When a clinical professional (e.g., doctor, psychologist, or other licensed mental health therapist) is also a social media “influencer,” how do you react? Our brains often respond to information with some sort of bias or judgment; notice what yours says.
I’ve heard a wide range of perspectives—from strongly supportive to skeptical. Even my own thinking has moved all over the place. I avoided even using my title of “therapist” on social media until needed for marketing when I was releasing my first book in 2021. But a new study has increased my support of professionals sharing guidance and information on TikTok, Instagram, or other networking sites (Carter et al., 2026). Heck, the authors specifically call for clinicians and organizations to share more evidence-based content online to help counter misinformation.
The 2026 study by Carter and colleagues included 27 studies (more than 5,000 posts) and revealed the following regarding “misinformation”—scientifically unsupported, inaccurate, or misleading information—related to mental health and neurodivergence:
It is widespread on social media. Some categories of content showed rates above 50 percent. (Imagine if your primary care doctor was wrong this often…)
TikTok—an especially popular source of health information (Kirkpatrick et al., 2024)—showed the highest misinformation rates, more than YouTube, Facebook, and other platforms, with 52 percent of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) videos and 41 percent of autism-related videos classified as misinformation.
Why Accurate Guidance and Information Matter
As a mental health clinician, I know that accurate health information is vital. A matched diagnosis-to-problem can create the path to potentially effective treatment. For example, let’s say you have obsessive-compulsive disorder but gleaned from online that ADHD was your match: How might that affect your path to relief?
If convinced of the ADHD diagnosis, you might delay seeking appropriate care. You may pursue approaches that are not well matched to the actual problem, potentially reinforcing distress or delaying effective care while losing valuable time that could change the outcome.
In my work, I’ve witnessed that sometimes people hold onto diagnoses they believe they have, even when evidence-based evaluations or assessments by licensed and regulated professionals suggest otherwise. As you can imagine, this can complicate trust in both providers and treatment recommendations.
Still, I “get it.” Algorithms often create echo chambers, pushing similar content repeatedly. Repetition of information, even if not in line with science, can make it feel credible. Through repetition, that sense of credibility can eventually feel ironclad.
For example, to those wanting an explanation for distress or concern, “If you do this [this = normal human thing to do], then you have that [that = diagnosis title]” content can feel relieving. But many human experiences overlap with symptoms depending on severity, frequency, intensity, and impact on functioning.
What You Can Do to Screen the Info on Social Media
No single factor (even those that sound as impressive as “licensed,” “regulated,” or “professional”) offers guarantees. However, we can make connections amongst meaningful factors to arrive at more confident conclusions.
A few extra steps may help—a simple, five-item checklist.
1. Vet the qualifications behind the content.
Is the person licensed, or what training and experience support their guidance? Interestingly, the review by Carter and associates generally found that professionally created content was more reliable than nonprofessional content.
I do look for years in the field, licenses, experience, and other factors that support why I might pay attention to someone’s clinical (assessment, diagnosis, treatment-related) information. In the United States, regulated providers (e.g., psychologists, physicians, psychotherapists) creating content have ethics requirements and oversight through licensing boards. Though requisites vary by geography, they often include graduate-level education and thousands of supervised clinical hours. Despite those seeming safeguards, some present information with a level of certainty or authority that would raise concerns within clinical settings.
Lived-experience perspectives can be deeply valuable. However, in my opinion, lived experience alone is not usually a substitute for formal clinical training when translating complex mental health concepts to broad audiences. Note that I said, “generally.” I think about my own lived experience of recovery from eating disorders as a foundation, alongside how much more I learned through the education, supervision, clinical work, and training required for two licenses and two specialist credentials.
Unlicensed professionals in the United States tend to include advocates, many coaches, and lived-experience creators. These are typically not regulated in the United States. Each brings different training, accountability, and forms of value.
Here’s a tip for any content creator’s bio you read, regulated or not: Marketing and descriptive language (e.g., “extensive”) can sound highly credible while remaining vague. It may help to look into what specifics back the language: what education, supervised experience, training, oversight, lived experience, self-study, years of dedication, level of activism or advocacy in the area, etc., a person has. Formal education is not the only form of training or expertise.
Social Media Essential Reads
2. Look for citations or references supporting health claims.
If none are provided, ask. If there is no response from the influencer or poster, that may be information worth considering.
3. Check for disclaimers about education vs. therapy, professional advice, etc.
If you see this kind of disclaimer, it might indicate that the online mental health influencer is clarifying limits to readers, which is generally a positive sign.
4. Notice if absolute language is used.
Statements including words such as “is/are,” “always/never,” “everyone/nobody” may be a hot pink flag. Wording that protects readers, science, and interpretations often includes terms such as “may,” “can,” “sometimes,” and “often.” There are a lot of nuances in mental health, and few absolutes.
5. Check your internal response to their content’s tone and feel.
Does this person sound wise and balanced? Is their tone calm or persuasive? Do they seem curious?
Bottom Line
Social media is designed to keep you engaged—you get information and entertainment, even when the information may be questionable, and the platforms get your time.
In a space shaped by repetition and reach, accuracy does not rise on its own—it requires voices willing to bring it forward.
As my colleague, Kimberley Quinlan, a licensed clinician, widely recognized mental health content creator, and host of a popular podcast notes:
My role is to make evidence-based information clear, relatable, and actually useful, without sacrificing accuracy. A huge part of my advocacy is pushing back against misinformation, because so many people are stuck from being taught the wrong things. I focus on giving accurate, nuanced guidance and making it clear that content is education, not therapy.
In many ways, social media has revolutionized the availability of guidance that was previously less accessible to many people. And that makes thoughtful, non-sensationalized, accurate mental health content matter even more, especially in an era of misinformation. It’s not about hierarchy or turf; it’s about safety.
This article is for informational purposes and does not provide therapy or professional advice. Thank you to fellow Psychology Today writer, researcher, and recovery coach Emily Troscianko for her thoughtful feedback.