Content uploaded by Deborah Lupton
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Deborah Lupton on Apr 07, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Deborah Lupton & Clare Southerton
#ActuallyAutistic: Competing Cultures of Expertise and Knowledge
in Relation to Autism and ADHD Self-Diagnosis on TikTok.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.29
Cite as:
Lupton, Deborah, and Clare Southerton. 2024.
#ActuallyAutistic: Competing Cultures of Expertise and Knowledge
in Relation to Autism and ADHD Self-Diagnosis on TikTok.
Historical Social Research 49 (3): 188-212.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.29
For further information on our journal, including tables of contents, article abstracts, and
our extensive online archive, please visit https://www.gesis.org/en/hsr.
Published in:
Historical Social Research 49 (2024) 3
Historical Social Research 49 (2024) 3, 188-212 │ published by GESIS
DOI: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.29
#ActuallyAutistic: Competing Cultures of Expertise
and Knowledge in Relation to Autism and ADHD
Self-Diagnosis on TikTok
Deborah Lupton & Clare Southerton *
Abstract: » #ActuallyAutistic: Konkurrierende Kulturen der Expertise und des
Wissens in Bezug auf die Selbstdiagnose von Autismus und ADHS auf TikTok«.
In recent times, the micro-video sharing platform TikTok has become ex-
tremely popular globally, especially among young people. Psychological and
medical topics are among the diverse array of issues addressed on TikTok,
sometimes sparking controversies over how “accurate” or helpful the infor-
mation is. One such issue concerns TikTok content relating to self-diagnosis
of neurodivergent conditions such as autism and ADHD. A dominant portrayal
of this phenomenon focuses on the possibilities for self-optimisation such di-
agnoses can offer. In this article, we discuss these issues from a sociomaterial
perspective, recognising the gatherings of humans, digital platforms, con-
tent, and the affective and relational connections that comprise TikTok as-
semblages. Digital sociology is brought together with health sociology and
the sociology of diagnosis to explore how TikToks about self-diagnosis of
ADHD and autism contribute to broader discourses and practices related to
self-optimisation. In particular, the socioeconomic and cultural dimensions
of health and identity issues on TikTok are highlighted. We delve into the con-
testations over power and authority as they receive expression both in Tik-
Toks and off the platform in medical/“psy” apparatuses of expertise. In so do-
ing, both the possibilities and the limitations for digitised and algorithmic
self-optimisation related to self-diagnosis via digital media are identified.
Keywords: TikTok, autism, ADHD, self-optimisation, self-diagnosis, digital
media, digital cultures.
* Deborah Lupton. Vitalities Lab, Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated
Decision-Making and Society, Goodsell Building, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Aus-
tralia; d.lupton@unsw.edu.au. ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2658-4430.
Clare Southerton. School of Education, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia;
c.southerton@latrobe.edu.au. ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5812-9785.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 189
1. Introduction
Since the early years of this century, a plethora of digital technologies have
been developed to support and promote people’s health and wellbeing. In ad-
dition to older style websites, blogs, discussion forums, and desktop/laptop
computing, over the past quarter century, social media platforms, mobile and
wearable devices, and mobile apps have offered a diverse range of possibili-
ties for people to monitor, measure, and share aspects of their bodies and
their health and illness states (see Krzeminska 2024; Zillien 2024; King et al.
2024, all in this special issue). A more specific category of platforms, apps,
and social media content is directed at symptom tracking and self-diagnosis
for psychological and health conditions. These digital media are part of a
complex and ever-expanding sociomaterial ecosystem of digital health tech-
nologies, in which tensions between patient self-care and autonomy and the
role of healthcare professionals in systems of medical knowledge, domi-
nance, and authority are constantly in play (Batifoulier and Diaz-Bone 2021;
Hanrieder and Maray 2021; Lupton 2012, 2017; Henwood and Marent 2019;
Maslen and Lupton 2020; Binkley 2024, in this special issue).
Digital health practices are often undertaken in the interests of self-optimi-
sation as part of a neoliberal project of responsibilised citizenship. It is as-
sumed that better knowledge about people’s bodies and health will lead to
improved health, physical fitness, wellbeing, and greater longevity (Lupton
2016; Cappel 2021; Lupton 1995; Cabanas 2024; Zillien 2024; Krzeminska 2024,
all in this special issue). These technological practices also operate in a cul-
ture that privileges therapeutic initiatives designed to promote self-responsi-
bility for improving mental health and wellbeing as a project and ethos of
selfhood (see Binkley 2024; Brandt and Straub 2024, both in this special issue).
In this article, we discuss these issues from a sociomaterial perspective. We
bring together digital sociology with health sociology and the sociology of di-
agnosis to explore how TikTok videos (henceforth, TikToks) about self-diag-
nosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism contrib-
ute to broader discourses and practices related to self-optimisation. The use
of TikToks to make and share content about how to self-diagnose these neu-
rodivergent conditions has recently attracted controversy, including in pop-
ular media outlets as well as in medical journals and online support groups.
As we show, TikToks are frequently positioned on the platform itself and in
other forums as one way to optimise the self via diagnosis. However, it is by
no means universally accepted that these and other digital media modes are
the best way to achieve this form of self-knowledge, self-improvement, and
identity. These digital media can therefore also disrupt the notion that digit-
ised self-diagnosis is an appropriate pathway to self-optimisation. Long-exist-
ing power structures upholding normative assumptions and notions of the
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 190
superiority of medical/“psy” knowledges over peer authority in popular cul-
ture are key to these complexities.
Across these literatures, we position TikToks as sociomaterial assemblages
in which capacities for action can be opened or closed (Lupton 2019; Maslen
and Lupton 2020). This approach recognises that TikTok content creators and
consumers are part of broad digital and non-digital networks of knowledge,
expertise, and power that imbricate both lay and expert understandings and
practices. TikToks are products of the platform, the content, the content-
makers, those who engage with the content, and the affective forces and re-
lational connections generated with and through these practices, people, and
things. TikTok has gained notoriety as a highly popular digital platform that
relies on non-expert short-form content creation that can appeal to the typi-
cal (young) user seeking entertainment and relaxation as a way of “switching
off” from the demands of everyday life (McLean, Southerton, and Lupton
2024). However, its use has expanded rapidly into “serious” topics such as
health promotion and education: including for neurological or mental health
conditions (McCashin and Murphy 2022; Yeung, Ng, and Abi-Jaoude 2022; Gil-
more et al. 2022). Healthcare workers are among the ranks of content crea-
tors, but content relating lived experiences of health conditions is made
mostly by young people for their peers (Southerton and Clark 2023; Souther-
ton 2021).
Self-diagnosis apps and online tools such as symptom checkers have been
in existence for some time. They are often encouraged by healthcare organi-
sations and providers as a form of self-triage before deciding whether to seek
medical help, and therefore as a way of lessening the burden on the
healthcare system (Lupton and Jutel 2015; Chambers et al. 2019). The micro-
video sharing platform TikTok is one of the newer digital platforms to feature
user-created content on self-diagnosis topics. TikTok creators and commen-
tators on their content have frequently referred to the possibilities self-opti-
misation diagnoses (whether self-applied or from professionals) can offer,
particularly the benefits of better self-knowledge, feelings of belonging and
community, improved mental health and social relationships, and ac-
ceptance or celebration of the differences that are part of being an autistic
person or a person with ADHD (or someone with both conditions, as they fre-
quently coincide).
In what follows, we highlight the socioeconomic and cultural dimensions
of health and identity issues on TikTok, with a particular focus on how struc-
tural power relations in medicine can be disrupted by the kinds of peer sup-
port and knowledge generation and exchange offered by such platforms.
Such an analysis serves to identify the broader networks of expertise in dif-
ferentiations between “the normal” and the “pathological” and the gatekeep-
ing of knowledge in which people’s attempts to optimise themselves via self-
diagnosis take place. We delve into the contestations over power and
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 191
authority as they receive expression both in TikToks and off the platform in
the medical and “psy” apparatuses of expertise. The background to our study
is first sketched out, drawing on sociological analyses of medical power and
authority and contestation by patients and lay people. We then focus on self-
diagnosis in digital health cultures in general and then present our discussion
of self-diagnosis of ADHD and autism on TikTok. Our analysis draws on a
range of materials: a review of digital self-diagnosis tools for these conditions,
a search we conducted for relevant hashtags on TikTok,
1
and news reporting
about the controversies and complexities of this issue. In so doing, we recog-
nise the gatherings of humans, social structures, digital platforms, content,
and the affective and relational connections that comprise these TikTok as-
semblages.
