The EchoSim Editorial Team publishes objective, psychology-grounded analysis of modern dating. These articles are educational, not clinical advice, and do not diagnose readers or the people they date. This page explains how we choose evidence, describe its limits, and correct mistakes.
Authorship
Articles credited to the EchoSim Editorial Team are researched, written, and edited as organizational work. We do not imply clinical credentials or expert review that did not occur. When a qualified external reviewer contributes, the article will name that person and describe the review.
Source selection
We prioritize peer-reviewed research, original papers, public datasets, and established nonpartisan research organizations. Secondary explainers may provide context, but they should not carry a claim that the underlying source cannot support.
Evidence language
We distinguish association from causation, identify important sample limits, and avoid turning one study into a universal rule. Exact numbers must be traceable to the linked source. Editorial frameworks and reflection tools are labeled as such.
Editorial independence
Objective analysis articles do not contain paid placements or undisclosed endorsements. Product-focused content, if published, will be clearly identified rather than presented as independent relationship research.
Updates
We review links, research scope, and time-sensitive statements when an article is materially revised. A substantive update changes the visible copy and the page’s dateModified; we do not change dates merely to make an article appear fresh.
Corrections
When a factual statement or citation is wrong, we correct both the visible article and matching structured data. Material corrections may be noted in the article’s Sources and scope section so readers can understand what changed.
Request a correction
Email support@echosim.ai with the article URL, the statement in question, and a primary source when available. We review correction requests against the published evidence.