Supplementing qualitative analysis with geometry in disaster management

Introduction

Disaster management refers to the efforts of government institutions to manage various disasters, including not only natural hazards but also man-made emergencies, in cooperation with voluntary organizations, businesses, and local communities (Balci et al., 2024: 1-18; FEMA, 2021: 1-14). In the 21^st century, colleges and universities in the United States have begun to systematically provide students with courses related to disaster management. The field has also developed various agreed-upon principles such as comprehensive emergency management, disaster management cycles, and integrated emergency management systems.

Disaster management studies have unique features compared with other research areas (Lindell, 2013: 812-815) and have helped practitioners assess, monitor, evaluate, or prepare for disasters by suggesting theoretical references. Given that no single discipline has successfully provided appropriate solutions for various problems in the field, disaster management research tends to adopt a multidisciplinary approach. In addition, considering that a disaster occurs within a short period, the issues of time and collective stress have always exerted pressure in the research field. Therefore, the research results should be provided to the field in a timely manner.

Qualitative analysis is relevant because it has already been actively applied to disaster management. However, although qualitative analysis has helped increase public understanding of disaster management, the technique is not without problems (Kusumastuti et al., 2021: 1-12; Staic and Grinsven, 2022: 1107-1110). For example, qualitative analysis has not fully addressed some critical issues such as the complexity of multidisciplinary studies, the need for urgency, and the rapid onset of stress. In this context, the present work poses the following research question: How can the field of disaster management improve qualitative analysis for more effective research?

While answering this research question, this study is novel and relevant to its research goal. Multiple researchers have continued to use qualitative analysis in their disaster management research, but no rigorous study has comprehensively studied the geometrical application of the method of qualitative analysis in the field (Gray et al., 2022; Jablonski, 2024: 1-9). This study may be considered pioneering in this context. In addition, this study investigated all aspects of geometry for qualitative analysis within the field of disaster management. Although this paper has relied on multiple disciplines, its scope and depth are clearly defined by referring to the scope of basic geometry and its in-depth application to the subject of disaster management.

The field of disaster management needs to leverage learning when potential problems (or potential directions) are identified with qualitative analysis are identified (Thompson, 2012: 198-199). There are always barriers to disaster management learning, whether at the individual, institutional, or societal level. Appropriate learning will help overcome the problems of decreasing or eliminating these challenges. In this regard, the field may apply extensive communication or cooperation among researchers, practitioners, and other stakeholders (Jillson et al., 2019: 1-14).

The present research aims to explore how to improve qualitative analysis in the field of disaster management, in particular by applying geometry, toward the ultimate goal of delivering effective research. Careful examination of the inevitable aspects of qualitative analysis is carried out, and then the importance of the basic elements of geometry in qualitative analysis is explored. The key finding is that the field needs to supplement qualitative analysis with geometry for better research results based on the Scratch programming language, computer-based learning, the effects of geometric thinking, and the issue of awareness.

Literature review

Two methods have been widely used in the research field: qualitative and quantitative analysis (Abuhamda et al., 2021: 71-74). Many researchers have supported the importance of qualitative analysis in comparison with quantitative analysis, with the basic concepts of qualitative analysis being suggested and then adopted in their work. A number of researchers have specifically applied qualitative analysis to case studies in various research fields, such as psychology, education, culture, pandemic management, and engineering management.

Qualitative analysis has played many roles in helping stakeholders understand disaster victims’ perspectives, experiences, and other social issues in the field of disaster management (Mueller et al., 2023: 1-6). During a short period of disaster response, many people have urgently demanded numerical data. Without quick quantitative analysis, they would face many challenges in responding to the occurrence of disasters. However, in particular, when realizing that decision-makers have been able to conceptualize disaster victims’ aspirations, disaster situations, response capacities, and other complicated matters, thanks to qualitative analysis, the importance of its usage has been equally maintained in the field.

Geometry, a branch of mathematics, takes its name from “geo” (or place) and “metric” (or measurement). Many people, including housewives, farmers, students, and workers, directly or indirectly use geometry in their daily lives (Chivai et al. 2022: 1-15; Walle, 2001: 306-312), such as in determining proportions and ratios. Geometry has thus become an inevitable aspect of human life given its application to real-life problems.

More recently, geometry has been explicitly applied to the concept of social distancing during the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (Yurtyapan and Yilmza, 2021: 188-201). Social distance refers to the required physical distance (about six feet) between individuals to prevent the spread of coronavirus infection. To maintain this distance, individuals apply geometry to ensure safety and ultimately protect their lives.

Geometry has also proven valuable to several professionals, such as architects, land developers, engineers, artists, and writers, who have applied geometric knowledge to their fields. In addition, geometry has been vital in facilitating the understanding of complicated practices through the comparison of objects, shapes, and their connections (Kutluca, 2013: 1509-1510). The application of geometric principles has helped workers improve their professional skills, including the examination, expression, and generalization of concepts in their practice.

