New Review Challenges the "Just-So Story" Critique of Evolutionary Psychology

February 19, 2026 - 19:57

For decades, evolutionary psychology has been dogged by a persistent criticism: that its theories are unfalsifiable "just-so stories," clever narratives about human nature that cannot be scientifically tested or disproven. This critique has become a "zombie idea" in academia—one that refuses to die despite repeated counterarguments.

A new conceptual review in a leading psychology journal directly confronts this claim. The authors systematically argue that the field is, in fact, built on a foundation of testable and falsifiable hypotheses. They contend that robust evolutionary theories generate specific predictions about human cognition and behavior, which can then be rigorously examined against empirical data from diverse cultures, historical records, and psychological experiments.

Crucially, the paper highlights that many predictions from evolutionary psychology have indeed been falsified. The field has a record of discarding or significantly revising theories when evidence contradicts them—a hallmark of genuine science. Examples include early ideas about certain mating strategies and adaptations that have not withstood cross-cultural scrutiny.

This review aims to shift the debate from broad philosophical dismissal to a more nuanced discussion of specific theories and methods. By demonstrating that the core of evolutionary psychology operates within the same scientific framework as other disciplines, the authors hope to move past the stale "unfalsifiable" critique and focus on the substantive empirical contributions the field continues to make to understanding the human mind.