Editorial Standards

I've been researching and writing about memory improvement since 2006. Over that time, I've developed a consistent approach to ensuring the information on this site is accurate, useful, and grounded in real science.

This page explains exactly how I research, write, and verify content for Memory-Improvement-Tips.com.

My Background

I'm Douglas, and I hold a B.S. in Mathematics, with a concentration in statistics, from Tulane University (1990). For over 15 years, I've studied the science of memory and learning, not as a casual interest, but as a genuine obsession with understanding how the brain encodes, stores, and retrieves information.

My professional work today involves training AI models. This technical background has deepened my appreciation for the complexity of the human biological brain. I approach memory techniques like the Memory Palace and spaced repetition not as "magic tricks," but as systematic algorithms backed by cognitive science.

I'm not a medical institution, and I don't pretend to be one. But I am someone who reads the actual studies rather than summarizing press releases. When I cite research, I've read the full paper, not just the abstract or a news headline about it.

You can learn more about me on my About page.

How I Research & Evaluate Sources

In an era of clickbait health news, I adhere to a strict 4-step evaluation process before citing any study:

1. Peer-Reviewed Priority: I prioritize data from reputable journals (e.g., Nature Neuroscience, Psychological Science, PNAS) over news articles or press releases.

2. Full-Text Review: I do not rely on abstracts alone. I read the full methodology to ensure the sample size was adequate and the conclusions match the data.

3. Clinical Context: For lifestyle and prevention advice, I verify my findings against established clinical guidelines and expert consensus in the field. I'm cautious about preliminary findings and try to distinguish between well-replicated effects and single studies that need more confirmation.

4. Consensus vs. Novelty: I clearly distinguish between established consensus (e.g., "Exercise helps the hippocampus") and emerging, preliminary research (e.g., "Fist clenching may aid recall"). When I mention a single study, I say so.

How I Interpret Scientific Research

Scientific studies vary widely in quality. When I cite research, I evaluate it using the following criteria:

• Study design: Randomized controlled trials and meta‑analyses carry more weight than small exploratory studies.

• Sample size: Larger samples reduce the risk of false positives.

• Replication: A finding supported by multiple studies is more reliable than a single result.

• Effect size: I look at how large the effect actually is, not just whether it was statistically significant.

• Limitations: I read the authors' own limitations section and reflect those caveats in my writing.

I aim to translate complex research into plain English without oversimplifying or overstating what the evidence shows.

How I Simplify Complex Topics Responsibly

Memory science can be technical, but accuracy should never be sacrificed for simplicity. When I simplify research, I follow these principles:

• Plain language first: I translate jargon into everyday terms while keeping the scientific meaning intact.

• No hype: If a study shows a small or uncertain effect, I say so.

• Practical relevance: I focus on what the research means for real people trying to improve their memory.

• Clear boundaries: I avoid implying that lifestyle tips can treat medical conditions.

• Open-access studies: I track down the open-access versions of studies, whenever these are available, to make it easier for you to review the same information I examined.

My goal is to make science understandable without distorting it.

My Policy on AI Tools

Because I work in the AI industry, I am intimately aware of both the power and the limitations of Artificial Intelligence.

How I Use AI: I use AI tools to assist with coding, formatting, and summarizing broad technical concepts.

How I Do NOT Use AI: AI models can hallucinate citations and misinterpret medical data. Every study linked on this site has been verified by a human (me).

How This Site Is Funded

Transparency about money matters. Here's how Memory-Improvement-Tips.com generates revenue:

Display Advertising: This site runs ads through Ezoic, which uses programmatic ad exchanges. I don't choose which ads appear on my pages, and advertisers generally don't hand-select individual pages. Instead, ads are placed automatically based on contextual signals, user interests, and brand-safety settings. I have proactively blocked a number of off-topic ad categories (such as gambling, astrology, and sensationalism) to maintain an advertising environment consistent with the site's evidence-based approach.

In some cases, advertisers may target certain types of content or specific URLs through programmatic deals, but editorial content is never influenced by advertisers.

Affiliate Links: Some pages contain affiliate links to books or products, such as on Amazon.com. If you purchase through these links, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. I only recommend products I genuinely believe are useful.

What I Don't Do: I do not accept payment for reviews, "Best Of" rankings, or editorial mentions. No company can pay to have their product featured or recommended. My opinions are not for sale.

This separation between editorial content and advertising is non-negotiable. If a product appears in my recommendations, it's because I think it's genuinely helpful, not because someone paid me to say so.

Conflicts of Interest

I maintain a strict separation between editorial content and revenue sources. This means:

• No sponsored articles: I do not publish paid posts or advertorials.

• No paid recommendations: Companies cannot pay to influence what I write or recommend.

• No preferential treatment: Products or books I mention are included because I personally find them useful.

• Clear labeling: If a link is an affiliate link, I disclose it.

My editorial decisions are based solely on accuracy and usefulness, not financial incentives.

What I Won't Do

I don't invent citations. Every reference on this site points to a real, verifiable source. If I can't find solid research to support a claim, I simply won't make it.

I don't provide medical advice. This site offers educational information about cognitive performance, not medical diagnosis. If you have concerns about memory loss, please consult a healthcare professional. See my full Medical Disclaimer.

How I Verify Claims Before Publishing

Before I publish or update an article, I run through a verification checklist:

• Check the original study: I confirm that the claim matches what the study actually found.

• Cross-reference multiple sources: When possible, I look for replication or meta-analyses.

• Ensure proper citation: Every claim that relies on research links to a specific reference.

• Review for overstatement: I rewrite any sentence that sounds stronger than the evidence supports.

• Final human review: No AI tool makes editorial decisions. I personally verify every fact.

This process helps ensure that the information on this site remains accurate, balanced, and trustworthy.

How I Update Pages When New Research Emerges

Memory science evolves quickly. When new research changes our understanding of a topic, I:

• Re‑evaluate older claims to ensure they still reflect current evidence.

• Add new citations when stronger or more recent studies become available.

• Revise outdated explanations to match the latest consensus.

• Note major changes in the “Last Updated” field at the bottom of each page.

My goal is to keep this site aligned with the best available evidence at all times.

How I Handle Reader Feedback

If a reader spots an error, broken link, or outdated claim, I appreciate the correction. I review all feedback and:

• Verify the issue against the original source

• Correct the page if needed

• Update the "Last Updated" date

Accuracy is a collaborative effort, and I welcome input from readers who care about getting the science right.

Corrections & Updates

Science is a self-correcting process, and so is this website.

I regularly review older articles to ensure they reflect the latest findings. If you spot an error, a broken citation, or a statement that contradicts newer research, please contact me. I commit to reviewing and correcting factual errors promptly.

Published: 12/21/2025
Last Updated: 12/21/2025