Algorithmic gaslighting in healthcare: mechanisms, harms, and epistemic injustice in context

Algorithmic systems are increasingly woven into healthcare, from triage applications to AI-enabled decision support tools. While such systems promise efficiency and diagnostic accuracy, they also perform a normative function: shaping whose knowledge is treated as credible, which symptoms matter, and how patient testimony is interpreted. This article introduces algorithmic gaslighting to name the patterned dynamic through which testimonial and hermeneutical injustices become recursively stabilized and internalized as patient self-doubt in algorithmically mediated clinical encounters. Building on feminist and disability bioethics accounts of medical gaslighting-where clinicians dismiss or reinterpret patient reports, often in gendered or racialized ways-I extend the analysis to algorithmic contexts. Drawing on Miranda Fricker's theory of epistemic injustice, I show how interlocking sociotechnical mechanisms-data violence, opacity, automated authority, and feedback loops-can displace patient credibility, constrain interpretive resources, and destabilize patient self-trust. These dynamics recalibrate epistemic agency, rendering patients as data objects rather than recognized knowers. To counter such harms, I propose a normative framework aimed at interrupting gaslighting dynamics in algorithmically mediated care, emphasizing rights to contestation, participatory design, critical audits, and shared responsibility. Recognizing algorithmic gaslighting helps safeguard trust, dialogue, and agency in the digital transformation of healthcare.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine
Published
2026-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-026-00235-0
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Algorithmic gaslighting in healthcare: mechanisms, harms, and epistemic injustice in context

Orhan Onder
Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Algorithmic gaslighting in healthcare: mechanisms, harms, and epistemic injustice in context

Orhan Onder
article en

Abstract

Algorithmic systems are increasingly woven into healthcare, from triage applications to AI-enabled decision support tools. While such systems promise efficiency and diagnostic accuracy, they also perform a normative function: shaping whose knowledge is treated as credible, which symptoms matter, and how patient testimony is interpreted. This article introduces algorithmic gaslighting to name the patterned dynamic through which testimonial and hermeneutical injustices become recursively stabilized and internalized as patient self-doubt in algorithmically mediated clinical encounters. Building on feminist and disability bioethics accounts of medical gaslighting-where clinicians dismiss or reinterpret patient reports, often in gendered or racialized ways-I extend the analysis to algorithmic contexts. Drawing on Miranda Fricker's theory of epistemic injustice, I show how interlocking sociotechnical mechanisms-data violence, opacity, automated authority, and feedback loops-can displace patient credibility, constrain interpretive resources, and destabilize patient self-trust. These dynamics recalibrate epistemic agency, rendering patients as data objects rather than recognized knowers. To counter such harms, I propose a normative framework aimed at interrupting gaslighting dynamics in algorithmically mediated care, emphasizing rights to contestation, participatory design, critical audits, and shared responsibility. Recognizing algorithmic gaslighting helps safeguard trust, dialogue, and agency in the digital transformation of healthcare.

Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in MedicineVol. 21(1)
University of Vienna (AT), Marmara University (TR)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.