Bio

Dr. Jonathan Y. Lee, MD, PhD is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the Depression Clinic of Stanford University where he founded the "Am I Good? Examining life through the lenses of Philosophical Skepticism, Moral Philosophy, and Existentialism" philosophical psychotherapy group.

Jonathan's research focuses on the causes and consequences of, as well as solutions to, rising skepticism and distrust in sources of expert information (e.g., science, health). He has a special interest in exploring skepticism and persuasion at the intersection of health and politics, which includes studying phenomena such as the politicization of science and health, political polarization, filter bubbles/echo chambers, the emerging post-truth world, and information warfare. It also includes seeking heteorgeneity in the findings across particular demographics at high socioeconomic and health risk. He draws on theories and methods from his uniquely interdisciplinary set of educational, research, and professional experiences, including those from experimental and behavioral economics, political science, psychology, philosophy, and machine learning. He is currently using machine learning-based text analytics to explore how trust/distrust in sources of expert information is discussed on traditional and social media -- followed by the use of online randomized controlled survey experiments to test the causal effects of particular persuasion strategies on perceptions of trust/distrust, as well as other important behavioral outcomes of interest.

Jonathan uses a clinical approach that consists of the use of both psychopharmacological and individual/group psychotherapeutic interventions to address depression, anxiety, and other mental health problems. Referred to by some as philosophical psychiatry, philosophical therapy, philosophical counseling, or philosophical psychology, Jonathan's approach to psychotherapy begins with the building of one's worldview / lens from a first principles perspective by asking the fundamental questions posed by philosophers and scientists spanning philosophical / intellectual traditions across time, including:

existentialism / existential philosophy

philosophical empiricism

philosophical skepticism, absurdism, pessimism, nihilism

logical empiricism / logical positivism

moral / ethical philosophy, skepticism, relativism

rational skepticism / scientific skepticism

political liberalism

Questions include 'how do we know what we know?', 'what is the meaning of life?', 'what is the purpose of life?', 'does God exist?', 'what matters?', 'what is value?', 'what is good?', 'do we have moral obligations?', 'what are our moral obligations?', 'do we have rights?', 'what are rights?', 'do we have free will?', etc.

Jonathan's approach draws heavily from the philosophical works of Epicurus, Baruch Spinoza, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Arthur Schopenhauer, Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre, John Rawles, etc.

Clinical Focus

  • Psychiatry

Academic Appointments

  • Clinical Assistant Professor, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

Professional Education

  • Residency: Stanford University Adult Psychiatry Residency (06/30/2018) CA
  • Medical Education: Pritzker School of Medicine University of Chicago Registrar (6/14/2014) IL
  • PhD, Stanford University, Health Policy - Health Economics (2024)
  • MA, Stanford University, Political Science (2024)
  • PhD Minor, Stanford University, Economics (2024)
  • Board Certification: American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, Psychiatry (2018)
  • Residency: Stanford University Adult Psychiatry Residency (2018) CA
  • MBA, University of Chicago - Booth School of Business, IL (2014)
  • Medical Education: Pritzker School of Medicine University of Chicago Registrar (2014) IL

Contact

  • Academic
    jonlee12@stanford.edu
    University - Staff Department: Psych/General Psychiatry and Psychology (Adult) Position: Clinical Assistant Professor
    University - Affiliate Department: Central Mgmt-Misc AR
  • Clinical (Primary)  Stanford Dept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences 401 Quarry Rd MC 5718 Stanford, CA 94305 (650) 724-9900 (fax)

Additional Clinical Info

Additional Info

  • Mail Code: 5717
  • Other Names:
    Jonathan Yong Lee
    Jonathan Y. Lee
    Jon Lee

Links

All Publications

  • The effects of social media criticism against public health institutions on trust, emotions, and social media engagement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America Lee, J. Y. 2025; 122 (26): e2422890122

