In business, equifinality implies that firms may establish similar competitive advantages based on substantially different competencies.
In psychology, equifinality refers to how different early experiences in life (e.g., parental divorce, physical abuse, parental substance abuse) can lead to similar outcomes (e.g., childhood depression). In other words, there are many different early experiences that can lead to the same psychological disorder.
In archaeology, equifinality refers to how different historical processes may lead to a similar outcome or social formation. For example, the development of agriculture or the bow and arrow occurred independently in many different areas of the world, yet for different reasons and through different historical trajectories. This highlights that generalizations based on cross-cultural comparisons cannot be made uncritically.
In Earth and Environmental Sciences, two general types of equifinality are distinguished: process equifinality (concerned with real-world open systems) and model equifinality (concerned with conceptual open systems).3 For example, process equifinality in geomorphology indicates that similar landforms might arise as a result of quite different sets of processes. Model equifinality refers to a condition where distinct configurations of model components (e.g. distinct model parameter values) can lead to similar or equally acceptable simulations (or representations of the real-world process of interest). This similarity or equal acceptability is conditional on the objective functions and criteria of acceptability defined by the modeler. While model equifinality has various facets, model parameter and structural equifinality are mostly known and focused in modeling studies.4 Equifinality (particularly parameter equifinality) and Monte Carlo experiments are the foundation of the GLUE method that was the first generalised method for uncertainty assessment in hydrological modeling.5 GLUE is now widely used within and beyond environmental modeling.
Cummings & Worley, Organization Development & Change, Thomson, 2005, p. 87. ↩
R.B. Zajonc, Feeling and Facial Efference: Implications of the Vascular Theory of Emotion. 1989, p. 16 http://psychology.stanford.edu/~lera/273/zajonc-psychreview-1989.pdf Archived 2007-06-10 at the Wayback Machine http://psychology.stanford.edu/~lera/273/zajonc-psychreview-1989.pdf ↩
Khatami, Sina; Peel, Murray C.; Peterson, Tim J.; Western, Andrew W. (2019). "Equifinality and Flux Mapping: A New Approach to Model Evaluation and Process Representation Under Uncertainty". Water Resources Research. 55 (11): 8922–8941. Bibcode:2019WRR....55.8922K. doi:10.1029/2018WR023750. hdl:11343/286609. ISSN 1944-7973. S2CID 198397645. https://doi.org/10.1029%2F2018WR023750 ↩
Beven, Keith; Binley, Andrew (1992). "The future of distributed models: Model calibration and uncertainty prediction". Hydrological Processes. 6 (3): 279–298. Bibcode:1992HyPr....6..279B. doi:10.1002/hyp.3360060305. ISSN 1099-1085. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hyp.3360060305 ↩
Jim E Freer, Keith J Beven(2001). Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology. Journal of Hydrology (2001) Volume: 249, Issue: 1–4, pp. 11–29 ↩