The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Challenges and obstacles in sharing and coordinating information during multi-agency disaster response: Propositions from field exercises
Open accessAbstract
Although various scholars have researched issues regarding disaster management, few have studied the sharing and coordinating of information during disasters. Not much empirical data is available in this field and there is sparse insight into the factors that may impede or facilitate information sharing and coordination among stakeholders. In this paper, we provide an overview of the relevant obstacles and challenges by examining existing literature and then investigating a series of multi-agency disaster management exercises, using observations and a survey. Although all the people who took part in our study agree that sharing information is important, for the success of their own organization as well as the exercise as a whole, the extent to which information is actually being shared among organizations is often limited by a number of factors that can be attributed to the community, agency and individual level. We found that relief workers are often more concerned with receiving information from others than with providing information to others who may benefit. Incentives for sharing information, understanding each other’s work-processes and the usability of information systems have shown positive effects on information sharing and coordination. The findings of our study have been formulated using six grounded propositions, which can be used by system designers and policy-makers upon validation in further research. We also provide directions for future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
The social construction of reality : a treatise in the sociology of knowledge
Simpson, G., Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2091739 · Cited by 16,462
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 10,899
Venkatesh, V. (2000) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 · Cited by 6,664
The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster
Weick, K. E. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393339 · Cited by 5,000
(2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.1.i · Cited by 4,443
The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge
Gustafson, J. M., Berger, P. L., Luckmann, T., & Luckmann, T. (1968) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.2307/1385127 · Cited by 4,311
Models of Bounded Rationality: Empirically Grounded Economic Reason
Simon, H. A. (1997) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4711.001.0001 · Cited by 4,205
Cited by
Socializing in emergencies—A review of the use of social media in emergency situations
Simon, T., Goldberg, A., & Adini, B. (2015) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.07.001 · Cited by 461
Assessing social resilience of flood-vulnerable communities in Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar
Lwin, K. K., Pal, I., Shrestha, S., & Warnitchai, P. (2020) · International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction · doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101745 · Cited by 74
Two sides to every story: The Dual Perspectives Method for examining interruptions in healthcare
McCurdie, T., Sanderson, P., Aitken, L. M., & Liu, D. (2017) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.05.012 · Cited by 30
Interpretive structural modelling of inter-agency collaboration risk in public safety networks
Sienkiewicz-Małyjurek, K. (2022) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-021-01172-0 · Cited by 26
Zeng, X., Ji, D., Thadani, D. R., Li, B., Pu, X., Cai, Z., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3593056 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Bharosa, N., Lee, J., & Janssen, M.
- Venue
- Information Systems Frontiers
- Published
- 2009-05-09
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-65
- ISSN
- 1387-3326 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-9419
- OpenAlex
- W2053020022
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 28.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Challenges and obstacles in sharing and coordinating information during multi-agency disaster response: Propositions from field exercises. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10796-009-9174-z
- The paper
- Bharosa, N., Lee, J., & Janssen, M. (2010). Challenges and obstacles in sharing and coordinating information during multi-agency disaster response: Propositions from field exercises. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-009-9174-z
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.