2. Sociological Perspectives on Medical Dominance,
Knowledge, and Diagnosis
Over the past-half century, the tensions between professional biomedical
knowledge and authority and the role of lived experience, expertise, and cul-
tures of peer sharing and advocacy have been closely examined in sociologi-
cal analyses (Batifoulier and Diaz-Bone 2021; Lupton 2012; Hanrieder and
Maray 2021). Self-diagnosis of health conditions has featured in patient advo-
cacy, self-help, and activist cultures since the consumerist movements in the
1970s that sought to challenge the authority of institutions such as biomedi-
cine and encourage patient “self-help” and “empowerment” (Lupton 1997,
2014; see also Binkley 2024, in this special issue). In that era, medical sociol-
ogists led the way by adopting a political economy critique of biomedical
dominance. They argued that the medical profession (particularly the profit-
driven system in the USA) exerted a hegemonic control over medical
knowledge that excluded other healthcare or alternative medicine practition-
ers as well as the lived experiences of patients and carers (Batifoulier and
Diaz-Bone 2021). The terms “medicalisation” (Lupton 1997) or “biomedicali-
zation” (Clarke et al. 2010) have been frequently employed in this literature
to describe how viewing an increasing array of bodily signs and human be-
haviours through a medical lens contributed to medical dominance and au-
thority, as well as offering massive profits to the pharmaceutical industry
(Rogers and Pilgrim 2021).
1
We conducted a search of TikTok using hashtags such as #Autism, #ADHD, #Autistic, #diagnosis,
#asd, #selfdiagnosis, #neurodivergent, #audhd, and #ActuallyAutistic in March 2023. For ethical
reasons, to preserve content creators’ privacy and anonymity we provide only a high-level over-
view of these TikTok videos and do not provide any details of usernames or use direct quotes.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 192
Scholars such as Michel Foucault and Georges Canguilhem examined the
historicity of the conventions and norms that have been generated with and
through the knowledge field of biomedicine. These scholars draw attention
to the political underpinnings of these definitions of “the normal” and “the
pathological” (Lupton 2012; Diaz-Bone 2021). Sociologists of mental health
have pointed out how the “psy” disciplines began to commandeer the defini-
tions of mental wellbeing, illness, and distress, identifying norms by which
people’s states of mind and ways of viewing and approaching the world could
be measured, compared, and, if deemed necessary, treated (Rogers and Pil-
grim 2021; Lane 2020). An aligned challenge to psychiatric care – sometimes
termed the “anti-psychiatry movement” – has highlighted how people with
mental illness were stigmatised and often poorly treated (Rose and Rose
2023).
As the sociology of diagnosis literature has outlined (Jutel and Nettleton
2011; Jeske, James, and Joyce 2024; Rogers and Pilgrim 2021; Lane 2020), di-
agnosis is both an art and a science, involving dynamic decision-making that
responds to broader social, political, and economic concerns. Sociologists of
diagnosis have detailed the inequalities and injustices that are often associ-
ated with the ways that certain conditions can be ignored during the process
of biomedical diagnosis or the lack of access those in underprivileged social
groups or low-income regions have to expert diagnosis. They point out that
expert diagnosis, as a form of medical authority, operates in a gate-keeping
role: validating what counts as “diseases” or “health conditions,” offering ex-
planations for symptoms, legitimating illness, and providing access to treat-
ment. However, biomedical diagnoses are also contested and socially con-
structed forms of knowledge, enacted through practice. For example, phe-
nomena that once were routinely diagnosed as demonstrative of pathologies
of the “nerves” or of sexual expression, such as hysteria and same-gender at-
traction, are no longer considered medical conditions, as women’s struggles
for independence and the queer community have become increasingly so-
cially accepted rather than pathologised.
Part of the lay challenge to medical authority in the 1970s involved initia-
tives to help people learn more about their bodies and their health states by
monitoring their symptoms and sharing knowledge developed by peers
through support groups and newsletters. Patient consumerist movements,
often led by marginalised or stigmatised groups such as women, people with
chronic or under-diagnosed medical conditions, disabled people, queer com-
munities, people of colour, and First Nations peoples, argued that lay people
should develop their expertise rather than allow biomedical practitioners and
Big Pharma to control healthcare (Lupton 2012). The global community
health movement has also challenged the basis of Global North-centric bio-
medical authority and paternalism. It calls for a great diversity of knowledge
to be applied that is responsive to specific socioeconomic and cultural
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 193
contexts in the Majority World (Hanrieder and Maray 2021; Singer and Baer
2018).
According to the social model of disability (Oliver 2013), the world into
which people who are considered “different” is the most disabling aspect with
which they have to cope. Discriminatory attitudes include stigma, stereotyp-
ing, lack of inclusion, and marginalisation as well as lack of provision of eco-
nomic or material support (such as accessible spaces or modes of education)
for people who do not fit the norm of how bodies and brains “should” func-
tion, move, or behave. Furthermore, people with invisible chronic conditions
or disabilities such as chronic fatigue syndrome, repetitive strain injury, or
other pain conditions (and these days, people with long-term effects of
COVID-19 infection, or “long COVID”) are often excluded from medical care
or told that their problems are psychosomatic or imagined (Rogers and Pil-
grim 2021; Lane 2020; Spence et al. 2023).
One important contribution offered by self-diagnosis is the challenging of
the standards of “normality” that until very recently have pervaded medical
and popular cultures. The very term “neurodivergent” and its opposite term
“neurotypical” resist the imperative offered in the mainstream “psy” disci-
plines to label neurological or mental states as either “normal” or “patholog-
ical” (or as “healthy” versus “diseased”). Instead, acknowledgement of the
neurodiversity in populations refers to differences in processing and re-
sponding to the world rather than as deviancies or deficits. The term “neuro-
diversity” acknowledges the range of neurological profiles in populations,
while “neurodivergence” refers to neurological profiles that differ from a
“typical” presentation. This interpretation of neurodiversity, and by exten-
sion, neurodivergence, is fundamental to the ways that autism and ADHD
self-diagnosis is portrayed as a route to self-optimisation through self-
knowledge. Avoiding the stigma and shame associated with a label that im-
plies deviance or pathology is itself a form of self-improvement and a refram-
ing of identity. The discourses of the “cerebral subject” that are expressed via
the neurodiversity movement link identity issues with “a neurological self-
awareness” that rejects mainstream authoritative medical or psychological
definitions (Ortega 2009).
Strategies for self-diagnosis of rare or invisible conditions for people who
had been unable to find a diagnosis from a biomedical practitioner have long
been developed through peer networks and support groups. The advent of
the internet and the World Wide Web in the 1990s facilitated these practices,
offering opportunities for communicating and networking across the world
at a larger scale and much faster. Patient support platforms and social media
groups that could be readily accessed through mobile devices and Wi-Fi ena-
bled further expansion of patient-led expertise (Lupton 2017; Cappel 2021;
Maslen and Lupton 2020). A range of digital self-diagnosis and symptom-
checker apps appeared. This software further encouraged lay people to
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 194
engage with the information provided to determine for themselves whether
they needed to seek professional health or psychological care (Lupton and
Jutel 2015; Jutel and Lupton 2015; Chambers et al. 2019).
These digitised options have expanded accessibility to health information
and encouraged patient expertise but have also potentially opened the way
for some health conditions to be missed and therefore untreated. Alongside
the problems of misdiagnosis, lack of access to diagnosis, or under-diagnosis
of illness or disability, the phenomenon of over-diagnosis, resulting in people
receiving medication or invasive treatments that were never required, has
emerged as a major issue in healthcare (Lane 2020). The medical literature
reveals a high degree of ambivalence among health practitioners concerning
to what extent patients should be “empowered” with and through their access
to online health information. On the one hand, it is argued that such “empow-
erment” can be helpful for the doctor-patient relationship. On the other hand,
however, many practitioners feel threatened if patients appear to be “too em-
powered” or seek medical knowledge elsewhere (Lupton 2017).
It is these fraught sociomaterial contexts that TikTok videos dealing with
self-diagnosis of conditions involving neurodivergence such as autism and
ADHD have entered. Recent interest in conditions of what are now typically
referred to as “neurodivergence” (including not only autism and ADHD but
also dyslexia, dyspraxia, Down syndrome, Tourette syndrome, bipolar disor-
der and intellectual disabilities, among other conditions) align with a growing
focus on how human brains differ from each other, as part of the expanding
domain of cognitive neuroscience (Ortega 2009). Currently there is much dis-
cussion in the lay health and medical literature about the importance of em-
phasising that neurodivergent conditions are “just differences” rather than
deficiencies or pathologies, as part of a drive to destigmatise and normalise
them (Ortega 2009).
It is unsurprising, therefore, that this TikTok genre has incited so much at-
tention and controversy. These videos combine many of the flashpoints in
which such features of self-optimisation as the desire for self-knowledge and
for improving health and wellbeing are in tension with the continuing con-
flicts between lay people and qualified experts and practitioners in the “psy”
disciplines in how “normality” and the distinction between “neurodivergent”
and “neurotypical” brains should be defined and who should have the power
to make this definition.
