Here is what we can’t claim.
We start with what people actually experience.Then we look for what the research can honestly support.
01
We don’t start from the literature. We start from something people actually recognize, and then look for the strongest research that supports it. If the evidence can’t carry the claim, we change the claim.
02
For every research-bearing claim, we show the study type, who was studied, and whether the result is an association or a cause.
03
We don’t dress up a weak finding. No big percentage without its context. No arrow implying cause where the study only found an association.
And here’s what we can’t claim. Shado is not a clinical tool and hasn’t been tested as one. Research about how people in general regulate emotion, replay conversations, or recover from stress is not evidence about you. It’s the reason we think the questions are worth asking — the answers come from your own life.
Evidence tiers
A — strong. High-quality synthesis or replicated experimental evidence, with a clear population and a result that fits the claim.
B — good. Consistent findings across sound studies, usually correlational.
C — suggestive. Worth raising as an open question, and framed as one.
D — not published. Too weak, indirect, or uncertain to present as fact.
What the site currently rests on
Relationships
See the evidence underneath
Evidence: Good
Across four daily-life studies, greater emotion suppression during interactions was associated with feeling less accepted and connected, lower relationship satisfaction, and more distancing behavior.
- Study type
- longitudinal and daily-diary studies with internal meta-analysis
- Who was studied
- University students in New Zealand, including people reporting daily interactions and romantic relationships · 4 samples; N=358 recruited (daily/longitudinal analyses retained 290 across the four samples) · 2018
- What it shows
- An association, not a cause
- What it does not show
- Self-report measures, student-heavy samples, and cultural/contextual variation limit generalization. The design does not show that suppression causes relationship problems, and suppression can be adaptive in some contexts.
Mind
See the evidence underneath
Evidence: Good
A meta-analysis of 35 studies found a moderate association between more post-event rumination and greater social-anxiety symptoms.
- Study type
- systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis
- Who was studied
- Participants across the social-anxiety spectrum in 35 correlational studies · 35 studies; N=10,082 · 2024
- What it shows
- An association, not a cause
- What it does not show
- The evidence concerns social-evaluative replay and social-anxiety symptoms, not every form of overthinking. Measures and eliciting tasks materially affected estimates, and correlation cannot establish direction or cause.
Career
See the evidence underneath
Evidence: Good
Across 91 employee samples, greater psychological detachment from work was associated with less exhaustion and better well-being and sleep.
- Study type
- systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis
- Who was studied
- Employees represented in 91 independent samples · 86 publications; 91 samples; N=38,124 · 2017
- What it shows
- An association, not a cause
- What it does not show
- Most included studies were cross-sectional and self-report. Effects varied by study and job context, so the review does not show that detachment itself causes recovery.
Behavior
See the evidence underneath
Evidence: Strong
Across 47 experimental tests, interventions produced a medium-to-large change in intentions but a smaller change in behavior.
- Study type
- meta-analysis of randomized experimental tests
- Who was studied
- Participants in 47 experiments targeting varied health and social behaviors · 47 experimental tests; aggregate participant count not reported in the accessible abstract · 2006
- What it shows
- A cause, established by design
- What it does not show
- The studies manipulated intentions rather than measuring everyday ’knowing.' Behaviors and interventions were heterogeneous, and the finding does not establish why any individual fails to act.
Well-being
See the evidence underneath
Evidence: Good
A meta-analysis of 55 studies found that more worry and rumination were associated with poorer sleep quality, shorter sleep, and longer time to fall asleep.
- Study type
- systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis
- Who was studied
- Non-clinical child, adolescent, and adult samples · 55 studies; aggregate participant count not reported in the accessible abstract · 2020
- What it shows
- An association, not a cause
- What it does not show
- Most evidence relied on self-report and many studies were cross-sectional. Distress may contribute to both repetitive thinking and poor sleep; results do not show that a particular thought caused a particular bad night.
Causal language
We write "associated with" when a study found an association. We write "causes" only when the design and result can establish cause. An arrow that implies cause from correlational evidence is an error, not a style choice.