Evolutionary change in New World Monkey (NWM) skulls occurred primarily along the line of least resistance defined by size (including allometric) variation (g(max)). Although the direction of evolution was aligned with this axis, it was not clear whether this macroevolutionary pattern results from the conservation of within population genetic covariance patterns (long-term constraint) or long-term selection along a size dimension, or whether both, constraints and selection, were inextricably involved. Furthermore, G-matrix stability can also be a consequence of selection, which implies that both, constraints embodied in g(max) and evolutionary changes observed on the trait averages, would be influenced by selection. Here, we describe a combination of approaches that allows one to test whether any particular instance of size evolution is a correlated by-product due to constraints (g(max)) or is due to direct selection on size and apply it to NWM lineages as a case study. The approach is based on comparing the direction and amount of evolutionary change produced by two different simulated sets of net-selection gradients (beta), a size (isometric and allometric size) and a nonsize set. Using this approach it is possible to distinguish between the two hypotheses (indirect size evolution due to constraints or direct selection on size), because although both may produce an evolutionary response aligned with g(max), the amount of change produced by random selection operating through the variance/covariance patterns (constraints hypothesis) will be much smaller than that produced by selection on size (selection hypothesis). Furthermore, the alignment of simulated evolutionary changes with g(max) when selection is not on size is not as tight as when selection is actually on size, allowing a statistical test of whether a particular observed case of evolution along the line of least resistance is the result of selection along it or not. Also, with matrix diagonalization (principal components [PC]) it is possible to calculate directly the net-selection gradient on size alone (first PC [PC1]) by dividing the amount of phenotypic difference between any two populations by the amount of variation in PC1, which allows one to benchmark whether selection was on size or not.