3. TikTok and Health Topics
In recent times, TikTok has become extremely popular globally, especially
among young people. TikTok, launched in 2017, is the international version
of the Chinese app Douyin, which was launched in 2016. Both Douyin and
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 195
TikTok are owned by the Chinese tech company ByteDance Ltd. Particularly
since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, when many people turned to
online technologies to feel connected and relieve isolation and boredom
(Watson, Lupton, and Michael 2021; Masciantonio et al. 2021), TikTok has
gathered momentum (Schellewald 2023). There are now 1 billion TikTok us-
ers worldwide, with the numbers of youth in countries of the Global North
rapidly rising. For example, a recent Pew Research Center survey of Ameri-
can adolescents aged 13 to 17 years found that the platform had very quickly
increased in popularity among that demographic in recent years. TikTok
(used by 67% of respondents) is now second only to YouTube (used by 95%)
as the most popular content sharing/social media platforms among this
group, with teenage girls, together with Black and Hispanic adolescents,
more likely to use TikTok (Vogel, Gelles-Watnick, and Massarat 2022).
TikTok videos (often referred to simply as “TikToks” by the app’s users) are
short in length, ranging from 15 seconds to 10 minutes long. Users can follow
each other and send direct messages, and their profiles show all the videos
they have created that are publicly visible. The TikToks shown in the person-
alised “For You” recommendations are selected by an algorithm based on us-
ers’ past browsing and viewing practices and their interactions with videos
(such as likes, comments, messages to other users, and shares) (Schellewald
2023; Kaye, Zeng, and Wikstrom 2022). Users can also view a “Following” feed
to see content created by users that they follow. While TikTok is often associ-
ated with “fun” content such as dance trends, popular music, and challenges,
with significant user growth its content has diversified into a huge array of
topics, organised and made discoverable by hashtags, and searching within
the platform. Creators now deal with serious subjects, including climate
change activism and other political issues (Hautea et al. 2021; Kaye, Zeng, and
Wikstrom 2022).
Health and wellbeing topics are popular categories of TikToks, boosted by
the global boom of the “wellness” industry more broadly, now a 1.5 trillion-
dollar (US) collection of products and services promoting nutrition, fitness,
and health (Callaghan et al. 2021). TikToks focusing on mental health and cog-
nitive functioning, including topics related to neurodivergence, are a signifi-
cant trend on the platform (McCashin and Murphy 2022; Yeung, Ng, and Abi-
Jaoude 2022; Gilmore et al. 2022). Content varies from everyday users seeking
to share their experiences of illness or mental distress to videos put together
by healthcare professionals and organisations as part of health education and
promotion initiatives (Southerton and Clark 2023; Southerton 2021; Stein,
Yao, and Aitamurto 2022; Eriksson Krutrök 2021). On the other hand, how-
ever, as is the case with many social media or content sharing platforms, it
has been suggested by some researchers (McCashin and Murphy 2022; Mas-
ciantonio et al. 2021) that TikTok use can harm user’s mental health and well-
being, for example, by increasing social exclusion, isolation, and loneliness
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 196
or by algorithmically curating content that encourages self-harm, suicidal
ideation, restricted eating, drug use, and other risk-taking behaviours. These
issues have received high levels of mainstream news media attention, includ-
ing coverage of a US Congressional hearing held in March 2023, in which
members of Congress repeatedly questioned TikTok’s CEO, Shou Zi Chew,
about the alleged undue influence the platform had over America adolescents
and its promotion of harmful behaviours (Shepardson and Ayyub 2023).
Furthermore, health-related content on TikTok has often provoked contro-
versy, with high-profile media stories about health misinformation circulat-
ing on the platform, especially during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
For example, an article in The Guardian published in October 2021 criticised
TikTok for the prevalence of anti-vaccine content on the platform (Grierson,
Milmo, and Farah 2021). A year later, Fortune magazine’s website ran an arti-
cle describing the prevalence of sex education misinformation on the plat-
form (Taylor 2022). Similar concerns about misinformation on TikTok related
to neurodivergent conditions such as autism, ADHD, and Tourette’s syn-
drome has emerged in recent years, especially as an explanation to the rise
in diagnoses of these conditions.
4. Diagnosis and Self-Diagnosis of Autism and ADHD
Popular cultural portrayals of “neuro-awareness” and “the cerebral subject”
(Ortega 2009) frequently mention the role of lay people in creating spaces
online for providing validation and self-acceptance of neurodivergence: in-
cluding the important role played by diagnosis in achieving these feelings of
validation and acceptance. Until recently, the prevailing stereotypes associ-
ated with ADHD and autism (that they predominantly affect white boys with
certain presenting traits living in wealthy countries) has excluded people who
do not fit these stereotypes. Demand for diagnoses of ADHD and autism have
increased over the past decade, particularly for the previously neglected
groups of women and girls (Huang et al. 2020; Wilson et al. 2022), young peo-
ple of colour (Jones and Mandell 2020; Cénat et al. 2024), and young people
living in low income settings (Durkin et al. 2015; Sevastidis et al. 2023). Find-
ing available professionals who are qualified to make these diagnoses (spe-
cially trained psychologists or psychiatrists, or in the case of children, paedi-
atricians) is often difficult and, in some countries, very expensive, meaning
that access is limited.
Most autism support organisations and groups emphasise that self-diagno-
sis is often all that adults need. To meet this need, websites designed to pro-
vide information and support for people with ADHD and autism, such as Au-
tism Awareness Australia, the Autism Society (USA), and ADHD UK provide
insights and advice concerning diagnosis for those considering it for
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 197
themselves or their children. Several online tools have been offered for peo-
ple to use to self-diagnose autism or ADHD, or to conduct a pre-diagnosis
screening to determine the likelihood that they have these conditions. Sup-
port organisations for neurodivergent people or their parents often offer such
screening tools. ADHD UK, for example, provides details in “diagnosis path-
ways for adult ADHD,” beginning with offering an online “screener” that is
designed to help people determine whether they may be affected by the con-
dition, and is therefore a type of “self-pre-diagnosis.” If the screening tool
gives a result that suggests a person may have ADHD, clear guidelines are
provided on the website for how they may then seek a formal diagnosis, be-
ginning with a visit to their general practitioner for a referral for a specialist
ADHD assessment.
Beyond these websites, major app stores feature a range of apps designed
for autism and ADHD support, including self-diagnosis. A search of the
Google App Store we conducted in March 2023 using the search terms “ADHD
diagnosis” and “autism diagnosis” found diagnosis apps such as ADHD Test,
ADD & ADHD Test, My ADHD, Autism Test (separate versions for adults and
children), Autism Treatment Evaluation, Awesomely Autistic Test, and Austi-
sim AI, with this final app being described by its developer as offering the
following functions:
Autism AI will be able see and detect autism indicators in the respondent
and tell whether there are any autistic traits by comparing the provided in-
dicators with others. The app also provides you with a detailed report that
you can share with your health professional.
Whether it is self-applied or professionally provided, diagnosis of ADHD and
autism has been described in both academic research findings and online
lived experience accounts as profoundly life changing. It is claimed that as-
sisting people to make the best of their lives across a range of domains –
health, wellbeing, happiness, relationships, access to support, educational
and employment opportunities – is therefore a form of self-optimisation (see
also Binkley 2024; Cabanas 2024, both in this special issue). Diagnosis can as-
sist with developing strategies for a more satisfying, productive, and con-
tented life in which the chances of success in social relationships and in edu-
cation and employment are improved. For people with ADHD, diagnosis can
offer pathways to medication that may help them make positive changes in
their lives (Crane et al. 2018; Huang et al. 2020). In some discussions, neuro-
divergent conditions have been described as offering people special qualities,
sometimes described as “superpowers.” Indeed, a common conception of au-
tism in particular is that it is frequently associated with high intelligence and
other superior brain function, such as the ability to concentrate closely and
for extended periods of time, or to display high-level musical or mathematical
prowess. For example, The Corum Institute, a British think tank dedicated to
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 198
the future of children, has produced an interactive booklet for young autistic
people, entitled Autism is a Superpower.
Research on how people respond to a diagnosis of ADHD or autism has em-
pirically demonstrated the benefits it can bring (Huang et al. 2020; Crane et
al. 2018; Wilson et al. 2022). This awareness of and explanations for the way
their brain works can help people improve their mental health, as they come
to see that they are not “bad” or “weird” people, as society has led them to
believe, but instead were born with neurological differences. It can help peo-
ple find a novel identity – as autistic or a person with ADHD (or both), or more
broadly as a member of the neurodivergent community – which also contrib-
utes to newfound feelings of acceptance and belonging. Diagnosis can further
lead to becoming part of a peer community which advocates for itself rather
than relying on others to do so. The use of the popular social media hashtag
#ActuallyAutistic, used mostly on Twitter and Instagram, sends the message
that the person using the hashtag is speaking from their own lived experience
as a self-identified or diagnosed autistic person, rather than a parent of an
autistic person or a psychologist, psychiatrist, or other healthcare worker
who is speaking “on behalf” of autistics. The hashtag also highlights that
many autistics prefer to refer to themselves with identity-first terminology
(contrasted with the person-first terms “person with autism” or “person on
the spectrum”). Using this hashtag helps people find others online who have
been either self- or professionally diagnosed and are willing to publicly iden-
tify themselves as autistic to share experiences.
