Editorial policy

How we research, write, review, and update what you read here.

How a piece gets written

Every article starts as an entry in a backlog of content ideas — a topic and a target cluster, nothing more. An idea becomes a draft only when a named writer commits to it and can articulate, in writing, what the piece will say that no other page on this site already says. We store that answer; it's both a quality forcing-function and an audit trail.

The publish gate

Before an article can be flipped to "published and indexable," it has to clear a checklist that the CMS enforces structurally — not a vibes-based "looks good" call from one editor. The checklist requires:

• Minimum word count (1,200 for cluster articles, 2,000+ for type hubs).
• A named author and, for any piece touching psychological claims, a named reviewer.
• At least two real, checkable sources logged with the article.
• At least three FAQs that genuinely answer questions readers ask.
• A confirmation that the article contains at least one element of original information gain — an original comparison, a worked example, original data, or a properly-cited primary-source synthesis. Rephrasing what's already ranking is not enough.
• An automated similarity check against other articles on this site. If a draft is too close to an existing piece, the editor sees a loud warning before publish.
• At least two inbound internal links from other live articles before the new piece is treated as fully published. Orphan pages don't get to be orphans here.

The velocity limiter

We deliberately cap how many new pages can be published in a rolling seven-day window. The cap is visible in the admin dashboard and the publish action warns when it's about to be exceeded. This isn't a hard technical lock — it's a guardrail that makes deliberate editorial pacing the easy default. Search engines treat sudden bursts of templated content as a quality signal to discount, and rightly so.

Sources and citations

Every article that makes a factual claim about the framework's research base cites real, checkable sources. If we can't find a primary or strong secondary source for a claim, we don't make the claim. Fabricated citations would be the easiest way to destroy reader trust and we won't go near them.

Updates and freshness

When we make a substantive change to an article, we log what changed in a per-article change log. The publicly displayed "Updated" date comes from that log, not from a timestamp we can bump cosmetically. If you see an "Updated" date here, it means something actually changed and you can see what.

Trademark and independence

This site is independently published. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by The Myers-Briggs Company or the Myers & Briggs Foundation. MBTI® and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® are trademarks of their respective owners. We discuss the 16-type framework — and the underlying assessment — the way independent typology publishers do, as a widely-used psychological vocabulary, not as an official product.

Corrections

Found something that's wrong? Tell us. Substantive corrections are made promptly and logged in the article's change log.