How We Verify
Ibron Field Notes operates under a defined set of editorial principles covering sourcing, review, corrections, and commercial transparency. This page documents those principles in full.
Editorial Principles
Ibron Field Notes operates under the following editorial principles: articles are reviewed by at least one second editor before publication, sources are cited where appropriate, corrections are noted publicly, and writers disclose any commercial relationships that could influence their selection of subject matter.
The publication's editorial position is that observation precedes instruction. Pieces published in Ibron Field Notes document what has been observed, prepared, and experienced — not what writers have been commissioned to promote. The distinction is maintained actively, not assumed.
Ibron Field Notes is an independent editorial publication. Articles reflect the considered observations of contributing writers and editors. The publication is not affiliated with any healthcare, commercial food brand, or governmental body.
Published Research
Articles in Ibron Field Notes reference published research from peer-reviewed journals and reputable institutional sources. Editorial selection prioritises long-running studies and replicated findings. Single-study or short-term interventional research is referenced with appropriate qualification and is never presented as settled consensus.
First-Hand Documentation
Observational pieces draw on first-hand documentation by the writer. Field notebooks, dated entries, market records, and personal food logs constitute primary source material. This documentation is retained by the editorial team and may be referenced in any corrections process.
Qualified Professional Consultation
Where pieces make claims that extend beyond documented personal observation and into the domain of nutritional science, writers are required to cross-reference against the views of qualified nutrition professionals or the relevant published literature. Such consultation is noted in the piece where directly informative.
Institutional and Population Data
Statistical or population-level claims are sourced from recognised bodies — national dietary surveys, established academic departments, or government-sponsored nutrition research programmes. Sources are identified by institution and general study type rather than specific citation in most cases, consistent with an editorial rather than academic register.
The Review Process
Writer Submission and Self-Review
Each submission arrives with the writer's own notation of sources consulted, documented observations referenced, and any external consultations undertaken. Writers are responsible for the accuracy of their first-hand material and for the characterisation of any research they reference.
Second-Editor Factual Review
A second editor reviews each piece with specific attention to: the accuracy of any population-level or research-based claims; the consistency of the observational register throughout; the absence of overclaimed findings; and the presence of any vocabulary that may mislead readers into regarding editorial observation as professional guidance.
External Reference Check (where applicable)
Where a piece makes a substantive claim about nutritional science that is central to its argument, the editorial team may request a brief external check against accessible published literature. This is not standard practice for observational pieces but is applied where significant claims are made.
Final Read and Publication
Following factual review, the lead editor conducts a final read for register consistency and editorial judgement. Pieces are published only when both the factual review and register review have been completed satisfactorily. Estimated time from submission to publication is two to four weeks.
Corrections Policy
Where factual errors are identified in published pieces — whether by the editorial team, by readers, or by the original writer — corrections are noted publicly in the affected piece. The original text is preserved where possible, with the correction appended in a clearly labelled note at the end of the relevant section or at the foot of the article.
Corrections to observational claims are distinguished from corrections to factual or research-based claims. A writer's observation that a particular market visit produced a specific selection of produce is not correctable by external parties; a claim about the nutritional composition of a food, or about what a body of research supports, is correctable and will be corrected if shown to be inaccurate.
Readers who wish to submit a correction request may do so via the contact page, selecting "Correction Request" as the subject. All correction requests are reviewed by the lead editor. The editorial team aims to respond to correction requests within ten working days.
Volume 01 (January — April 2026): No corrections have been issued in this volume to date. This record will be updated upon any correction being made.
Commercial Disclosures
Ibron Field Notes does not accept direct payment for editorial coverage. The journal will not publish a piece about a food producer, brand, or product as a result of a commercial arrangement unless that arrangement is disclosed in full within the piece, and unless the editorial team has independently determined that the piece meets the same standards as any other published work.
Some links in published pieces may be affiliate links — links for which the journal receives a small commission if a reader purchases a referenced product. This practice does not affect editorial selection: affiliate relationships are only established for products that would have been referenced regardless. All affiliate relationships are disclosed at the foot of any piece in which they appear.
Writers are required to declare any professional or commercial relationship with any individual, brand, or organisation mentioned in their submitted work. Undisclosed relationships that are subsequently discovered will result in the relevant piece being reviewed, corrected, or removed at the editorial team's discretion.