Particularly for adult women, the realisation that they are autistic or have
ADHD only comes later in life, and often accompanies the diagnosis of their
children. Regardless of whether they are self- or professionally diagnosed,
many report the feelings of relief that this self-knowledge brings them: expla-
nations for why they have always felt “different,” have been subjected to so-
cial exclusion and bullying, or have struggled to organise their lives according
to general expectations and norms. Diagnosed autistic women talk about
finding self-compassion as well as compassion towards others through self-
knowledge as well as feeling safer about “unmasking” (no longer hiding their
autistic behaviours) in front of others once they have been diagnosed, leading
to a greater sense of authenticity (Wilson et al. 2022).
However, a diagnosis can also bring challenges with it and is not necessarily
a pathway for self-optimisation. Particularly in relation to children, a diagno-
sis of autism or ADHD can expose people to stigma, social discrimination, and
reductive “labelling.” Disbelief can be expressed by others that a person is
neurodivergent, particularly if they do not fit the stereotype of the young
white male, and this can be extremely upsetting for individuals who have re-
ceived a diagnosis. Some parents have reported struggling with receiving the
news that their children are disabled and will always be neurodivergent, ac-
knowledging that stigma that can accompany these kinds of diagnoses (Crane
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 199
et al. 2018). This news can also be challenging for adults who have been diag-
nosed themselves as being autistic or having ADHD: particularly as the diag-
nosis process focuses on the negative aspects of being neurodivergent, such
as difficulties in functioning in everyday life (Crane et al. 2018; Huang et al.
2020). There is a continuing debate about whether ADHD should be treated
with drugs, particularly for children, or whether the range of behaviours that
are diagnosed as ADHD should be better accepted socially rather than being
viewed as a “disease” that should be treated with drugs (Rafalovich 2013).
Self-diagnosis remains controversial and frequently invalidated at the med-
ical provider or institutional level. Some researchers in psychiatry have ex-
pressed concern that people are using TikTok to inaccurately diagnose them-
selves with ADHD (Gilmore et al. 2022). In certain contexts, people are dis-
suaded from self-diagnosis because this is not accepted by institutions. Many
educational institutions, workplaces, and social welfare providers require a
formal expert diagnosis of autism or ADHD before providing accommoda-
tions or other support. For young children in particular, a formal diagnosis
can frequently be the better option as they can then begin to access therapy,
medication, disability entitlements, and other support and accommodations
at childcare or school if needed (James and Smith 2020; Cénat et al. 2024).
Even among members of the neurodivergent online community, debate
about whether people should self-diagnose continues, sometimes to the point
of antagonism. As a contributor to a magazine on autism parenting com-
mented in an article headlined “Self-diagnosed autism: a valid diagnosis?”
many adults “find peace” and a sense of affinity with the autism community
after realising they are autistic through self-diagnosis and do not feel the need
for an expensive formal diagnosis. However, she notes that:
Self-diagnosing autism is controversial; some (with a formal diagnosis) in
the autism community feel it’s a slippery slope to misdiagnosis, dilution of
resources, and silencing of the “true” autistic voice. Angry, online commu-
nity members do not hesitate to harshly tell the self-diagnosed to “Shut up,”
so that the voices of the formally diagnosed can be heard. (Loftus 2022)
There are also concerns that TikTok influencers generating content on men-
tal health or neurodivergence may be seeking to profit on their success
through partnerships with commercial therapy services or other private
mental health services with unproven benefits (Dunbar 2023). The growth of
self-diagnosis and lack of mental health services has also been linked to an
expansion in private market products that have sought to profit through fill-
ing this gap. In the autism and ADHD market, this includes products such as
ADHD themed subscription boxes such as Brainfetti (Imperfect Inspiration
2023), co-working online platforms targeted at people with ADHD, online
shops selling sensory resources for autistic people, and telehealth services
such as Cerebral (USA), which offer psychiatric drug prescriptions. A recent
investigation from Bloomberg found employees at Cerebral reported
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 200
concerns that the company was prescribing drugs too readily, with surface-
level engagement with patients, and was driven by profit over patient care
(Mosendz and Melby 2022).
5. Self-Diagnosis of Autism and ADHD on TikTok
TikToks about autism and ADHD involve several intersections with key dis-
courses and practices related to self-optimisation more broadly. These in-
clude the imperative to maintain good health and mental wellbeing as part of
being the ideal productive citizen in neoliberal societies and therapeutic cul-
tures. Such perspectives on the notion of productive citizenship emphasise
the value of adopting responsibility for one’s own health and wellbeing. This
may involve seeking out and acting on information about ways to promote
good health (Lupton 2016, 1995; Elliott 2020; Nehring and Röcke 2023; see also
Binkley 2024; Cabanas 2024; King et al. 2024, in this special issue). Using a
self-diagnosis app or symptom tracker can be viewed as part of these initia-
tives. Self-diagnosis not only can reduce the economic burden on the
healthcare system (Lupton and Jutel 2015), but it contributes to the ideal of
the “engaged” patient who engages in self-monitoring and self-care (Lupton
2013).
Previous research has found that social media platforms such as Twitter
and Facebook have provided valuable opportunities for neurodivergent peo-
ple to find support, share knowledge, develop social relationships, and en-
gage in community advocacy (Bellon-Harn, Ni, and Manchaiah 2020; Abel,
Machin, and Brownlow 2019). TikTok has now joined the ranks of these plat-
forms. TikToks tagged with hashtags such as #neurodivergent, #Autism, #Ac-
tuallyAutistic, #Autistiktok, #adhd, and #adhdtok can be very popular, with
view metrics ranging from over 3 million to 52 million. A recent article on
autism TikTok noted that there were in excess of 38,000 posts using the #Au-
tism hashtag, with more than 200 million views, while #ActuallyAustic had
been used in more than 20,000 posts, with 40 million views. The most popular
accounts by autistic people have millions of followers each (Jones 2022).
These TikToks cover many different aspects of living with ADHD and autism,
including demonstrating bodily experiences of neurodivergence made in the
format of a day-in-the-life, or sometimes attempting to replicate the visceral
experience of being autistic or having ADHD.
TikToks providing summaries of symptoms of ADHD or autism and noting
that some groups can often be missed as potentially being autistic or ADHD
(such as women and people of colour), directly contribute to efforts of view-
ers to self-identify, if not self-diagnose. They challenge the biases, stereo-
types, misconceptions, and labels that are often applied to people with ADHD
or autistics. The creators of these videos use humour to normalise their
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 201
conditions and find ways to build intimacy around a shared sense of identity,
belonging, and lived experience. This content encourages the recognition
and familiarity of experiences that are shared across diverse experiences and
geographical locations. The TikToks sometimes offer quick tips or systems
and strategies for dealing with the symptoms of ADHD or autism: for exam-
ple, ways to keep track of time, deal with cleaning or overwhelming tasks,
find and stick to a routine, or prevent meltdowns or burnout.
The evidence used in these formats of TikTok is lived experience rather
than medical or psychological research findings or expertise. Taken together,
this body of TikToks create a community voice, space, and tools to speak back
to criticism of neurodivergent people, including those who use the platform
to find a sense of belonging. Across these TikToks, identity and diagnosis
(whether expert- or self-provided) are entangled, both part of efforts by this
neurodivergent community to acknowledge, advocate for, and share insights
about what it is like to be autistic or live with ADHD. As such, these TikToks
conform to the general “authenticity” and “self-expression” ethos of the plat-
form creators and users. One of the major reasons for the popularity of Tik-
Tok is that, unlike some other social media sites such as Instagram and Face-
book, TikTok allows people to “be themselves,” with no filter, in a “feel good
space” (Barta and Andalibi 2021; Schellewald 2023). The highly personalised
algorithmic processing of the feed each person receives operates as a form of
digitised generation of identity, personal style and taste, reflecting people’s
consumption practices back to them to make them feel recognised
(Schellewald 2023). Here again, there are opportunities for self-optimisation
as part of the shaping and expression of self-identity, self-authenticity, and
community membership. Such opportunities might be described as a form of
“algorithmic self-optimisation” (see also King et al. 2024, in this special issue).
Through continuing use of the platform, the algorithms learn what kind of
selfhood and social identities that TikTok users prefer – at least as indicated
by the videos they watch.
A prominent theme in recent news reporting is the acknowledgement of the
benefits of neurodivergent TikTok creators reducing stigma of conditions
such as ADHD and autism by using the platform to speak honestly about their
experiences. These articles generally include interviews with TikTok creators
or neurodivergent people and provide details of their lived experiences.
