<p>Evolutionary psychology often brings forward elegant and easily grasped explanations, but just the fact that they sound logical is not a proof on its own. Moreover, evolutionary psychology seems to be prone to picking and fitting certain facts to meet its explanatory models.</p>
<p>Therefore, what are the common scientific methods applied to testing the claims of evolutionary psychology?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-23T01:14:54.647Z
I would say that one necessary (but probably not sufficient) component to invoking fitness as a cause of some psychological phenomenon is to show how that phenomenon could have evolved subject to pressures for fitness. I think I've also seen arguments that, if something evolves over and over again in unrelated lineages, it probably is more than an accident, but rather serves some important function, i.e., improves fitness in some way.
Russell Richie
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-07-23T13:07:56.770Z
I'm voting to close this question because it is too broad. I think the methods would greatly depend on the specific theory and argument in question. But, in general circumstances, when you would like to disprove a(n evolutionary) theory, you search for circumstances/details that that theory cannot explain.
Robin Kramer-ten Have
<measurement><test><evolutionary-psychology><reproducible-research>
What empirical research methods are usually applied to testing evolutionary psychology concepts?
J Li
# What empirical research methods are usually applied to testing evolutionary psychology concepts?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-07-22)

Evolutionary psychology often brings forward elegant and easily grasped explanations, but just the fact that they sound logical is not a proof on its own. Moreover, evolutionary psychology seems to be prone to picking and fitting certain facts to meet its explanatory models.

Therefore, what are the common scientific methods applied to testing the claims of evolutionary psychology?

**Tags:** measurement, test, evolutionary-psychology, reproducible-research

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I would say that one necessary (but probably not sufficient) component to invoking fitness as a cause of some psychological phenomenon is to show how that phenomenon could have evolved subject to pressures for fitness. I think I've also seen arguments that, if something evolves over and over again in unrelated lineages, it probably is more than an accident, but rather serves some important function, i.e., improves fitness in some way.  
> **username_2**: I'm voting to close this question because it is too broad. I think the methods would greatly depend on the specific theory and argument in question. But, in general circumstances, when you would like to disprove a(n evolutionary) theory, you search for circumstances/details that that theory cannot explain.  

---

## 0 answers

