PsyTheater aims to publish psychology and mental health content that is accurate, transparent, and grounded in credible evidence. Our source policy is designed to help readers understand what kinds of materials inform our reporting, explainers, and educational articles.
Our Preferred Source Types
- Peer-reviewed research and systematic reviews
- Major public health and government institutions
- Professional associations and clinical consensus materials
- Primary interviews with qualified experts
- High-quality reporting from credible outlets, when relevant and properly attributed
How We Evaluate Sources
We consider source quality based on authorship, evidence strength, publication context, recency, relevance, and whether the claims presented are proportional to the underlying evidence. We are especially cautious with preliminary findings, non-peer-reviewed claims, social media assertions, anecdotal evidence, and oversimplified research summaries.
How We Use Sources
Our editorial team aims to cite or rely on sources in ways that support accuracy rather than perform authority. That means we do not treat isolated findings as settled truth, and we avoid implying clinical certainty where evidence remains mixed, early, or population-specific.
Research Interpretation
When covering research, we aim to reflect what a study actually shows, what it does not show, and what limitations may affect interpretation. Correlation should not be presented as causation, small studies should not be exaggerated, and findings should not be generalized beyond the populations studied without caution.
Source Transparency
Where practical, PsyTheater may reference the sources, institutions, studies, or expert materials that inform a piece. Some articles may also be updated with newer evidence or expanded references over time.
What We Avoid
- Unverified health claims
- Sensationalized interpretations of research
- Overreliance on anecdotal evidence
- Unsupported treatment claims
- Authority language without evidence context