Some are opinion pieces written directly by community members, thereby
allowing neurodivergent people to speak for themselves. There is a degree of
overlap in that some of these articles touched on self-diagnosis, largely with
a less critical lens than articles that focused entirely on self-diagnosis. Several
articles were authored by or featured the experiences of people who self-di-
agnosed, explaining their struggles to achieve a medical diagnosis. Accounts
in the popular media have been reported of people recognising from TikToks
that they may be autistic or have ADHD, seeking a diagnosis, and finding a
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 202
sense of relief. As one woman commented, her diagnosis of ADHD made her
feel “validated” and that the diagnosis was “life changing”: “I wasn’t lazy, and
I wasn’t stupid. I was just different […] It’s absolutely changed my perspective
on myself” (Stone 2023). As one journalist wrote about her ADHD diagnosis:
“A diagnosis is the thing that allowed us to forgive ourselves and finally start
healing” (Boseley 2023).
As with other social media platforms, however, there has also been some
extremely harmful and stigmatising TikTok content posted, in which autistics
or people with ADHD have been targeted. One example is the #AutistismChal-
lenge, in which neurotypical people were encouraged to upload TikToks in
which they pretended to be autistic by using various words, facial expres-
sions, or body movements that they assumed were typical of autistic behav-
iour. A lesser-known version of a popular song was used as the backing track,
in which “let’s get started” is replaced by the ableist slur “let’s get retarded.”
These videos were ableist and cruel, causing great distress to autistic people.
After complaints were made, including by the Autism Society of America, Tik-
Tok removed the content (Wassef 2022; Jones 2022).
Members of the psychology and medical professions have also expressed
alarm about the possibility that watching TikToks about ADHD or autism can
lead young people to mimic the behaviours as an attention-seeking strategy
or expression of mental distress, particularly in the context of the stressors of
the COVID-19 pandemic (Heyman, Liang, and Hedderly 2021; Olvera et al.
2021; Gilmore et al. 2022). A content analysis of popular TikToks about ADHD
conducted by psychiatric researchers criticised the videos for “spreading dis-
information” (including that related to diagnosis) potentially leading to peo-
ple seeking unnecessary medical advice, and resulting in misdiagnosis or
overdiagnosis (Yeung, Ng, and Abi-Jaoude 2022). Some commentators from
this background have gone so far as to describe this phenomenon as “a pan-
demic within a pandemic,” seeing these expressions as “a mass sociogenic
illness” (Olvera et al. 2021). Such assessments, from a sociology of diagnosis
perspective, can be viewed as themselves generating novel diagnoses and in
doing so, making distinctions between what kind of TikTok (or other social
media use) should be considered “normal” and what is “pathological.”
In recent times, news reporting of ADHD and autism portrayals on TikTok
have similarly claimed that self-diagnosis as promoted on the platform has
led to an increase in people believing that they have these conditions, with
the suggestion often that such individuals are wrong or misguided. While the
authors of many news reports expressing anxiety about the prevalence of
self-diagnosis have acknowledged the challenge of seeking a medical diagno-
sis, few identify this issue as a contributing factor to self-diagnosis. Self-diag-
nosis, or even the trends of increasing diagnosis of these conditions by any
means, is frequently reported in the mainstream media as originating from
the communities on the platform itself. In particular, young people, usually
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 203
identified in the language of “teenagers,” are often singled out as the group
that is self-diagnosing.
Examples of this style of reporting include an article from Sky News UK
(2023) titled “ADHD: Why teenagers are using TikTok to self-diagnose,” while
a similar article from another British news outlet, The Telegraph (Stephens
2023), is headlined, “Fears teenagers self-diagnose autism and ADHD using
TikTok.” This characterisation does not reflect the actual reason for the in-
crease in ADHD and autism diagnoses, which has occurred in the adult pop-
ulation (20 years and older) rather than adolescents (Fairman, Peckham, and
Sclar 2020; Russell et al. 2022). These articles also significantly emphasise
medical expertise over neurodivergent people’s experiences, often privileg-
ing the expertise of medical professionals who diagnose these conditions. As
one writer remarked, there are “plenty of influencers who speak about ADHD
with no medical training at all,” before quoting a clinical psychiatrist opining
that “[o]ne of the things that is really important about clinical diagnosis is that
the professional is also ruling in and out different conditions that might look
similar” (Pasha-Robinson 2022).
Autistic people and people with ADHD in news articles have also described
struggling with the “trend” of these conditions on TikTok, as Charlotte Co-
lombo (2023) explains in her article:
And finally, the most aggravating misconception of all, is the idea that
ADHD is something to actively seek in order to conform to a “trend” or sta-
tus symbol. As a registered disability, ADHD is something that can signifi-
cantly impact your ability to function in day-to-day life. While I’m open
about my ADHD and the more light-hearted aspects of the condition, that
doesn’t change the fact that, for me, it significantly impacts pretty much
every aspect of my life and means that things neurotypical people take for
granted are, oftentimes, a lot more difficult for me.
The pervasive trivialising of ADHD and autism and other related mental
health conditions because of their recent rise in diagnoses, and speculation
that this was social contagion through TikTok rather than “authentic” diagno-
sis appears in several articles authored by neurodivergent people. A New York
Times article published in April 2023, penned by Emma Camp (2023), herself
diagnosed with autism, argued that what she saw as a trend by people to self-
diagnose this condition on TikTok and other social media platforms “flattens
the difficult reality of living with a psychological or neurological disorder to
little more than cutesy products and personality traits.” Camp described a
“cottage industry” of social media influencers who she views as encouraging
self-diagnosis conditions like autism based on “spurious symptoms.” Com-
ments on her piece (numbering over 600 within a week of the article being
published) made observations such as “my daughter’s teenage friends wear
their supposed pathologies like merit badges,” referred to “learned helpless-
ness” from diagnosed young people and from another commentor, “I see a
culture that is obsessed with pathologizing every human trait, backed by the
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 204
industrial pharmaceutical establishment.” In such portrayals, the validation
offered by self-diagnosis is reduced to personality flaws such as a desire to be
“special” or to receive attention, and such diagnoses are positioned as ulti-
mately serving medical authority and “Big Pharma.”
6. Conclusion
Our analysis presents TikToks about neurodivergence and self-diagnosis as
sociomaterial assemblages that bring together platform architectures and af-
fordances with affects, bodily affordances, and communities of feeling. Tik-
Tok content about ADHD and autism, and commentary in news reporting
about this phenomenon represents a tangled and complicated set of forces,
relational connections and agencies. The boom of TikTok content focused on
ADHD and autism has been controversial for a range of reasons. This content
has been viewed positively as raising awareness of these conditions, shatter-
ing stereotypes, sharing lay expertise and insights, and helping people (par-
ticularly girls and women) who have been unable to access professional as-
sessments to finally receive a diagnosis. On the other hand, professional ex-
perts have raised concerns about over-diagnosis and potential lack of engage-
ment of people who have self-diagnosed with what they consider to be appro-
priate expert help and support.
Intertwined within these debates are dominant discourses and practices of
self-optimisation: particularly those that position self-diagnosis of neurodi-
vergent and other conditions as a route to better self-knowledge, self-im-
provement, self-acceptance, authentic self-expression, and a way to achieve
healing from past trauma and feel accepted within a specific community of
peers. In these dynamic assemblages of feelings, knowledges and relational
connections, the digital platform that is TikTok, its community of users, and
the broader sociomaterial contexts in which is it used, an opportunity to self-
diagnose autism or ADHD bears major implications for an individual’s life go-
ing forward. We emphasise that diagnosis is a mode of self-optimisation that
differs in some important respects from other health-related modes such as
the fitness regimens outlined by Cabanas (2024, in this special issue). Self-
diagnosis via a popular digital platform such as TikTok, in particular, can
challenge medical and “psy” authority and distinctions between the “normal”
and the “pathological,” whereas mainstream fitness discourses and practices
usually conform to or align closely with medical expertise and the neoliberal
moral imperatives of promoting one’s health. Furthermore, while efforts to
optimise the self through “being fit” are typically considered non-controver-
sial, as we have shown, neurodivergent people using peer expertise such as
that found on TikTok for self-diagnosis is a less well accepted practice. It
pushes the boundaries between lay and expert authority to a far greater
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 205
extent than is usually considered “appropriate” by medical or “psy” profes-
sionals or institutions who demand an expert diagnosis before they will pro-
vide support, therapies, or accommodations. It is in considering these inter-
plays of power structures, institutional authority, digital media platform af-
fordances, and users of these platforms that the complexities of digitised and
algorithmic self-optimisation can be better identified.
