Searching for Models for Psychological Science: A Possible Contribution of Simulation

The problem of the theoretical precariousness of psychology requires defining, at an epistemological level, its concepts and languages and the use of models for finding core concepts and building more or less 'hard' theories. After reviewing some main aims and models of psychology, and comparing them with those of other sciences, the commentary deals with the possibility of simulating life as a tool for building evolutionary psychological models. In particular, evolutionary and developmental robotics and the evo-devo models can simulate the simultaneous adaptation effects of the phylogenetic and ontogenetic development of the embodied mind in response to the characteristics of the environment. The simulation using Artificial Intelligence and robotics could contribute significantly to the definition, experimentation, and validation of the models that make up the theories of psychology in its different domains, enhancing the interdisciplinarity with other sciences that study the same objects. Further studies, both epistemological and empirical, are suggested to confirm whether this evo-devo approach can be integrated with "evolutionary psychology" and contribute to a unifying meta-theory of psychological science.

Psychology: a Giant with Feet of Clay

The aim of the current study has been to highlight the theoretical precariousness of Psychology. The theoretical precariousness has been evidenced through a review of psychological "core-constructs" whose definitions were thoroughly searched in 11 popular introductory textbooks of psychology edited between 2012 and 2019 and in an APA dictionary of Psychology (VandeBos 2015). This analysis has shown unsatisfactory or discordant definitions of psychological "core-constructs". A further epistemological comparison between psychology and three "harder" sciences (i.e., physics, chemistry and biology) seemed to support the "soft" nature of psychology: a minor consensus in its "core" and a minor capacity to accumulate knowledge when compared to the former "harder" sciences (Fanelli in PLoS One, 5, e10068, 2010; Fanelli and Glänzel in PLoS One, 8, e66938, 2013). This comparison also seemed to support the "pre-paradigmatic" condition of psychology, in which conflicts between rival schools of thought hamper the development of a real unified paradigm (Kuhn 1970). To enter a paradigmatic stage, we propose here evolutionary psychology as the most compelling approach, thanks to its empirical support and theoretical consistency. However, since the skepticism about "grand unifying theories" is well disposed (Badcock in Review of General Psychology, 16, 10-23, 2012), we suggest that evolutionary psychology must be intended as a pluralistic approach rather than a monolithic one, and that its main strength is its capacity to resolve the nature-nurture dialectics.

The dot-probe task to measure emotional attention: A suitable measure in comparative studies?

For social animals, attending to and recognizing the emotional expressions of other individuals is of crucial importance for their survival and likely has a deep evolutionary origin. Gaining insight into how emotional expressions evolved as adaptations over the course of evolution can be achieved by making direct cross-species comparisons. To that extent, experimental paradigms that are suitable for investigating emotional processing across species need to be developed and evaluated. The emotional dot-probe task, which measures attention allocation toward emotional stimuli, has this potential. The task is implicit, and subjects need minimal training to perform the task successfully. Findings in nonhuman primates, although scarce, show that they, like humans, have an attentional bias toward emotional stimuli. However, the wide literature on human studies has shown that different factors can have important moderating effects on the results. Due to the large heterogeneity of this literature, these moderating effects often remain unnoticed. We here review this literature and show that subject characteristics and differences in experimental designs affect the results of the dot-probe task. We conclude with specific recommendations regarding these issues that are particularly relevant to take into consideration when applying this paradigm to study animals.

Myopia is an Adaptive Characteristic of Vision: Not a Disease or Defect

This article proposes that myopia (nearsightedness) is an adaptive characteristic of human vision. Most theories of the evolution of vision assume myopia is a disease or defect that would have resulted in decreased reproductive fitness in the absence of modern corrective lenses. In contrast, the present article argues that myopic individuals may have played important roles in hunter–gatherer groups such as making tools and weapons, and identifying medicinal plants, contributing to individual and group survival. This idea is called the “adaptive myopia hypothesis.” Evidence favoring this hypothesis is reviewed in the context of the metatheory of evolutionary psychology.

Transformation of Psychology: From Thinking/Thought to Metathinking/Metathought

The prefix meta is popular in psychology as well as in other sciences oriented on the investigation of psychology. In the first case the usage is quite simple: every term is “the sum” of meta and usual psychological concept. In the second case, the situation is much more complicated. Sometimes, it is related to transition on a higher level of abstraction, from first-order to second-order investigations. Why is such a transition necessary and is it useful for scientific progress? The comparative analysis of the meta-approach to different sciences shows both specific peculiarities (reasons for application of the prefix, methods of manipulation and investigation, main objects of analysis, goals raised, and status of metaresearcher) and common features and regularities that may be discovered only in an interdisciplinary context. In this special section, we suggest a new way of application of meta-approach to psychology—in terms of metathinking. Our main idea is as follows: The wide circulation of meta-approach to psychology with necessity leads to serious changes in thinking of both researchers in the field of psychology and in sciences oriented on investigation of psychology.