For decades, a simple explanation has permeated the public's thought with respect to depression: it’s a "chemical imbalance" in the brain, usually relating to serotonin, an important neurotransmitter. This crude, yet intuitive reasoning gave rise to the assumption that if depression was caused by low serotonin, then addressing this issue with medication could fix it.
Although this idea still exists, modern research tells us a different, more complicated story, and the scientific consensus has shifted in line with this. To understand why this happened, it helps to trace where the theory came from, why it took hold, and what the evidence actually shows today.
The Origins: A Plausible Concept in the Mid-20th Century
The association between lowered serotonin and depression was first suggested as early as the 1960s [1]. From the 1990s onwards, this link was widely publicized with the advent of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant medications [2]. Although questioned in recent years, the serotonin theory of depression retains some influence, particularly in textbooks, the endorsements of leading researchers, and research based on the concept [2]. In addition, survey data indicate that 80% or more of the general public now believes that depression is caused by a "chemical imbalance," and this is established knowledge [2]. The propagation of this narrative, particularly among healthcare providers, has been criticized as oversimplified, scientifically controversial, and potentially treatment-interfering [3].
The chemical imbalance theory didn’t emerge from nowhere. It grew out of early discoveries in psychopharmacology [4]. In the 1950s and 1960s, researchers noticed something intriguing: certain drugs that altered brain chemistry also influenced mood. For example, the drug reserpine — which depletes monoamine neurotransmitters like serotonin [5] — often produces depressive symptoms.
From this, it was reasoned that lower levels of certain neurotransmitters (especially serotonin) might cause depression and that increasing those neurotransmitters might relieve it. This became known as the monoamine hypothesis [6], with serotonin eventually taking center stage. At the time, this was a reasonable inference, as brain chemistry was one of the few measurable biological factors available, and early findings seemed to align with clinical observations.
The Explosion of SSRIs and the 1990s Marketing Era
The theory might have remained a niche scientific idea, but by the 1990s, the landscape had changed dramatically. The era of SSRIs, a new class of antidepressants that included blockbuster drugs like Prozac, had arrived. These medications were widely promoted and marketed as addressing a serotonin deficiency [7].
The persistence of the chemical imbalance theory isn’t just down to marketing — it also highlights the way humans tend to understand illness. Although mental health is complex, it’s far easier to grasp a single-cause explanation than a model that has many distinct factors. The framing of depression as a brain disorder helped reduce stigma and shifted blame towards biology.
If SSRIs increase serotonin, it feels intuitive to assume depression must involve low serotonin. This “mechanism implies cause” logic is compelling but not necessarily correct.
Even if incomplete, the explanation helped clinicians communicate with patients and encourage treatment adherence.
The Evidence Never Fully Matched the Story
Despite its popularity, the serotonin hypothesis was always more tentative in scientific circles than in public messaging. Over the past several decades, researchers have examined multiple lines of evidence, including serotonin levels in blood and cerebrospinal fluid [8,9], brain imaging of serotonin receptors and transporters, genetic studies, and experimental depletion of tryptophan, a serotonin precursor [10].
If depression is caused by low serotonin, these measures should consistently show deficits in depressed individuals, yet the evidence shows that this isn’t the case.
What Does Modern Research Actually Show?
A large-scale comprehensive review of the evidence, synthesizing decades of data, found no consistent evidence that depression is associated with reduced serotonin levels or activity [2], generating much discussion and commentary [11–13].
Taken at face value, these findings don’t mean that serotonin is irrelevant but rather highlight the simplicity and limitations of the “low serotonin equals depression” model. Nuance matters here, as the failure of the chemical imbalance theory does not automatically insinuate that antidepressants are ineffective — these are separate questions.
SSRIs do indeed elevate serotonin availability in the brain [14]; their clinical effects tend to take weeks to manifest [15], vary widely among individuals [16], and may involve downstream effects, such as neuroplasticity [17–20].
A More Contemporary View of Depression
If depression doesn’t involve a chemical imbalance, then what’s driving it?
