ABSTRACT
Introduction Evolutionary psychiatry is a rapidly growing field that emphasizes the value of evolutionary explanations for traits that make individuals vulnerable to mental disorders. Some articles that apply evolutionary theory to psychiatric disorders make errors, such as viewing a disease as if it is an adaptation. We assessed the quantity of errors in the most widely cited articles on evolutionary psychiatry and its relationship to citation frequency
Methods Two reviewers searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar on September 8, 2023, using specific search terms related to “evolution” and “psychiatry”, in order to find the most highly cited articles in the field. Based on the work of Nesse, we developed a measure for assessing the number of errors and overall quality in evolutionary psychiatry articles. We applied the measure to the 20 most highly cited articles, and calculated the correlations between article quality and number of errors with number of citations.
Results Twenty highly cited articles, with a mean citation count of 758.95 and publication year range from 1964 to 2011, were rated. While the most highly cited articles had good quality on average, they also made important errors. There was no significant correlation of article quality or article errors and citation count.
Conclusion Highly cited articles in evolutionary psychiatry demonstrated strengths but also exhibited weaknesses. The lack of a relationship of quality and error scores with citation rates suggests that other factors influence such citations. Future research should focus on achieving consensus on how best to assess the quality of evolutionary psychiatry articles and on what errors should be avoided.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
