Reconciling healthism and techno‐solutionism: An observational study of a digital mental health trial

Abstract

In a growing trend in digital psychiatry, algorithmic systems are used to determine correlations between data that is collected using wearable devices and self‐reports of mood. They then offer recommendations for behaviour modification for improved mood. The present study consists of observations of the development of one of these systems. Descriptions of the trial emphasise the powerful role of the intrinsically motivated, responsible participant on one hand and the empowering machine learning (ML)‐based technology on the other. This conceptualisation is shown to extend the neoliberal paradox of a freedom that, to be maintained, must be continually adjusted through discipline. Because of the paradoxical nature of this formulation, laboratory members disagree about the balance of agency between the objective machine learning system and the empowered participant. The guides who help participants interpret ML outputs and implement system recommendations are ascribed a replaceable role in formal accounts. Observations of this guidance practice make clear not only the important role played by guides but also how their work is relegated to the technological side of the broader formulation of the trial and further how this conceptualisation affects the way they conduct their work.