To operationalize the methodological assessment of evolutionary psychology, three requirements are proposed that, if satisfied, would show that a hypothesis is not a just-so story: (1) theoretical entrenchment (i.e., that the hypothesis under consideration is a consequence of a more fundamental theory that is empirically well-confirmed across a very wide range of phenomena), (2) predictive success (i.e., that the hypothesis generates concrete predictions that make it testable and eventually to a certain extent corroborated), and (3) failure of rival explanations (i.e., that crucial and successful predictions attributed to the hypothesis in question cannot be derived from alternative hypotheses). The author argues that the hypothesis about evolutionary sex differences in human jealousy satisfies all three requirements.
References
1.
Buss, D. M. 1999. Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
2.
Buss, D. M. 2000. The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex. New York: Free Press.
3.
Buss, D. M. et al. 1996a. Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology and psychology. Psychological Science3:251-255.
4.
Buss, D. M. et al. 1996b. Sex differences in jealousy: Not gone, not forgotten, and not explained by alternative hypotheses. Psychological Science7:373-375.
5.
Buss, D. M. et al. 1999. Jealousy and the natureof beliefs about infidelity: Test of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. Personal Relationships6:125-150.
6.
Buunk, B. P. et al. 1996. Sex differences in jealousy in evolutionary and cultural perspective: Tests from the Netherlands, Germany and the United States. Psychological Science7:359-363.
7.
Clutton-Brock, T. H. 1991. The evolution of parental care. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
8.
Daly, M., and M. Wilson. 1988. Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
9.
DeSteno, D. A., and P. Salovey. 1996. Evolutionary origins of sex differences in jealousy: Questioning the “Fitness” of the Model. Psychological Science7:367-372.
10.
Diamond, J. 1992. The rise and fall of the third chimpanzee. London: Vintage.
11.
Ford, C. S., and F. A. Beach. 1951. Patterns of sexual behavior. NewYork: Harper& Row.
12.
Geary, D. C. 1998. Male, female: The evolution of human sexual difference. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13.
Geary, D. C. 2000. Evolution and proximate expression of human paternal investment. Psychological Bulletin126:55-77.
14.
Ghiglieri, M. P. 2000. The dark side of man. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.
15.
Griffiths, P. E. 1997. What emotions really are: The problem of psychological categories. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
16.
Kummer, H. 1995. Causal knowledge in animals. In Causal cognition: Amultidisciplinary debate, edited by Dan Sperber, David Premack, and Ann James Premack, 26-39. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
17.
Lipton, P. 1990. Contrastive explanation. In Explanation and its limits, edited by D. Knowles, 247-266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Lipton, P. 2000. Inference to the best explanation. In A companion to the philosophy of science, edited by W. H. Newton-Smith, 184-193. Oxford: Blackwell.
19.
Mealey, L. 2000. SexDiffer ences: Development and Evolutionary Strategies.San Diego: Academic Press.
20.
Morell, V. 1998. A new look at monogamy. Science281:1982-1983.
21.
Solomon, R. C. 1998. The politics of emotions. Midwest Studies in Philosophy22:1-20.
22.
Symons, D. 1992. On the use and misuse of darwinism in the study of human behavior. In The adapted mind, edited by J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby, 137-162. New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
Wilson, M., and M. Daly. 1992. The man who mistook his wife fora chattell. In The adapted mind, edited by J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby, 289-322. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
Wilson, M., and M. Daly. 1996. Male sexual proprietariness and violence against wives. Current Directions in Psychological Science5:2-7.
25.
Wright, J. 1998. Paternity and paternal care. In Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection, edited by T. R. Birkhead and A. P. Møller, 117-145. San Diego: Academic Press.