Modern research points to depression as a multifactorial condition involving numerous interacting systems rather than a single direct cause. There could be changes in how brain regions communicate, especially those involved in mood regulation. Environmental factors could also play a major role, such as chronic stress, trauma, and social variables that could trigger and maintain depression.
Emerging evidence links immune signaling and inflammation to depressive symptoms, as well as a multitude of genetic influences beyond a single pathway or gene of interest. In short, depression is better understood as a “systems-level condition."
Believing depression is purely biological can lead to a reduced sense of agency [21] and reliance on medication alone to address the condition.
A broader model of understanding encourages exercise and lifestyle interventions [22], psychotherapy [23], social support [24], and personalized treatment approaches [25], while freeing the research community to explore more accurate and novel mechanisms.
Conclusion
The “chemical imbalance” theory of depression, and in particular the idea that it is caused by low serotonin, was a historically influential but oversimplified model. Its popularity is largely a consequence of early pharmacological observations, which coincided with the emergence of antidepressant medications and marketing based on a simplistic, if seductive, explanation. Modern research shows that there is no consistent evidence linking low serotonin to depression and that depression is a multifaceted condition. Treatments like antidepressants may help, but not by simply correcting a neurotransmitter deficiency, and are best employed as part of a multipronged treatment strategy that gives agency and impetus to the patient.
References
[1] A. Coppen, The Biochemistry of Affective Disorders, Br J Psychiatry 113 (1967) 1237–1264. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.
[2] J. Moncrieff, R.E. Cooper, T. Stockmann, S. Amendola, M.P. Hengartner, M.A. Horowitz, The serotonin theory of depression: a systematic umbrella review of the evidence, Mol Psychiatry 28 (2023) 3243–3256. https://doi.org/10.1038/
[3] H.S. Schroder, J. Tovey, R. Forer, W. Schultz, E.T. Kneeland, J.S. Moser, Where do “chemical imbalance” beliefs come from? Evaluating the impact of different sources, Front. Psychol. 15 (2025) 1469913. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.
[4] J. Leo, J.R. Lacasse, The Media and the Chemical Imbalance Theory of Depression, Soc 45 (2008) 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/
[5] A. Reches, K.P. Liu, S.E. Karpiak, S. Fahn, T.B. Cooper, R. Suckow, V. Jackson, H. Tamir, Serotonin depletion induced by reserpine is attenuated by prophylactic administration of lithium, European Journal of Pharmacology 113 (1985) 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-
[6] P.L. Delgado, Depression: the case for a monoamine deficiency, J Clin Psychiatry 61 Suppl 6 (2000) 7–11.
[7] N.P. Greenslit, T.J. Kaptchuk, Antidepressants and advertising: psychopharmaceuticals in crisis, Yale J Biol Med 85 (2012) 153–158.
[8] D. Saldanha, N. Kumar, V. Ryali, K. Srivastava, A. Pawar, Serum Serotonin Abnormality in Depression, Medical Journal Armed Forces India 65 (2009) 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-
[9] I.V. Mousten, N.V. Sørensen, R.H.B. Christensen, M.E. Benros, Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in Patients With Unipolar Depression Compared With Healthy Control Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, JAMA Psychiatry 79 (2022) 571. https://doi.org/10.1001/
[10] S. Jauhar, P.J. Cowen, M. Browning, Fifty years on: Serotonin and depression, J Psychopharmacol 37 (2023) 237–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/
[11] J. Wise, “No convincing evidence” that depression is caused by low serotonin levels, say study authors, BMJ (2022) o1808. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.
[12] A. Lepri, THE MYTH OF SEROTONIN THEORY OF DEPRESSION: AN ANALYSIS OF UMBRELLA REVIEW METHODOLOGIES AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS, Psychiatr Danub 37 (2025) 187–188.
