A recent philosophical examination of evolutionary psychology argues that it currently lacks a metatheoretical “hard core” and thus cannot be considered a mature science. It has been proposed instead that evolutionary psychology should be categorized as a pre-normal, but not pre-paradigm (as defined by Kuhn), science, given, on the one hand, substantial theoretical tensions but, on the other, evidence of impressive scientific progress. Yet a survey of controversial beliefs involving 581 evolutionarily informed scholars, the majority with psychology backgrounds, has found that they have “shared core beliefs” about a number of topics central to their field, which potentially suggests that there is a metatheory or “hard core” uniting evolutionary psychology. The current study reconsidered these data using factor analysis in an effort to identify the presence of a latent Core Beliefs factor, which if present could be reasonably interpreted as reflecting a widely accepted (implicitly or explicitly) metatheory. A single-factor solution did not fit these data, however. Instead, three belief-cluster factors emerged, corresponding to Behavioral Genetics, Mainstream Evolutionary Psychology (characterized by certain beliefs about massive modularity, menstrual cycles, sex differences, life history, and developmental influences), and Biocultural Dynamics (characterized by certain beliefs about population differences and group selection). Mostly weak but positive inter-factor correlations were noted, which suggest the potential future development of a unitary metatheory. Participant training background was examined as a predictor of endorsement of the different belief-cluster factors, and significant evidence of influence was observed in some cases. While these data could be taken as evidence that evolutionary psychology is not yet a fully “normal” science, having only a metatheoretical “soft core,” this view faces certain challenges.

最近对进化心理学的一项哲学考察认为，它目前缺乏元理论的“硬核”，因此不能被视为一门成熟的科学。相反，有人提出，进化心理学应该被归类为前正常科学，而不是前范式（如库恩所定义），因为一方面存在大量的理论张力，但另一方面，也有令人印象深刻的证据。科学进步。然而，一项涉及 581 名进化论学者（大多数具有心理学背景）的争议性信念调查发现，他们对各自领域的许多核心主题拥有“共同的核心信念”，这可能表明存在一种元理论或“硬核信念”。 ” 统一进化心理学。当前的研究使用因素分析重新考虑了这些数据，试图确定潜在的核心信念因素的存在，如果存在，可以合理地解释为反映了广泛接受的（隐式或显式）元理论。然而，单因素解决方案不适合这些数据。相反，出现了三个信念簇因素，对应于行为遗传学、主流进化心理学（以关于大规模模块化、月经周期、性别差异、生活史和发育影响的某些信念为特征）和生物文化动力学（以关于人口差异和群体选择的某些信念为特征）。人们注意到因素间的相关性大多较弱但呈正相关，这表明单一元理论未来的潜在发展。参与者的培训背景被检查为不同信念簇因素认可的预测因素，并且在某些情况下观察到了显着的影响证据。虽然这些数据可以作为证据证明进化心理学还不是一门完全“正常”的科学，只有元理论的“软核”，但这种观点面临着某些挑战。