Editorial policy

Who writes this

Everything here is written and published by Reconnect Digital Pty Ltd, the small independent studio that makes MyDirection. There is no separate editorial company, no contributor network and no sponsored content. When a page carries a byline it reads as the MyDirection editorial team, which is an accurate description of a small group rather than a device for hiding behind.

That is also a gap we are willing to name. Our own review method requires a named responsible editor and a named tester before any scored comparison of other apps is published, and we have not yet made that appointment. Until we do, no page on this site claims to have hands-on tested a competitor, and the comparison pages say so on the page rather than in a footnote.

If you want to know who to write to, the contact address on our privacy policy reaches a person rather than a queue, and that person can answer questions about anything published here.

The conflict of interest

We make a manifestation and vision board app. We also publish guides about manifestation and vision boards, and comparison content about apps in that category. Those two facts are in tension and no amount of careful writing dissolves it.

What we can do is make the tension visible and give you a way to check our work.

• Every page that compares products states, in the body text rather than in small print, that MyDirection publishes it.
• Our scoring model and weights are published in advance at how we review apps, so they cannot be reverse-engineered to produce a convenient result.
• MyDirection is not eligible to be named an overall winner on any comparison page until it has been tested against the same rubric, on the same released-build basis, as every other product on that page.
• Where a competitor is the better fit for a described reader, we say so, including on pages where saying so costs us the sale.
• We hold no affiliate relationships in this category, accept no paid placements, and take no payment for inclusion or ranking.
• Guides are written so they work with a notebook, a Photos album or any app, not so they require ours.

If you think a page has failed one of those tests, that is worth telling us, and it is the kind of correction we would make visibly.

How we source claims

Two kinds of claim appear on this site and each has its own rule.

Product facts about other apps

These are sourced to the vendor's own material, meaning the App Store listing, the product website, or the published privacy policy, with the date we checked it. Where the vendor's material does not answer a question, the page says the question is unanswered rather than inferring an answer from what the marketing implies. Where we have contacted a vendor and had no reply, we say that too.

We do not reproduce competitor pricing we have not verified recently, because pricing in this category changes often and a wrong number about someone else's product is worse than no number at all. You will see "check the current listing" on our pages more often than you would on a typical comparison site, and that is deliberate.

Research claims

These are cited to primary papers rather than to a secondary write-up, and the sentence in the text is limited to what the study actually supports. This discipline matters in a category built on overstatement. A study finding that positive fantasies reduced effort in a specific experimental setting supports a specific hedged sentence, and it does not support a sweeping claim that visualization does not work. We write the hedged version and link the paper so you can check whether we characterised it fairly.

Where a page has no source list, it is because the content describes our own product or gives straightforward practical instruction, not because a research claim went unsupported.

What we will not publish

• Any claim that thought alone causes external outcomes. The evidence does not support it and the belief causes measurable harm, because it reframes ordinary setbacks as failures of faith.
• Guarantees about results. No page here will tell you that a practice will bring you money, a relationship, or a specific outcome.
• Mental-health treatment claims. Content that touches distress, compulsive practice or clinical care carries an explicit boundary pointing at a qualified person instead.
• A test we did not run. We do not use the word tested unless a named person used a stated version for a stated period on a stated device.
• Invented user quotes, testimonials or reviews. If a quote appears on this site it came from an identifiable source.
• Doorway pages. We do not publish a near-duplicate page for every wording variation of a search query.
• Scientific-sounding language with nothing behind it. No "neuroscience-backed" without a citation, no "rewires your brain", no "quantum".

AI assistance

We use AI tools in the production of this site, mostly for drafting, restructuring and checking consistency across a large number of pages. It would be strange to hide that on a site published by a company that builds AI features, so we will not.

What that does not change is responsibility. Every page is read, edited and approved by a person before it is published, every factual claim is checked against a source by a person, and every research citation is one a person has read. If something on this site is wrong, the answer is not that a tool produced it. The answer is that we published it.

We do not publish AI-generated pages at volume to occupy search results, and we do not generate a page for every keyword variation. The word-count targets on this site exist to force depth rather than to hit a length, and the build refuses to ship a page that falls short of them.

Corrections and updates

Every page carries a published date and an updated date, both of which are real. If a guide has not changed, its date does not move. We do not refresh dates to look current, because a dated page you can trust is worth more than a recent-looking one you cannot.

Material changes are made visibly. That includes a changed price, a removed feature, a revised privacy policy at a vendor we have written about, and any change to a recommendation. The page records what changed and why rather than being silently rewritten.

1. Tell us what is wrong, and where, using the contact address on our privacy policy.
2. We check it against the primary source, which for product facts means the vendor's own material and for research means the paper.
3. If we got it wrong, we fix it, note the change on the page and move the updated date.
4. If we think the page is right, we tell you why rather than leaving the message unanswered.

This applies to vendors as well as readers. If we have described your product inaccurately, write to us with the correction, including in cases where the fix makes your product look better than our page currently does.

How this site is funded

By the subscription, and by nothing else. MyDirection has no free tier and no advertising, and the app costs $7.99 per week, $19.99 per month or $59.99 per year on the US App Store, with a 3-day free trial for eligible new subscribers.

There are no ads on this site, no affiliate links, no sponsored posts and no paid placements in any comparison. We do not sell data collected from this site, and the analytics we use for the website is separate from the app and never receives goals, reflections or anything else you write in the product.

That funding model is the reason several of these rules are possible to keep. A site funded by affiliate commission has a structural reason to recommend whichever product pays best, and a site funded by advertising has a structural reason to maximise pages rather than usefulness. We would rather be a paid product with a smaller audience than either of those.