[13] H.-J. Möller, P. Falkai, Is the serotonin hypothesis/theory of depression still relevant? Methodological reflections motivated by a recently published umbrella review, Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 273 (2023) 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/
[14] H. Seyedmirzaei, N. Bayan, M.A.D. Ohadi, G. Cattarinussi, F. Sambataro, Effects of antidepressants on brain structure and function in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder: A review of neuroimaging studies, Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging 342 (2024) 111842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[15] R. Machado-Vieira, J. Baumann, C. Wheeler-Castillo, D. Latov, I.D. Henter, G. Salvadore, C.A. Zarate, The Timing of Antidepressant Effects: A Comparison of Diverse Pharmacological and Somatic Treatments, Pharmaceuticals 3 (2010) 19–41. https://doi.org/10.3390/
[16] M.V. Heinz, E. Yom-Tov, D.M. Mackin, R. Matsumura, N.C. Jacobson, A large-scale observational comparison of antidepressants and their effects, Journal of Psychiatric Research 178 (2024) 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[17] A. Johansen, S. Armand, P. Plavén-Sigray, A. Nasser, B. Ozenne, I.N. Petersen, S.H. Keller, J. Madsen, V. Beliveau, K. Møller, A. Vassilieva, C. Langley, C. Svarer, D.S. Stenbæk, B.J. Sahakian, G.M. Knudsen, Effects of escitalopram on synaptic density in the healthy human brain: a randomized controlled trial, Mol Psychiatry 28 (2023) 4272–4279. https://doi.org/10.1038/
[18] C. Andrade, Ns.K. Rao, How antidepressant drugs act: A primer on neuroplasticity as the eventual mediator of antidepressant efficacy, Indian J Psychiatry 52 (2010) 378. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-
[19] B. Liu, J. Liu, M. Wang, Y. Zhang, L. Li, From Serotonin to Neuroplasticity: Evolvement of Theories for Major Depressive Disorder, Front. Cell. Neurosci. 11 (2017) 305. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.
[20] G.U. Rosas-Sánchez, L.J. Germán-Ponciano, G. Guillen-Ruiz, J. Cueto-Escobedo, A.K. Limón-Vázquez, J.F. Rodríguez-Landa, C. Soria-Fregozo, Neuroplasticity and Mechanisms of Action of Acute and Chronic Treatment with Antidepressants in Preclinical Studies, Biomedicines 12 (2024) 2744. https://doi.org/10.3390/
[21] M.S. Lebowitz, W. Ahn, S. Nolen-Hoeksema, Fixable or fate? Perceptions of the biology of depression., Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 81 (2013) 518–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/
[22] M. Noetel, T. Sanders, D. Gallardo-Gómez, P. Taylor, B. Del Pozo Cruz, D. Van Den Hoek, J.J. Smith, J. Mahoney, J. Spathis, M. Moresi, R. Pagano, L. Pagano, R. Vasconcellos, H. Arnott, B. Varley, P. Parker, S. Biddle, C. Lonsdale, Effect of exercise for depression: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, BMJ 384 (2024) e075847. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-
[23] Health Quality Ontario, Psychotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder and Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Health Technology Assessment, Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 17 (2017) 1–167.
[24] G. Li, Y. Li, A.I.F. Lam, W. Tang, S. Seedat, C. Barbui, D. Papola, C. Panter-Brick, J.V.D. Waerden, R. Bryant, E. Mittendorfer-Rutz, K. Gémes, F.D. Purba, H. Setyowibowo, I. Pinucci, C. Palantza, C. Acarturk, G. Kurt, L. Tarsitani, N. Morina, S. Burchert, M. Patanè, S. Quero, D. Campos, A.C. Huizink, D.C. Fuhr, T. Spiller, M. Sijbrandij, B.J. Hall, Understanding the protective effect of social support on depression symptomatology from a longitudinal network perspective, BMJ Ment Health 26 (2023) e300802. https://doi.org/10.1136/
[25] G. Sampogna, C. Toni, P. Catapano, B.D. Rocca, M. Di Vincenzo, M. Luciano, A. Fiorillo, New trends in personalized treatment of depression, Current Opinion in Psychiatry 37 (2024) 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.