    Abstract

    In recent years, trust in US public health and science institutions has faced unprecedented declines, particularly among Republicans/conservatives. To what extent might institutional criticism on social media be responsible for such politically polarized declines in institutional trust? Two online survey experiments (total N = 6,800), using samples roughly reflective of the US adult population, examined the effects of key types of criticism against the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The results suggest that just a single exposure to any of the key types of criticism was sufficient to undermine institutional trust. While an institutional rebuttal was partially able to reverse these effects, residual declines in trust were substantial enough to cause decreased intentions to adhere to the AHRQ/CDC health recommendation featured in the experiments. While institutions should, therefore, be concerned about all types of social media criticism, those featuring morally charged trust-undermining narratives attacking the integrity of the AHRQ/CDC generated dramatically more anger (i.e., moral outrage), which in turn attracted social media engagement preferences likely to promote viral spread and exacerbate preexisting institutional politicization and issue polarization. These results suggest that efforts to bolster institutional trust should pay special attention to criticisms featuring integrity-based trust-undermining narratives.

    View details for DOI 10.1073/pnas.2422890122

    View details for PubMedID 40560618

  • Verbigeration: An overlooked symptom of a "forgotten syndrome"? Bipolar disorders Mason, D. P., Tan, M. n., Lee, J. n., Wolstencroft, P. n., Sanborn, K. n., Ballon, J. S. 2017; 19 (8): 710–12

    View details for PubMedID 29268005

  • Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health Record-Based Best-Practice Discharge Checklist for Hospital Patients JOINT COMMISSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND PATIENT SAFETY Garg, T., Lee, J. Y., Evans, K. H., Chen, J., Shieh, L. 2015; 41 (3): 126-+

    View details for DOI 10.1016/S1553-7250(15)41017-7

    View details for Web of Science ID 000443991200004

  • Development and evaluation of an electronic health record-based best-practice discharge checklist for hospital patients. Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety / Joint Commission Resources Garg, T., Lee, J. Y., Evans, K. H., Chen, J., Shieh, L. 2015; 41 (3): 126-121

    Abstract

    Checklists may help reduce discharge errors; however, current paper checklists have limited functionality. In 2013 a best-practice discharge checklist using the electronic health record (EHR) was developed and evaluated at Stanford University Medical Center (Stanford, California) in a cluster randomized trial to evaluate its usage, user satisfaction, and impact on physicians' work flow.The study was divided into four phases.In Phase I, on the survey (N = 76), most of the participants (54.0%) reported using memory to remember discharge tasks. On a 0-100 scale, perception of checklists as being useful was strong (mean, 66.4; standard deviation [SD], 21.2), as was interest in EHR checklists (64.5, 26.6). In Phase II, the checklist consisted of 15 tasks categorized by admission, hospitalization, and discharge-planning. In Phase III, the checklist was implemented as an EHR "smart-phrase" allowing for automatic insertion. In Phase IV, in a trial with 60 participating physicians, 23 EHR checklist users reported higher usage than 12 paper users (28.5 versus 7.67, p = .019), as well as higher checklist integration with work flow (22.6 versus 1.67, p = .014), usefulness of checklist (33.7 versus. 8.92, p = .041), discharge confidence (30.8 versus 5.00, p = .029), and discharge efficiency (25.5 versus 6.67, p = .056). Increasing EHR checklist use was correlated with usefulness ( r = .85, p < .001), confidence (r = .81, p < .001), and efficiency (r = .87, p < .001).The EHR checklist reminded physicians to complete discharge tasks, improved confidence, and increased process efficiency. This is the first study to show that medicine residents use "memory" as the most common method for remembering discharge tasks. These data reinforce the need for a formalized tool, such as a checklist, that residents can rely on to complete important discharge tasks.

    View details for PubMedID 25977128

  • Seven hundred days of startup: a day in the life of a medical student in Silicon Valley. Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry Lee, J. Y. 2014; 38 (1): 52-4

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s40596-013-0025-3

    View details for PubMedID 24442789