Home / About

Editorial standards

We are not a research institute and we do not hold counseling credentials. But we follow a publishable set of rules for every article and every quiz item. This page states them, so you can judge whether to trust us.

Where our content comes from

Everything on this site is compiled from public academic research and science-communication material. We do not originate theory. We draw on three kinds of sources:

Original research papers: the foundational attachment literature—Bowlby's Attachment and Loss, Ainsworth's Strange Situation, Hazan & Shaver's extension into adult love, and Mary Main's disorganized category.
Textbooks and reviews: such as Mikulincer & Shaver's Attachment in Adulthood, and mainstream developmental and clinical psychology texts.
Science-communication books by named clinicians: e.g. Sue Johnson's Hold Me Tight, Levine & Heller's Attached, Tatkin's Wired for Love. We use only the parts consistent with mainstream research and do not follow any single author's commercial claims blindly.

We do not treat social-media influencers, unnamed "psychology accounts", or unverifiable posts as sources. Each article ends with clickable further-reading you can check yourself.

How we select and verify

Every article goes through three steps:

Sourcing: pull only core conclusions relevant to the topic from the three public source types above—no freelancing from intuition.
Structured rewrite: rewrite in language a Chinese reader can read directly, drop over-academic jargon, add concrete examples and small actionable steps.
Cross-check: fact-check every citation (names, years, book titles, core claims) and flag any controversy or simplification.

If a claim appears only in a single small study, or the field still disagrees, we mark it "still contested" in the text rather than present it as settled.

How we show authorship and dates

Each blog post is headed with: Authors: Attachment Style Test Editorial Team / Compiled from public academic sources / Last updated. Revisions keep a timestamp at the end so you can tell how fresh the content is.

We do not currently have a named licensed counselor or psychiatrist signing off on content. This is a limitation we state honestly: our content is compiled by an editorial team from public literature, not endorsed paragraph-by-paragraph by a licensed professional. That is exactly why we point every claim back to verifiable original sources you can check yourself, instead of asking you to trust a title.

What we do not do

No diagnosis or treatment: this site is educational self-assessment; any result is a "snapshot", not a substitute for a licensed professional's evaluation.
No ad-driven edits: ads (e.g. AdSense) are fully separate from editorial content. We never change an evaluation of any study or view because of an advertising relationship, and we never write or adjust articles for an advertiser.
No affiliate marketing: we do not earn commissions by promoting specific courses, apps, or services; books are cited, not affiliate-linked.
No deletions to silence disagreement: if you disagree with a claim, write in with your reasoning; we may add a note or write a response, but we will not remove the original.

How we handle mistakes

Limited editorial resources mean we cannot promise the site is 100% free of factual or wording errors. If you spot a wrong citation, a factual error, or misleading wording, email [email protected]. After verification we correct and timestamp the revision; for material errors we add a "revised" note at the top of the article.

Relationship to YMYL

Attachment, relationships, and emotions affect major life decisions, so Google classes this as YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) sensitive territory. Our stance: educational science communication only, clear boundaries, and professional judgment left to licensed people. If you are experiencing serious distress, relationship violence, PTSD, or self-harm thoughts, contact a local crisis line or licensed professional immediately—see the crisis-resource list on Contact.