Anything written about research will eventually get something wrong. What matters is what happens next. This page sets out what you can expect.
How to report an error
Get in touch with the article URL, the specific sentence, and — if you have one — a source. You do not need a source to report something; a clear description of what looks wrong is enough.
The most useful reports name a specific claim. “This article is misleading” is harder to act on than “this sentence says the effect replicated, and the 2016 multi-lab attempt found otherwise.”
What happens next
- The claim is checked against the source it rests on.
- If it is wrong, it is corrected.
- If it is defensible but poorly worded, it is rewritten to say what the evidence actually supports.
- If it is correct, you get a reply explaining why, with the source.
Aim is a reply within a week. Corrections to factual errors are made as soon as they are confirmed rather than batched.
How corrections are marked
- Substantive corrections — anything that changes what a reader would conclude — are noted on the article with the date and what changed. They are not made silently.
- Routine updates — adding a newer study, improving clarity, fixing a broken link — are reflected in the article’s modified date without a separate note.
- Typos and formatting are fixed without comment.
The distinction is deliberate. Marking every comma change as a “correction” makes the label meaningless when it matters.
Retractions
If an article turns out to rest on a claim that does not survive scrutiny, it is either rewritten around what does hold, or withdrawn with a note explaining why. It is not quietly deleted.
Standing corrections
None currently recorded.
See also the editorial policy for how claims are sourced in the first place.