When the lived experience that is shared resonates with the TikTok, that
establishes rapport and builds credibility for the creator, rather than any
health or medical qualification. Becoming a content creator who achieves
recognition and validation when describing personal experiences of ADHD
or autism, therefore, may itself be a mode of self-optimisation, just as the Tik-
Tok users who view, share, or comment on these TikToks are engaging in self-
optimisation. We can therefore view these sociomaterialities of social media
use as digitised modes of networked self-optimisation. TikTok provides a val-
uable opportunity to create and maintain cultures of sharing of personal ex-
periences and feelings that have become so important to intimacies, rela-
tional connections, authenticity, and the performing of identities online
(Farci et al. 2017; Lupton, Clark, and Southerton 2022; McLean, Southerton,
and Lupton 2024). For young people who may have gone through difficult ex-
periences in their offline worlds when attempting to negotiate a dominantly
neurotypical world as a neurodivergent person, the contribution made by
TikTok content to self-knowledge, potentially leading to a diagnosis, can be
important. More than this, as previous research on TikTok users has shown,
finding a sense of community, connection, and acceptance, a way to com-
municate with peers who understand, is potentially life changing (McLean,
Southerton, and Lupton 2024; Hiebert and Kortes-Miller 2021; Eriksson
Krutrök 2021). For those with neurodivergent conditions, networked inti-
macy and feelings of being seen and known by others who understand what
it is like to be autistic or live with ADHD in the context of an ableist world
where they have often been socially excluded, bullied, or stigmatised can be
affirming.
The phenomenon of the autism or ADHD “influencer” is part of lay cultures
of expertise, therapy, celebrity, self-help, and moral authority on TikTok
(Hartung et al. 2022). These creators offer what Hendry et al. (2021) term “in-
fluencer pedagogy,” which describes “indirect, mediated processes of educa-
tion produced through relatable interactions between influencers and their
followers on social media platforms” (428). As Hendry et al. (2021) argue, dis-
missing influencer pedagogy as misinformation neglects opportunities for
understanding the deeply held connections within these communities and
the significant forms of knowledge making that occur. Especially given the
complexities of seeking reputable medical information about conditions such
like ADHD and autism, lay cultures of expertise on the subject should not be
assumed as dubious sources of information.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 206
There are clear opportunities for creators and content users to find a sense
of community and improve their self-knowledge, self-compassion, self-
growth, and self-esteem, including achieving a self-diagnosis, as ways of op-
timising their lives and finding a sense of authenticity. Using the relevant
hashtags, they can locate appropriate content and engage with each other.
Nonetheless, there are also many ways in which the phenomenon of self-di-
agnosis of these conditions on the platform and broader reflections about it
reflect similar concerns and tensions that have prevailed in relation to self-
diagnosis for several decades. TikTok also conveys harmful, wrong, and cruel
stereotypes about ADHD and autism, and there is concern even among peo-
ple with these conditions that self-diagnosis has become a simplistic novelty
or an avenue to exploitation rather than a real pathway to self-optimisation.
To return to the broader issues of diagnosis, medical authority, patient en-
gagement, and medicalisation with which we started, the insights we offer in
our analysis demonstrate the complexities of lived experiences, therapeutic
cultures, and power relations generated with and through social media plat-
forms such as TikTok and their relationship to self-optimisation. As we have
shown, ADHD and autism expert- or self-diagnoses could be viewed as draw-
ing people who become diagnosed into webs of medicalisation by offering a
medical label to a set of ways of thinking and behaving that are currently but
have not always been viewed as outside the norm. Diagnosis may then lead to
therapies or medications to “treat” or manage these conditions: another form
of medicalisation.
As we have argued, however, many people are eager and even desperate to
be medicalised in these ways and often find benefits in being so “labelled.”
We might therefore expand the notion of self-optimisation to include the de-
sire to become the subject of medicalisation. This move opens up some intri-
guing avenues for further theorising of self-optimisation through online en-
gagements, particularly in relation to how people with unrecognised or un-
der-diagnosed conditions can improve their lives by finding a diagnosis. Con-
tinuing tensions exist in how such diagnoses are achieved and how valid they
are if achieved outside the domains of medical authority and expertise. This
is particularly the case if people use a social media platform, TikTok, which
has increasingly become positioned in the popular imagination and public
discourses as, on the one hand, harmful, and on the other, a trivial networked
space that should not be used for purposes such as self-diagnosis.
References
Abel, Susan, Tanya Machin, and Charlotte Brownlow. 2019. Support, Socialise
and Advocate: An Exploration of the Stated Purposes of Facebook Autism
Groups. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 61: 10-21.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 207
Barta, Kristen, and Nazanin Andalibi. 2021. Constructing Authenticity on TikTok:
Social Norms and Social Support on the “Fun” Platform. Proceedings of the ACM
on Human-Computer Interaction 5 CSCW2: 1-29.
Batifoulier, Philippe, and Rainer Diaz-Bone. 2021. Perspectives on the Economics
and Sociology of Health. Contributions from the Institutionalist Approach of
Economics of Convention – An Introduction. Historical Social Research 46 (1): 7-
34. doi: 10.12759/hsr.46.2021.1.7-34.
Bellon-Harn, Monica L., Jianyuan Ni, and Vinaya Manchaiah. 2020. Twitter
Usage about Autism Spectrum Disorder. Autism 24 (7): 1805-16.
Binkley, Sam. 2024. Opening Up and Going In: Metaphors of Interiority and the
Case of Humanistic Psychology. Historical Social Research 49 (3): 123-155. doi:
10.12759/hsr.49.2024.27.
Boseley, Matilda. 2023. ADHD Has Become an Identity, Not Just a Disorder. We Need
a New Way to Talk about It. The Guardian Australia, September 21. https://www.
theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/21/adhd-has-become-an-identity-not-just-a-
disorder-we-need-a-new-way-to-talk-about-it (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Brandt, Senta, and Jürgen Straub. 2024. A Critique of Guided Self-Optimisation:
Mental Health, Success, Happiness, and Virtue in Missionary Positive
Psychology and Psychotherapy. Historical Social Research 49 (3): 156-187. doi:
10.12759/hsr.49.2024.28.
Cabanas, Edgar. 2024. CrossFit and Self-Optimization in CrossFit’s Popular
Literature. Historical Social Research 49 (3): 30-59. doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.23.
Callaghan, Shaun, Martin Lösch, Anna Pione, and Warren Teichner. 2021. Feeling
Good: The Future of the $1.5 Trillion Wellness Market. McKinsey & Company.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/our-insights/
feeling-good-the-future-of-the-1-5-trillion-wellness-market (Accessed July 16,
2024).
Camp, Emma. 2023. Why I Am More and More Ambivalent about My Autism
Diagnosis. The New York Times, April 19. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/19/
opinion/tiktok-mental-health.html?smid=url-share (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Cappel, Valeska. 2021. The Plurality of Daily Digital Dealth. The Emergence of a
New Form of Health Coordination. Historical Social Research 46 (1): 230-60. doi:
10.12759/hsr.46.2021.1.230-260.
Cénat, Jude Mary, Cyrille Kossigan Kokou-Kpolou, Camille Blais-Rochette,
Catherine Morse, Marie-Pier Vandette, Rose Darly Dalexis, Wina Paul Darius,
Pari-Gole Noorishad, Patrick R. Labelle, and Cary S. Kogan. 2024. Prevalence
of ADHD among Black Youth Compared to White, Latino and Asian Youth: A
Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 53 (3): 373-88.
doi: 10.1080/15374416.2022.2051524.
Chambers, Duncan, Anna J. Cantrell, Maxine Johnson, Louise Preston, Susan K.
Baxter, Andrew Booth, and Janette Turner. 2019. Digital and Online Symptom
Checkers and Health Assessment/Triage Services for Urgent Health Problems:
Systematic Review. BMJ Open 9 (8): e027743. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-
027743.
Clarke, Adele, Janet Shim, Laura Mamo, Jennifer Ruth Fosket, and Jennifer
Fishman. 2010. Biomedicalization: A Theoretical and Substantive Intro-
duction. In Biomedicalization: Technoscience, Health, and Illness in the U.S., ed.
Adele Clarke, Laura Mamo, Jennifer Ruth Fosket, Jennifer Fishman and Janet
Shim, 1-44. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 208
Colombo, Charlotte. 2023. ADHD is a Lot More Than a TikTok Trend, It Can Come
with Serious Guilt, Anxiety, and More than Anything, Shame. Glamour
Magazine UK, February 2023. https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/
adhd-tiktok-trend (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Crane, Laura, Richard Batty, Hanna Adeyinka, Lorna Goddard, Lucy A. Henry,
and Elisabeth L. Hill. 2018. Autism Diagnosis in the United Kingdom:
Perspectives of Autistic Adults, Parents and Professionals. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders 48 (11): 3761-72.
Diaz-Bone, Rainer. 2021. Economics of Convention Meets Canguilhem. Historical
Social Research 46 (1): 285-311. doi: 10.12759/hsr.46.2021.1.285-311.
Dunbar, Polly. 2023. The ADHD Self-Diagnosis ‘Industry’ Offering a Quick Fix that
Doesn’t Exist. The Daily Telegraph, February 2023. https://www.telegraph.co.
uk/health-fitness/mind/adhd-self-assessment-test-online-reliable-accurate-
tiktok/ (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Durkin, Maureen S., Mayada Elsabbagh, Josephine Barbaro, Melissa Gladstone,
Francesca Happe, Rosa A. Hoekstra, Li-Ching Lee, Alexia Rattazzi, Jennifer
Stapel-Wax, and Wendy L. Stone. 2015. Autism Screening and Diagnosis in Low
Resource Settings: Challenges and Opportunities to Enhance Research and
Services Worldwide. Autism Research 8 (5): 473-6. doi: 10.1002/aur.1575.
