdotes. While self-awareness is valuable, misdiagnosing oneself without professional input can lead to unnecessary distress and prevent individuals from seeking appropriate care.
Neurodivergence as an Explanation for Every Struggle: The rise of awareness around ADHD and autism has helped many individuals access needed support, but it has also contributed to a trend where common difficulties, such as forgetfulness or social discomfort, are automatically attributed to neurodivergence without a thorough assessment.
These narratives can be prejudicial because they encourage individuals to adopt rigid
identities around their struggles rather than exploring the full range of factors influencing their mental health. Therapy provides a space to refine personal beliefs and needs by examining evidence-based perspectives rather than simply following prevailing narratives.
Individualized Treatment Over Generalized Narratives
Mental health conditions, including addiction, are multifaceted and deeply personal.
While shared experiences can provide comfort, healing requires an
individualized approach that considers each person’s unique history, triggers, and coping mechanisms. Research supports a biopsychosocial model of mental health, which highlights genetic predisposition (Volkow et al., 2016),
environmental influences (Koob & Volkow, 2016), and psychological factors
(McLellan et al., 2000) as key contributors.
Relying on one-size-fits-all explanations can obscure these complexities.
This is where professional therapy plays a crucial role. By engaging in individual sessions, clients can explore their lived experiences rather than passively adopting generalized narratives. Therapists help clients uncover personal patterns, emotional triggers, and tailored strategies for overcoming their
struggles.
There are other ways to engage with our mental health other than the classic therapy
sessions. In the example of addiction, people can engage for free with The 12-step program, developed by Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), which is a widely
recognized framework that fosters personal reflection and individualized healing. Contrary to popular belief, the 12-step model does not dictate a singular cause or solution for addiction. Instead, it guides participants
through a structured process of self-examination, accountability, and personal
growth (Kurtz, 2002).
Participants are encouraged to identify their own limitations, explore the underlying causes of their substance use, and develop personalized strategies for change. The
program’s emphasis on moral inventory, amends, and spiritual exploration (which
can be interpreted in a secular way) allows for a broad and individualized approach to recovery. Studies have shown that AA and similar 12-step programs can be effective, particularly when participants engage with the process in a way that aligns with their personal beliefs and needs, which can be refined in therapy rather than merely following a narrative presented (Kelly et al., 2020).
What I am proposing is that, whilst it is extremely important to be aware of how we feel and how such feelings are impacting our wellbeing and emotional development, we
need to refrain from being guided by what others are going through. In the
example of addiction as a self-harm and control tool, one can ask themselves, “Am
I purposefully trying to harm myself?”, “Is there any part of this habit that make me feel any degree of control?”. Engaging in substance misuse is inherently a self-harming acting, as irrelevant of the quantity, most of these substances will be harmful to some degree (World Health Organization,
2023), and we are taking them voluntary.
But when self-harm is associated to control, what is implied is that one is
purposefully harming themselves with the intent of achieving a sense of control.
Often these people have gone their own personal journey to overcome and evolve, becoming successful and grateful in a way that they feel compelled to help others by
sharing what they discovered. More often than not, those mass narratives come
from a place of compassion and helpfulness. However, we must not adopt other’s journey but instead embrace our own.
While it is natural to seek validation in mental health narratives, individuals must remain
open to diverse perspectives and professional guidance. Confirmation bias can inadvertently limit personal growth by reinforcing incomplete or misleading beliefs. Engaging in therapy and self-exploration allows for a nuanced understanding of one’s struggles and the development of effective, personalized coping strategies.
Rather than subscribing to generalized explanations, individuals benefit most from working with professionals who can help them navigate their unique journeys. As mental health conversations continue to flourish online, fostering critical thinking
and an openness to multiple perspectives will be key in supporting true healing and development.
I am not asking for people to stop educating themselves and being curious. I am asking
that we don’t believe in those blindly, that we discuss those with our therapist or mental health supports: “I have seen this theory and resonated with it, can we explore how it fits with me?”
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice-Hall.
Kelly, J. F., Humphreys, K., & Ferri, M. (2020). Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step
programs for alcohol use disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (3).
Khantzian, E. J. (1997). The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: A
reconsideration and recent applications. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4(5), 231-244.
Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2016). Neurobiology of addiction: A neurocircuitry analysis. The
Lancet Psychiatry, 3(8), 760-773.
Kurtz, E. (2002). Alcoholics Anonymous: A cult or a cure? Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Psychiatry, 36(3), 276-279.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
McLellan, A. T., Lewis, D. C., O’Brien, C. P., & Kleber, H. D. (2000). Drug dependence, a chronic
medical illness: Implications for treatment, insurance, and outcomes evaluation. JAMA, 284(13), 1689-1695.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of
General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220.
Volkow, N. D., & Morales, M. (2015). The brain on drugs: From reward to addiction. Cell, 162(4), 712-725.
Volkow, N. D., Koob, G. F., & McLellan, A. T. (2016). Neurobiologic advances from the brain disease model of addiction. New England Journal of Medicine, 374(4), 363-371.
World Health Organization. (2023). No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.
World Health Organization. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/04-01-2023-no-level-of-alcohol-consumption-is-safe-for-our-health