Sources and Further Reading

How we choose sources

We prefer original research, university and public-health resources, recognized professional bodies and books from established researchers or practitioners. A source must support the exact claim beside it. The editorial policy explains how this evidence standard fits the broader writing and correction process.

Claim-level review

Editors check whether a source studied the same population, behavior and outcome described on the page. We avoid stretching a narrow result into a universal rule and distinguish practical editorial guidance from research findings. Publication date, study limits and conflicts are considered when they affect how a reader should interpret the claim.

Research used for the editorial framework

• Laurenceau, Barrett and Pietromonaco on intimacy as an interpersonal processThis study informs our careful use of mutual disclosure and perceived responsiveness. It does not prove that a particular prompt will improve a relationship.
• Weger and colleagues on active listening in initial interactionsThis research informs the site's distinction between listening behaviors and merely waiting to reply. Findings from an initial interaction are not treated as universal relationship advice.

Standards used to build and publish the site

• W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2The accessibility target used for semantics, keyboard access, focus, contrast and responsive content.
• Google Search spam policiesThe operational reference for scaled content, reputation abuse, hidden content, link spam and misleading behavior.
• Schema.org vocabularyThe vocabulary used for WebPage, Organization, Article, WebApplication, FAQ and breadcrumb entities.

What sources cannot do

A citation does not turn general information into personalized care. We avoid clinical recommendations and encourage qualified support when a situation involves safety, abuse or serious distress. See the conversation method and its limits before adapting a guide.