Editing Handicap principle (section)

=== Unworkable theory lacking empirical evidence ===

In 2015, Simon Huttegger and colleagues wrote that the distinction between "indexes" (unfakable signals) and "fakable signals", crucial to the argument for the handicap principle, is an artefact of signalling models. They demonstrated that absent that dichotomy, cost could not be the only factor controlling signalling behaviours, and that indeed it was "probably not the most important" factor acting against deception.<ref name="Huttegger Bruner Zollman 2015">{{cite journal |last1=Huttegger |first1=Simon M. |last2=Bruner |first2=Justin P. |last3=Zollman |first3=Kevin J. S. |title=The Handicap Principle Is an Artifact |journal=Philosophy of Science |volume=82 |issue=5 |date=2015 |issn=0031-8248 |doi=10.1086/683435 |pages=997–1009 |jstor=10.1086/683435 |url=https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/6492797 }}</ref>

Dustin J. Penn and Szabolcs Számadó stated in 2019 that there was still no [[empirical evidence]] for evolutionary pressure for wasteful biology or acts, and proposed that the handicap principle should be abandoned.<ref name="Penn Számadó 2019 pp. 267–290">{{cite journal |last1=Penn |first1=Dustin J. |last2=Számadó |first2=Szabolcs |title=The Handicap Principle: how an erroneous hypothesis became a scientific principle |journal=Biological Reviews |publisher=Wiley |volume=95 |issue=1 |date=23 October 2019 |issn=1464-7931 |doi=10.1111/brv.12563 |pages=267–290|doi-access=free |pmid=31642592 |pmc=7004190 }}</ref>