Editorial Policy

Our aim is to publish useful, understandable guidance about body doubling. The site is published by the team behind MySession, and that relationship should remain visible wherever it matters to a reader's decision.

Evidence and health claims

We separate established information, early research, plausible explanations and personal reports. Research-dependent claims link to their sources. A small experiment, workshop paper or personal account is not presented as proof of broad clinical effectiveness.

Body doubling is described as a practical support strategy. We do not claim it treats or cures ADHD, autism, depression, anxiety or executive dysfunction. Educational articles do not replace individual assessment or professional care.

Practical examples and authorship

Illustrative people and scenarios are labeled fictional. We do not invent patient stories, credentials, testimonials, ratings or usage statistics. Articles are attributed to BodyDoubling Editorial rather than to fabricated individual experts.

The initial collection was prepared with AI assistance. It is not presented as clinician-reviewed content. Publication dates indicate the initial release; material revisions should update the modification date and describe substantive corrections when appropriate.

Commercial relationship

MySession is the product operated by the team behind this publication. Outbound links use UTM referral parameters. We do not disguise those links as independent third-party endorsements. Readers should check the platform for current availability, rules and prices.

Corrections

A correction request should identify the page URL, the disputed sentence and a source or explanation. Use the contact page to find the available route. Source updates should be evaluated for the exact claim they affect rather than used to make broader promises.

Content standards

Each guide should answer a concrete reader question, include actionable examples and link to relevant next reading. We prefer acknowledging a limit to filling a gap with an unsupported explanation. Our evidence guide demonstrates that approach.