For instance, Kazi Mustafa, Alejandro Prieto, and Marc Ottele (2021) studied how to apply the subject of geometry to the construction industry, while creating green and sustainable concrete (Mustafa et al., 2021). Many negatively considered the increase in lichens and mosses on facades, resulting from related random and bad growth conditions. However, lichens and mosses have various environmental benefits. These researchers fully utilized surface geometry as a significant analysis variable and then systematically facilitated moss growth in concrete façade panels. Geometry has been proven to be a design guideline.

Geometric thinking refers to the development of thoughts using geometry, as well as how an individual rationalizes the use of geometric figures and related spatial connections. Two distinctive processes, visualization and reasoning, have been frequently used in geometric thinking (Gunhan, 2014: 3-4). Visualization refers to the creation of new objects, shapes, and connections. Reasoning refers to the formal development of conceptual systems for examining not only spaces but also shapes as well as the application of logical thinking to draw conclusions.

The geometric application process consists of two steps: perception and representation (Greenstein, 2014: 74-75). Perception means that practitioners see or develop an image by depending entirely on their own senses, thus enabling them to establish connections between their perceptions and various types of data. This perception is followed by a relevant representation or description of the image(s) by referring to geometry. Representation is not purely a copy of perception, but rather a reconstruction of coordinated percepts or abstracts.

Geometry consists of several sub-branches, such as Euclidean geometry, non-Euclidean geometry, differential geometry, analytic geometry, and topology. Many researchers, educators, and practitioners have examined the issue of geometry from their own perspectives. Euclid (300 BC), regarded as the father of modern geometry, introduced not only the axiomatic method, but also mathematical rigor into the area of geometry. Pythagoras formed his Pythagorean theorem approximately 1,000 years ago (Dani and Papadopoulos, 2019). Many other geometers have continued to make geology one of the most actively researched areas.

In 1957, Pierre van Hiele and Dina van Hiele-Geldof, both educators in the Netherlands, developed their own theories toward decreasing the difficulties of students in learning geometry. Their key idea was that students should follow five levels of geometric understanding: recognition, analysis, informal deduction, formal deduction, and rigor (Kalyankar, 2019: 31-48). Their theory has been widely used in many nations, including the former Soviet Union and the United States, where it has allowed students to learn geometry through a step-by-step process.

Geometry has been applied to many other areas in addition to mathematics and geometry. For example, geometry education has played many roles in teaching and researching topics such as geometric measurement, spatial thinking, and teaching development (Jones and Tzekaki, 2016: 109-149). Many educators have made efforts to facilitate systematic learning of geometry among their students, particularly the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (IGPME).

Computational geometry has been supported in computer science, where algorithms are examined from a geometric perspective. In addition to applying computational geometry to the study of geometric problems in computers, geometric methods are now being used for human-related analysis in computer science (Gong et al., 2019: 1-47). Geometric methods rely on the application of geometric concepts while embodying geometric attributes and constraints, spatial information, or machine learning.

Specifically, some researchers have discussed the basic elements of geometry in their study areas. A few researchers have also advocated for the significance of triangulation in the fields of nursing and health research (Foss and Ellefsen, 2002: 243-244; Sandelowski, 1995: 572-573), maintaining that triangulation contributes to understanding the complexity of human behavior, operationalizing the comprehensive aspect of nursing, and accommodating not only qualitative but also quantitative research.

A few researchers have advocated the value of a rectangle and polygon in the area of knowledge-based systems (Long et al., 2020: 1-14). In dealing with spatial data in the application of information technology, researchers have made efforts to form a compact representation of spatial knowledge. As a result, the rectangle represents small storage, and the polygon has a qualitative directional relationship between/among some extended objects. Thus, geometry has been dynamically used to signify a compact representation.

Regardless of research boundaries, the majority of the above-mentioned studies have depended heavily on the aspects of traditional validation, reliability, and generalization, among others, particularly toward the goal of robust research or a naturalistic paradigm. However, given that politics, economy, culture, and other contingencies have been rapidly evolving in the 21^st century, the aforementioned aspects of qualitative analysis, or the position of fundamentalism, should not be fully fixed (Tobin and Begley, 2004: 393-394). Instead, an infinite variety of methodological factors are required.

Similarly, pluralism has been considered in qualitative analysis, along with the exploration of how multiple factors are integrated with one another (Ganzevles et al., 2021: 1-17). In other words, it has become necessary to include different viewpoints, techniques, and discussions from various researchers in qualitative analysis. Pluralism may be partially or fully addressed through flexible relationships among researchers, practices, and other methodological approaches. Certainly, different researchers need to provide not only different goals, but also proportional paths.

Similarly, when Zhang et al. (2022) examined the role of social media during the occurrence of natural hazards in China, they relied heavily on the technique of multimodal data analysis, such as the function of pluralism (Zhang et al., 2022). To increase the extent of disaster information accuracy via mass media, these researchers did not attempt to analyze related unimodal or bimodal data, but multimodal data to include various texts, videos, and other images. This method successfully monitored rainstorms in Henan by 2021.

Very few studies have attempted to rigorously apply geometry to qualitative analysis in the field of disaster management, although a few studies have discussed the application of geomatics to the field in an effort to suggest innovative measures (Li et al., 2007). Geomatics, as a sub-study of geography, includes the collection, analysis, interpretation, and distribution of multiple types of data on the Earth’s surface (also known as geospatial data). The application of geomatics to disaster management involves the unprecedented use of remote sensing, satellite positioning, geographic information systems (GIS), and other technologies to prevent natural hazards.