Elliott, Anthony. 2020. Reinvention. Abington: Routledge.
Eriksson Krutrök, Moa. 2021. Algorithmic Closeness in Mourning: Vernaculars
of the Hashtag #Grief on TikTok. Social Media + Society 7 (3). doi: 10.1177/
20563051211042396.
Fairman, Kathleen A., Alyssa M. Peckham, and David A. Sclar. 2020. Diagnosis
and Treatment of ADHD in the United States: Update by Gender and Race.
Journal of Attention Aisorders 24 (1): 10-9.
Farci, Manolo, Luca Rossi, Giovanni Boccia Artieri, and Fabio Giglietto. 2017.
Networked Intimacy. Intimacy and Friendship among Italian Facebook Users.
Information, Communication & Society 20 (5): 784-801.
Gilmore, R., J. Beezhold, V. Selwyn, R. Howard, I. Bartolome, and N. Henderson.
2022. Is TikTok Increasing the Number of Self-Diagnoses of ADHD in Young
People? European Psychiatry 65 S1: S571-S571.
Grierson, Jamie, Dan Milmo, and Hibaq Farah. 2021. Revealed: Anti-Vaccine
TikTok Videos being Viewed by Children as Young as Nine. The Guardian,
October 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/08/reveal
ed-anti-vaccine-tiktok-videos-viewed-children-as-young-as-nine-covid
(Accessed July 16, 2024).
Hanrieder, Tine, and Eloisa Montt Maray. 2021. Digitalizing Community Health
Work. Historical Social Research 46 (1): 136-59. doi: 10.12759/hsr.46.2021.1.136-
159.
Hartung, Catherine, Natalie Ann Hendry, Kath Albury, Sasha Johnston, and
Rosie Welch. 2022. Teachers of TikTok: Glimpses and Gestures in the Per-
formance of Professional Identity. Media International Australia 186 (1): 81-96.
Hautea, Samantha, Perry Parks, Bruno Takahashi, and Jing Zeng. 2021. Showing
They Care (or Don’t): Affective Publics and Ambivalent Climate Activism on
TikTok. Social Media + Society 7 (2). doi: 10.1177/20563051211012344.
Hendry, Natalie Ann, Catherine Hartung, and Rosie Welch. 2021. Health
Education, Social Media, and Tensions of Authenticity in the ‘Influencer
Pedagogy’ of Health Influencer Ashy Bines. Learning, Media and Rechnology 47
(4): 427-39.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 209
Henwood, Flis, and Benjamin Marent. 2019. Understanding Digital Health:
Productive Tensions at the Intersection of Sociology of Health and Science and
Technology Studies. Sociology of Health & Illness 41: 1-15.
Heyman, Isobel, Holan Liang, and Tammy Hedderly. 2021. COVID-19 Related
Increase in Childhood Tics and Tic-Like Attacks. Archives of Disease in Childhood
106 (5). http://adc.bmj.com/content/106/5/420.abstract (Accessed July 16,
2024).
Hiebert, Alexa, and Kathy Kortes-Miller. 2021. Finding Home in Online
Community: Exploring TikTok as a Support for Gender and Sexual Minority
Youth throughout COVID-19. Journal of LGBT Youth 20 (4): 800-17.
Huang, Yunhe, Samuel R. C. Arnold, Kitty-Rose Foley, and Julian N. Trollor. 2020.
Diagnosis of Autism in Adulthood: A Scoping Review. Autism 24 (6): 1311-27.
Imperfect Inspiration. “Brainfetti Subscription Box.” https://imperfectinspiration.
com/brainfetti-subscription-box (Accessed July 16, 2024).
James, Stephen N., and Christopher J. Smith. 2020. Early Autism Diagnosis in the
Primary Care Setting. Seminars in Pediatric Neurology 35. doi: 10.1016/j.spen.
2020.100827.
Jeske, Melanie, Jennifer James, and Kelly Joyce. 2024. Diagnosis and the
Practices of Patienthood: How Diagnostic Journeys Shape Illness Experiences.
Sociology of Health & Illness 46 S1: 225-41.
Jones, Desiree R., and David S. Mandell. 2020. To Address Racial Disparities in
Autism Research, We Must Think Globally, Act Locally. Autism 24 (7): 1587-9.
Jones, Sandra. 2022. TikTok is Teaching the World about Autism – But is it
Empowering Autistic People or Pigeonholing Them? The Conversation, October
25. https://theconversation.com/tiktok-is-teaching-the-world-about-autism-
but-is-it-empowering-autistic-people-or-pigeonholing-them-192093 (Accessed
July 16, 2024).
Jutel, Annemarie, and Deborah Lupton. 2015. Digitizing Diagnosis: A Review of
Mobile Applications in the Diagnostic Process. Diagnosis 2 (2): 89-96. doi: 10.1515/
dx-2014-0068.
Jutel, Annemarie, and Sarah Nettleton. 2011. Towards a Sociology of Diagnosis:
Reflections and Opportunities. Social Science & Medicine 73 (6): 793-800.
Kaye, D. Bondy Valdovinos, Jing Zeng, and Patrik Wikstrom. 2022. TikTok:
Creativity and Culture in Short Video. Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.
King, Vera, Benigna Gerisch, Hartmut Rosa, Ramona Franz, Diana Lindner, Ben
Salfeld, Micha Schlichting, Julia Schreiber, and Maike Stenger. 2024. Self-
Optimization via Figures and Digital Parameters – Psychic Repercussions of
Digital Measurement and Comparison. Historical Social Research 49 (3): 213-237.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.30.
Krzeminska, Agnieszka. 2024. Self-Optimisation and the Technologically
Mediated Self: Balancing Self-Care and Self-Control. Historical Social Research
49 (3): 77-101. doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.25.
Lane, Rhiannon. 2020. Expanding Boundaries in Psychiatry: Uncertainty in the
Context of Diagnosis-Seeking and Negotiation. Sociology of Health & Illness 42
S1: 69-83.
Loftus, Yolande. 2022. Self-Diagnosed Autism: Is It a Valid Diagnosis? Autism
Parenting Magazine, December 5. https://www.autismparentingmagazine.
com/autism-self-diagnosis/ (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Lupton, Deborah. 1995. The Imperative of Health: Public Health and the Regulated
Body. London: Sage.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 210
Lupton, Deborah. 1997. Foucault and the Medicalisation Critique. In Foucault,
Health and Medicine, ed. Petersen, Alan and Robin Bunton, 94-110. London:
Routledge.
Lupton, Deborah. 2012. Medicine as Culture: Illness, Disease and the Body. 3rd ed.
London: Sage.
Lupton, Deborah. 2013. The Digitally Engaged Patient: Self-Monitoring and Self-
Care in the Digital Health Era. Social Theory & Health 11 (3): 256-70.
Lupton, Deborah. 2016. The Quantified Self: A Sociology of Self-Tracking.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lupton, Deborah. 2017. Digital Health: Critical and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives.
London: Routledge.
Lupton, Deborah. 2019. Toward a More-Than-Human Analysis of Digital Health:
Inspirations from Feminist New Materialism. Qualitative Health Research 29
(14): 1998-2009.
Lupton, Deborah, Marianne Clark, and Clare Southerton. 2022. Digitized and
Datafied Embodiment: A More-Than-Human Approach. In Palgrave Handbook
of Critical Posthumanism, ed. Herbrechter, Stefan, Ivan Callus, Manuela
Rossini, Marija Grech, Megen de Bruin-Molé and Christopher John Müller, 1-
23. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Lupton, Deborah, and Annemarie Jutel. 2015. ‘It’s Like Having a Physician in
Your Pocket!’ A Critical Analysis of Self-Diagnosis Smartphone Apps. Social
Science & Medicine 133: 128-35.
Masciantonio, Alexandra, David Bourguignon, Pierre Bouchat, Manon Balty, and
Bernard Rimé. 2021. Don’t Put All Social Network Sites in One Basket:
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, and Their Relations with Well-Being
during the COVID-19 Pandemic. PloS One 16 (3): e0248384. https://journals.
plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0248384 (Accessed July 16,
2024).
Maslen, Sarah, and Deborah Lupton. 2020. Enacting Chronic Illness with and
through Digital Media: A Feminist New Materialist Approach. Information,
Communication & Society 23 (11): 1640-54.
McCashin, Darragh, and Colette M. Murphy. 2022. Using TikTok for Public and
Youth Mental Health – A Systematic Review and Content Analysis. Clinical
Child Psychology and Psychiatry 28 (1): 279-306.
