使用结果分割的以人为中心的分析检查均衡性和多终局性:青少年发展资产和健康的概念验证

IF 4.5 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Luke T. Russell, Todd M. Jensen, Jonathon J. Beckmeyer, Chang Su-Russell
{"title":"使用结果分割的以人为中心的分析检查均衡性和多终局性:青少年发展资产和健康的概念验证","authors":"Luke T. Russell,&nbsp;Todd M. Jensen,&nbsp;Jonathon J. Beckmeyer,&nbsp;Chang Su-Russell","doi":"10.1111/jftr.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Early general systems theorists proposed a key difference between living systems and physical systems is the widespread presence of equifinality and multifinality among living organisms. That is, in living systems, there are often variable pathways to the same outcomes (equifinality), or the same starting conditions can lead to disparate outcomes (multifinality). Family scientists, however, frequently use methods (adapted from the physical sciences) that fail to reflect these characteristics within their statistical models. In this paper, we propose and provide a preliminary proof-of-concept of how an outcome-partitioned set of person-centered analyses might be used to develop alternative models that more comprehensively capture equifinality and multifinality in living systems. This approach balances the needs for parsimony and utility in family theories and models of human development, relationships, and family systems while recognizing the diversity within which individuals and families navigate many pathways to success, difficulty, or something in-between.</p>","PeriodicalId":47446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Theory & Review","volume":"17 3","pages":"579-599"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jftr.70003","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining equifinality and multifinality using outcome-partitioned person-centered analyses: A proof-of-concept with youth developmental assets and health\",\"authors\":\"Luke T. Russell,&nbsp;Todd M. Jensen,&nbsp;Jonathon J. Beckmeyer,&nbsp;Chang Su-Russell\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jftr.70003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Early general systems theorists proposed a key difference between living systems and physical systems is the widespread presence of equifinality and multifinality among living organisms. That is, in living systems, there are often variable pathways to the same outcomes (equifinality), or the same starting conditions can lead to disparate outcomes (multifinality). Family scientists, however, frequently use methods (adapted from the physical sciences) that fail to reflect these characteristics within their statistical models. In this paper, we propose and provide a preliminary proof-of-concept of how an outcome-partitioned set of person-centered analyses might be used to develop alternative models that more comprehensively capture equifinality and multifinality in living systems. This approach balances the needs for parsimony and utility in family theories and models of human development, relationships, and family systems while recognizing the diversity within which individuals and families navigate many pathways to success, difficulty, or something in-between.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Family Theory & Review\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"579-599\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jftr.70003\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Family Theory & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jftr.70003\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Theory & Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jftr.70003","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

早期的一般系统理论家提出了生命系统和物理系统之间的一个关键区别是生物有机体中广泛存在的等终性和多终性。也就是说,在生命系统中,通常存在通往相同结果(等终性)的不同途径,或者相同的起始条件可能导致不同的结果(多终性)。然而,家庭科学家经常使用的方法(改编自物理科学)不能在他们的统计模型中反映这些特征。在本文中,我们提出并提供了一个初步的概念证明,即如何使用一组以人为中心的结果分区分析来开发更全面地捕捉生命系统中的等终性和多终性的替代模型。这种方法平衡了家庭理论和人类发展、关系和家庭系统模型中对节俭和实用的需求,同时认识到个人和家庭在通往成功、困难或介于两者之间的许多途径中的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Examining equifinality and multifinality using outcome-partitioned person-centered analyses: A proof-of-concept with youth developmental assets and health

Examining equifinality and multifinality using outcome-partitioned person-centered analyses: A proof-of-concept with youth developmental assets and health

Early general systems theorists proposed a key difference between living systems and physical systems is the widespread presence of equifinality and multifinality among living organisms. That is, in living systems, there are often variable pathways to the same outcomes (equifinality), or the same starting conditions can lead to disparate outcomes (multifinality). Family scientists, however, frequently use methods (adapted from the physical sciences) that fail to reflect these characteristics within their statistical models. In this paper, we propose and provide a preliminary proof-of-concept of how an outcome-partitioned set of person-centered analyses might be used to develop alternative models that more comprehensively capture equifinality and multifinality in living systems. This approach balances the needs for parsimony and utility in family theories and models of human development, relationships, and family systems while recognizing the diversity within which individuals and families navigate many pathways to success, difficulty, or something in-between.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信