## 3 Data Analysis and Result Interpretation
### Q-Likert Factor Interpretation  
Prior to interpreting the factors, it is important to check the reliability of each identified factor. Table 4 shows that all factors are highly reliable, with reliability values \(\geq\) 0.89. The final step towards Q-Likert factor analysis was interpreting the factors. The objectively focused concourse statements were discussed with interpretations. It was conducted in two ways; first, the discourse and discussion on identified name-called factors along with explanatory notes from experts. Second, the comparison of ICTs engaged by experts in the pre-, during, and post-flood phases (Table 5).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factors** & r = 0.80(p)/(1 + (p-10).80), r = Reliability of Factors (Ranges from 0 (Not Reliable at All) to 1 (Extremely Reliable)), p = Number of Persons (Exerts) Defining a Factor \\ \hline  & York: ICT-1 & HM: ICT-1 \\
**1** & r1 = 0.94, p1 = 120 & r1 = 0.96, p1 = 210 \\
2 & r2 = 0.94, p2 = 120 & r2 = 0.92, p2 = 90 \\  & York: ICT-2 & r1 = 0.95, p1 = 150 & r1 = 0.96, p1 = 180 \\
2 & r1 = 0.89, p2 = 90 & r2 = 0.90, p2 = 60 \\
3 & -None- & r3 = 0.90, p3 = 60 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Reliability check for identified factors for ICT groups 1 and 2 from York and Head-Marala.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**ICT-1** & **York** & **Head-Marala** & **ICT-2** & **York** & **Head-Marala** \\ \hline  & Newspaper & & & Navigation system (GPS) & \\ \hline
**Pre** & NS & U & **Pre** & MU & NU \\ \hline
**During** & NU & NS & **During** & NU & NU \\ \hline
**Post** & NU & NS & **Post** & NU & NU \\ \hline  & Newsletters and brochures & & **Variable message signs (VMS), diversions, loudspeakers for evacuations** \\ \hline
**Pre** & NS & U & **Pre** & U & U \\ \hline
**During** & MU & NS & **During** & U & U \\ \hline
**Post** & MU & NS & **Post** & U & U \\ \hline  & Landlines/smartphones (call and text) & & **Remote sensing technologies (satellite images/RADAR, LIDAR)** \\ \hline
**Pre** & NS & NU & **Pre** & NU & NU \\ \hline
**During** & MU & NS & **During** & NU & NU \\ \hline
**Post** & NU & MU & **Post** & NU & NU \\ \hline  & Newsletter/email subscriptions & & & **Airborne technologies (airplanes and helicopters)** \\ \hline
**Pre** & NU & NU & **Pre** & MU & MU \\ \hline
**During** & NU & NU & **During** & U & U \\ \hline
**Post** & NU & NU & **Post** & U & U \\ \hline  & Information websites & & & **Small drones** \\ \hline
**Pre** & NS & NU & **Pre** & NU & NU \\ \hline
**During** & NU & NU & **During** & U & NU \\ \hline
**Post** & NU & NU & **Post** & U & NU \\ \hline  & Flood/earthquake site-specific application & & & **Technology-equipped boat** \\ \hline
**Pre** & NU & NU & **Pre** & NU & U \\ \hline
**During** & NU & NU & **During** & U & U \\ \hline
**Post** & NU & NU & **Post** & U & U \\ \hline  & Smartphone communication applications & & & **Bluetooth technology (wireless and non-wireless), LOOP detectors, and CCTV cameras** \\ \hline
**Pre** & U & U & **Pre** & U & NU \\ \hline
**During** & U & U & **During** & MU & NU \\ \hline
**Post** & U & U & **Post** & U & NU \\ \hline  & & & & & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Expert’s perspectives: the effectiveness of ICTs through the life cycle of a flood for York and Head-Marala (where U = used, NU = not used, NS = not sure (ambiguous), and MU = moderately used or somewhere in the middle).  
The next section presents the identified factors following an elaborate discussion on each one of them.