Given the above discussion, this study attempts to comprehensively explore the application of geometry to qualitative analysis. For comprehensiveness, this research has tried to cover the multiple components of previous frames on how to directly or indirectly apply geometry to qualitative analysis. Furthermore, rather than applying traditional approaches, this study makes use of flexible approaches as well as pluralistic perspectives on geometrical applications. Thus, the present work will serve as a guide for improving the paradigm of qualitative analysis in the field of disaster management.

Methods

Qualitative analysis involves collecting qualitative data in the field of disaster management and then thoroughly analyzing them. The analysis was much more holistic than expected, covering the interpretation of theories, perspectives, and attitudes, among others. As a major methodology, descriptive qualitative analysis entails describing the characteristics of the subject by directly using qualitative data (Nassaji, 2015: 129-130). Thus, descriptive qualitative analysis focuses on describing what happened in the field more than why or how.

The process of descriptive qualitative analysis generally consists of three major steps: designing descriptive qualitative analysis, implementing qualitative data analysis, and ensuring rigorous findings (Chivanga and Monyai, 2021: 13-15; Colorafi and Evans, 2016: 17-23). In designing the descriptive qualitative analysis, this study considered the subject from the perspective of naturalistic inquiry (i.e., how to improve qualitative analysis), particularly without manipulating the unfolding events. Figure 1 shows the structure of the descriptive qualitative research.

Figure 1. Research design referring to geometry.

In the implementation of qualitative data analysis, both data collection and analysis (e.g., coding and qualitative content analysis) as well as qualitative data representation were carried out. Text data were collected through search engines (e.g., Google.com, ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, Oxford University Press, etc.) using the keywords “research methods,” “disaster management,” and “effects of geometry,” among others. These were then coded as qualitative analysis, geometric thinking, or disaster management. Similarly, the eligibility criteria were whether a specific text would be much related to qualitative methods, geometry, and disaster management or not. The data were flexibly interpreted, and the appropriate content was rewritten to achieve the goal of the research.

Many traditional factors have been considered to ensure rigorous findings, such as credibility, reliability, objectivity, authenticity, and application. Referring mainly to objectivity, which is relative neutrality, this work tried to include pluralistic viewpoints equally, such as the academic demand in the 21^st century and how to easily or simply embody qualitative analysis. To ensure the rigor of the major findings, we describe an increasing trend in disaster management.

To enhance the systematic elements of descriptive qualitative analysis, this study specifically used the PRISMA checklist with flow chart as a supporting tool (please refer to the data availability statement). This study’s thorough inclusion of all essential methodological components was made possible in large part by the PRISMA checklist with flow chart (Sinha et al., 2024: 1–20). The PRISMA checklist with flow chart assists with text selection, result synthesis, research limitations, and other related issues. Descriptive qualitative analysis embodies the rigorous structure of the research thanks to the PRISMA checklist with flow chart.

Results: Qualitative analysis characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages

Discussion: Enhancing qualitative analysis with basic elements of geometry

Conclusion

Despite the high frequency of qualitative analysis in the research field of disaster management, very little research has attempted to rigorously discuss how this method can be enhanced through geometry. The objective of this study was to explore how to improve qualitative analysis, specifically by applying geometric principles in the field. Toward this end, this work describes not only the whole process of qualitative analysis but also the ways in which it can be strengthened by geometric application.

The pivotal finding is that the field must complement the method of qualitative analysis with clear and simplified geometric application toward improving the quality of researches. When considering that all documents should be written in an easy and simple manner in the field of disaster management, geometric applications must be substantially embodied. Only if those documents are difficult for the public to understand within a short period of emergency response, in particular without appropriate geometrical frame(s), can they not be an effective information channel for disaster management. These key tenets will ultimately lead to decreased human losses, economic damage, and psychological impacts in disaster areas. While reading and understanding easy writing, the public may learn to deal with various disasters better than before. At the same time, the field must apply the basic elements of geometry, Scratch and sketching, technology-oriented learning to enhance outcome of qualitative analyses.

One advantage of this research is that it flexibly considered various disciplines and pluralistic perspectives in discussing the issue of geometric application in qualitative analysis. Admitting that the field of disaster management has been a typical case of multidisciplinary studies, not only geometry but also qualitative analysis had to keep pace with the occurrence of various disasters in this paper. The major topic was thus more comprehensively addressed than in many previous researches. However, some scholars who prefer to use the traditional form of qualitative analysis to facilitate a deep understanding of the research subject may consider the pioneering effort of this work as a deviation and, thus, a limitation.

Future researchers may expand the application of geometry, which is the key tenet of this study, in disaster management studies. Supplementing qualitative analysis with geometry may provide them with an opportunity to directly or indirectly contribute to the whole-community approach. In addition to using geometry to increase the quality of qualitative analysis, these researchers may find ways to persuade more traditional scholars to adopt new trends.

Ethical statement & consent

Ethical approval and consent were not required.