A publication is defined as much by what it turns down as by what it runs. This page is the explicit list.
What we write
project-diada.org covers human behaviour — why people act as they do, and what research says about it — across six areas:
- Mental health — anxiety, depression, stress, emotional wellbeing
- Relationships — attachment, communication, breakups, marriage, friendship
- Self and emotions — self-esteem, overthinking, confidence, emotional regulation, loneliness, motivation
- Child and adolescent psychology — child behaviour, parenting, teen psychology, development
- Brain and cognition — memory, attention, decision-making, cognitive biases, sleep
- Psychology research itself — new studies, method explainers, replication, how the science works
The formats are narrow on purpose: a single study explained properly, an evidence review across several studies, a research method made comprehensible, or a widely-believed claim checked against the literature.
What we don’t write
Anything we cannot source
If we cannot find and read the study behind a claim, we do not publish the claim. No exceptions for a good angle.
Diagnostic content
No “signs you have X” checklists, no self-tests, no symptom quizzes. These read as helpful and function as a machine for convincing healthy people they are unwell. Diagnosis is a clinical act and it does not happen on a website.
Armchair diagnosis of third parties
No “signs your partner is a narcissist”, no diagnosing public figures, no content that hands a reader a label to apply to someone who cannot respond.
Treatment instructions
No dosages, no protocols, no supplement regimes, and nothing suggesting a reader start, stop or change a medication. Where research concerns medication we report the finding and say the decision belongs with the reader’s own doctor.
Cures and guarantees
No “cure”, “reverse”, “eliminate” or “guaranteed” attached to a mental health condition. No “natural alternative to medication”.
Method detail on self-harm
Where we cover suicide or self-harm we follow safe-messaging guidance: no method, no means, no procedural detail, no description of an individual attempt, and support information carried high in the piece rather than buried.
Numbers that could be used as targets
In eating disorder coverage: no weights, no calorie counts, no BMI figures, no goal numbers, and no usable detail of restriction or purging.
Parent-blaming
Nothing implying a parent caused their child’s condition. Developmental ranges are reported as ranges, never as deadlines a child has missed.
Animal research as human advice
A mouse study is a hypothesis about humans. We may cover it as a mechanism story; we will not convert it into something a reader should do.
Trend pieces without evidence
Popular psychology terminology that has escaped the research — we cover it only where there is literature to examine, and often the story is that the evidence does not support the term.
Sponsored coverage
We do not sell coverage, and no commercial arrangement affects what we write. See the ethics policy.
Aggregated rewrites
We do not rewrite another outlet’s article. We go to the paper.
When we are unsure
Where a topic sits on the line — a finding that is real but easily misused, a study strong enough to report but weak enough to mislead — the default is not to publish. There is always another story. There is not always another reader you can un-harm.
If you think something we published breaches this page, tell us: [email protected].