McLean, Jessica, Clare Southerton, and Deborah Lupton. 2024. Young People and
TikTok use in Australia: Digital Geographies of Care in Popular Culture. Social
& Cultural Geography 25 (5):795-813. doi: 10.1080/14649365.2023.2230943.
Mosendz, Polly, and Caleb Melby. 2022. ADHD drugs Are Convenient to Get
Online. Maybe Too Convenient. Bloomberg News, March 11. https://
www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-03-11/cerebral-app-over-
prescribed-adhd-meds-ex-employees-say (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Nehring, Daniel, and Anja Röcke. 2023. Self-Optimisation: Conceptual,
Discursive and Historical Perspectives. Current Sociology online first. doi:
10.1177/00113921221146575.
Oliver, Mike. 2013. The Social Model of Disability: Thirty Years On. Disability &
Society 28 (7): 1024-6.
Olvera, Caroline, Glenn T. Stebbins, Christopher G. Goetz, and Katie Kompoliti.
2021. TikTok Tics: A Pandemic within a Pandemic. Movement Disorders Clinical
Practice 8 (8): 1200-5.
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 211
Ortega, Francisco. 2009. The Cerebral Subject and the Challenge of Neurodiversity.
BioSocieties 4 (4): 425-45.
Pasha-Robinson, Lucy. 2022. Doctor TikTok: Overlooked Women are Relying on
the Internet to Self-Diagnose with ADHD, But It’s Complicated. iNews UK,
November 29. https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/women-self-diagnosing-
adhd-social-media-1997640 (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Rafalovich, Adam. 2013. Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder as the
Medicalization of Childhood: Challenges from and for Sociology. Sociology
Compass 7 (5): 343-54.
Rogers, Anne, and David Pilgrim. 2021. A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness.
6th ed. London: McGraw-Hill Education.
Rose, Diana, and Nikolas Rose. 2023. Is ‘Another’ Psychiatry Possible?
Psychological Medicine 53 (1): 46-54.
Russell, Ginny, Sal Stapley, Tamsin Newlove-Delgado, Andrew Salmon, Rhianna
White, Fiona Warren, Anita Pearson, and Tamsin Ford. 2022. Time Trends in
Autism Diagnosis over 20 Years: A UK Population-Based Cohort Study. The
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 63 (6): 674-82.
Schellewald, Andreas. 2023. Understanding the Popularity and Affordances of
TikTok through User Experiences. Media, Culture & Society 45 (8): 1568-82.
Sevastidis, Abraham, Sithara Wanni Arachchige Dona, Lisa Gold, Emma
Sciberra, David Coghill, and Ha Nguyet Dao Le. 2023. Social Gradient in Use of
Health Services and Health-Related Quality of Life of Children with Attention-
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Systematic Review. JCPP Advances 3 (3).
https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcv2.12170 (Accessed July
16, 2024).
Shepardson, David, and Rami Ayyub. 2023. TikTok Congressional Hearing: CEO
Shou Zi Chew Grilled by US Lawmakers. Reuters, March 24. https://www.reut
ers.com/technology/tiktok-ceo-face-tough-questions-support-us-ban-grows-
2023-03-23/ (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Singer, Merrill, and Hans Baer. 2018. Critical Medical Anthropology. New York:
Routledge.
Sky News. 2023. ADHD: Why Teenagers are Using TikTok to Self-Diagnose.
Feburary 20. https://news.sky.com/story/adhd-why-teenagers-are-using-
tiktok-to-self-diagnose-12813695 (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Southerton, Clare. 2021. Lip-Syncing and Saving Lives: Healthcare Workers on
TikTok. International Journal of Communication 15: 3248-68.
Southerton, Clare, and Marianne Clark. 2023. OBGYNs of TikTok and the Role of
Misinformation in Diffractive Knowledge Production. Journal of Sociology 59
(3): 610-27.
Spence, Naomi J., David Russell, Erin D. Bouldin, Christa M. Tumminello, and
Tatum Schwartz. 2023. Getting Back to Normal? Identity and Role Disruptions
among Adults with Long COVID. Sociology of Health & Illness 45 (4): 914-34.
Stein, Krysten, Yueyang Yao, and Tanja Aitamurto. 2022. Examining
Communicative Forms in #TikTokDocs’ Sexual Health Videos. International
Journal of Communication 16: 1309-31.
Stephens, Max. 2023. Fears Teenagers Self-Diagnose Autism and ADHD Using
TikTok. The Telegraph, February 10.
Stone, Megan. 2023. TikTok Sparks Woman’s ADHD Diagnosis at Age 34. How
Social Media is Changing the Conversation. Good Morning America, April 28.
https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/wellness/story/tiktok-sparks-
HSR 49 (2024) 3 │ 212
womans-adhd-diagnosis-age-34-social-84315901#:~:text=Valerie%20Hardt%
20was%20diagnosed%20with,%2F%20hyperactivity%20disorder%20(ADHD)
(Accessed July 16, 2024).
Taylor, Chloe. 2022. Millions are Getting Birth Control Advice from TikTok.
Experts Warn the Consequences of Getting it Wrong Have Never Been More
Dangerous in Post-Roe America. Fortune, September 3. https://fortune.com/
well/2022/09/03/tiktok-birth-control-advice-videos-rhythm-method-rack-up-
millions-of-views-experts-warn-not-to-trust-them/ (Accessed July 16, 2024).
Vogels, Emily A., Risa Gelles-Watnick, and Navid Massarat. 2022. Teens, Social
Media and Technology 2022. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/
internet/2022/08/10/teens-social-media-and-technology-2022/ (Accessed July 16,
2024).
Wassef, Fady. 2022. TikTok Cyberbullying: Attacks against the Autism
Community. UCLA Disabillities & Computing Program. https://dcp.ucla.edu/
tiktok-cyberbullying-attacks-against-autism-community#:~:text=A%20few%2
0weeks%20ago%20a,%2C%20gestures%2C%20and%20facial%20expressions
(Accessed July 16, 2024).
Watson, Ash, Deborah Lupton, and Mike Michael. 2021. Enacting Intimacy and
Sociality at a Distance in the COVID-19 Crisis: The Sociomaterialities of Home-
Based Communication Technologies. Media International Australia 178 (1): 136-
50.
Wilson, Rosemarie B., Andrew R. Thompson, Georgina Rowse, Richard Smith,
Amber-Sophie Dugdale, and Megan Freeth. 2022. Autistic Women’s
Experiences of Self-Compassion after Receiving Their Diagnosis in Adulthood.
Autism 27 (5): 1336-47.
Yeung, Anthony, Enoch Ng, and Elia Abi-Jaoude. 2022. TikTok and Attention-
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Study of Social Media
Content Quality. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 67 (12): 899-906.
Zillien, Nicole. 2024. Self-Tracking as a Dietetic Practice. Historical Social Research
49 (3): 60-76. doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.24.
All articles published in HSR Special Issue 49 (2024) 3:
Debating Self-Optimisation: Practices, Paradoxes, and Power.
Introduction
Anja Röcke, Daniel Nehring & Suvi Salmenniemi
Dynamics of Self-Optimisation: An Introduction.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.22
Contributions
Edgar Cabanas
CrossFit and Self-Optimization in CrossFit’s Popular Literature.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.23
Nicole Zillien
Self-Tracking as a Dietetic Practice.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.24
Agnieszka Krzeminska
Self-Optimisation and the Technologically Mediated Self: Balancing Self-Care and Self-Control.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.25
Tristan Fournier & Sébastien Dalgalarrondo
From Self-Optimization to Minimalism and Back. The Promises and Practices of Fasting in France
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.26
Sam Binkley
Opening Up and Going In: Metaphors of Interiority and the Case of Humanistic Psychology.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.27
Senta Brandt & Jürgen Straub
A Critique of Guided Self-Optimisation: Mental Health, Success, Happiness, and Virtue in Missionary
Positive Psychology and Psychotherapy.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.28
Deborah Lupton & Clare Southerton
#ActuallyAutistic: Competing Cultures of Expertise and Knowledge in Relation to Autism and ADHD Self-
Diagnosis on TikTok.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.29
Vera King, Benigna Gerisch, Hartmut Rosa, Ramona Franz, Diana Lindner, Benedikt Salfeld, Micha
Schlichting, Julia Schreiber & Maike Stenger
Self-Optimization via Figures and Digital Parameters – Psychic Repercussions of Digital Measurement
and Comparison.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.30
For further information on our journal, including tables of contents, article abstracts, and our extensive online archive, please
visit https://www.gesis.org/en/hsr.
Amir Hampel
Practical Daydreams: Self-Optimization through Consumer Lifestyles in China.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.31
Daniel Nehring, Talia Esnard & Dylan Kerrigan
Re-Thinking Self-Optimisation: Power, Self, and Community in the Global South.
doi: 10.12759/hsr.49.2024.32
For further information on our journal, including tables of contents, article abstracts, and our extensive online archive, please
visit https://www.gesis.org/en/hsr.
