How social media is becoming an “ADHD wikipedia”
We have three general types of ADHD sources: scientific research, popular science books and self-help articles (of varying quality), as well as social media.
And we have three groups of people who use these sources: professionals, laypeople seeking solutions and assistance, and individuals with ADHD who are looking for validation and acceptance.
These three groups are often intertwined: a researcher decides to study ADHD because they experience it themselves. A mother, seeking help for her child, may discover she meets the diagnostic criteria too. A newly diagnosed person, caught in a moment of “aha!” and hyperfocus, reads everything they can find. Often, they end up creating their own content on the subject.
Nevertheless, despite this overlap, each group has its “favorite” type of source. Someone searching for help will mainly choose self-help publications, often written by psychiatrists, therapists, and coaches. Even if they visit NIH websites, they usually do so just to clear up doubts about the safety of stimulants. Wading through detailed methodological explanations isn’t particularly valuable reading for them. Social media posts like “I love my ADHD, it’s my superpower” or “Hey, how many tabs do you have open?” also aren’t the best source of strategy-related knowledge.
But — it’s 2025 now, and ADHD diagnoses are on the rise. If we take a closer look at the diagnostic criteria and tools and compare them to what is being written by the masses of newly diagnosed, long-diagnosed, and self-diagnosed individuals, we can see that these various sources — tailored to the level and needs of different audiences — are causing the overall picture of ADHD to become somewhat blurred. Previously, this wasn’t so obvious because there weren’t as many people openly talking about their issues.
And even if these folks write about other things than diagnostic criteria, the image is somehow consistent.
Diagnostic criteria are a bit like GDP — it measures what can be measured but doesn’t capture what’s most important.
Diagnostic criteria are based on deficits. This is reflected in the disorder’s name (attention deficit), which has long been known to be inaccurate, based on outdated knowledge. It’s not always accompanied by hyperactivity, and attention may not always be deficient; sometimes it’s quite the opposite, overly focused. And (apart from the unfortunate name), it might not be a problem if these criteria were sufficient. However, they are not. For a long time now, we’ve been dealing with a situation in which ADHD is both underdiagnosed and overdiagnosed. On the one hand, diagnosis is given to people who exhibit symptoms that could have been triggered by something else (mainly schoolchildren). On the other hand, those who do not show obvious, instantly recognizable symptoms (mainly women who aren’t as hyperactive and have learned to mask other symptoms) may not receive the ADHD diagnosis at all. Instead, they receive diagnoses related to other issues that can cause similar symptoms. Of course, the other way is also true: some of them self-diagnose themselves thanks to tik-tok, but their ADHD-like symptoms were caused by something else or even entirely imagined, because they raised their bar too high and were trying to meet impossible standards.
Signs Between the Lines: Recognizing ADHD Beyond Clinical Checklists
Meanwhile, many people (perhaps everyone) with ADHD can recognize other ADHD individuals by subtle signs not covered in the main criteria.
Get Ania Powers’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
For example, their style of expression reveals the pathways their minds take. This can be seen in online discussions on any topic (especially the more emotionally charged), mainly where it’s impossible to edit a posted comment:
- Long sentences filled with digressions in parentheses, sometimes nested inside other parentheses.
- The end of a sentence introduces a different topic than the beginning, including typos and grammar errors indicating the writer does not remember how the sentence began — or who or what is its subject.
- “My argument is the most right.”
- Questioning obvious things, not because of differing beliefs but just for the sake of it.
- Beating a dead horse.
- Frustration (for example: “It was clearly stated three times already, but people still don’t get the obvious link between X and Y”).
- A heightened sensitivity to injustice (not necessarily towards themselves!) and a deep emotional response to it. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24878677/
- Rapid-fire replies at a speed unattainable for people who would normally take time to carefully read what they are responding to.
Of course, ADHD people can write clear and comprehensive texts. But if someone leaves a trail of spontaneous posts and notes written in the style described above, most likely will also fit the classic diagnostic criteria.
While we are at the screen-related activities: Another common trait (recognized by professionals) is having a gazillion of browser tabs opened. And I believe it could be a valuable research material, to have a screen recording of people with ADHD and a control group. I am not saying it would be a fantastic standalone test — I have no clue how it would compare to, let’s say, a neurotypical person who just lost a long-life partner and is barely self at the moment — but I can guarantee it would show certain patterns beyond multiple tabs, including reopening the last closed ones, having the same tab open in 5 different windows, searches in history, repeated entries in forms open in multiple locations, with tabs irrelevant to the main topic but showing a deep research of something what just came as a distraction, you get the idea. And that was a long sentence, BTW.
