Page 158 - AJWEP-22-4
P. 158

Jusoh and Alwi

                3.  Balcik  B, Beamon BM, Krejci  CC, Muramatsu KM,   14.  Faul F, Erdfelder  E, Lang  AG, Buchner  A. G*power
                   Ramirez M. Coordination in humanitarian relief chains:   3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the
                   Practices, challenges and opportunities. Int J Prod Econ.   social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res
                   2010;126(1):22-34.                                   Methods. 2007;39(2):175-191.
                   doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.09.008                      doi: 10.3758/BF03193146
                4.  Kovács G, Spens KM. Humanitarian logistics in disaster   15.  Mohd Zaki  NA, Hashim H, Hassan MN. Disaster
                   relief  operations.  Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manage.   database  management  and  its  role  in  flood  response
                   2007;37(2):99-114.                                   effectiveness: A case study of NADMA. Int J Environ
                   doi: 10.1108/09600030710734820                       Res Public Health. 2020;17(3):891.
                5.  Shaluf IM, Ahmadun F, Said AM. A review of disaster   16.  Azmi F, Latif AA. Data verification in disaster management
                   and crisis. Disaster Prev Manage. 2003;12(1):24-32.  research: Challenges and solutions in Malaysian context.
                   doi: 10.1108/09653560310463829                       Malays J Soc Space. 2019;15(2):45-57.
                6.  Wang S, Cheah JH, Wong CY, Ramayah T. Progress in   17.  Rahman AA, Ghazali NHC, Shamsudin N. Inter-agency
                   partial  least  squares  structural  equation  modeling  use   coordination  in  Malaysian  flood  disaster  response:
                   in logistics and supply chain  management  in the  last   Evaluating  NADMA’s role.  J  Conting  Cris Manage.
                   decade: A structured literature review. Int J Phys Distrib   2020;28(3):289-300.
                   Logist Manage. 2024;54(1):673-704.               18.  Ismail N, Ahmad R. Targeted sampling in humanitarian
                   doi: 10.1108/IJPDLM-06-2023-0200                     research:  Lessons  from  flood  response  studies  in
                7.  Sarstedt M, Richter NF, Hauff S, Ringle CM. Combined   Malaysia. J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2018;27:467-475.
                   importance-performance map analysis (cIPMA) in partial   19.  Neuman  WL.  Social  Research Methods: Qualitative
                   least squares structural equation modeling (PLS SEM):   and Quantitative Approaches. 7  ed. United Kingdom:
                                                                                                  th
                   A SmartPLS 4 tutorial. J Mark Anal. 2024;12:746-760.  Pearson Education; 2014.
                   doi: 10.1057/s41270-024-00325-y                  20.  Mahmud R, Ariffin AH. Integrating NGOs into national
                8.  Cheah JH,  Kersten W,  Ringle CM,  Wallenburg CM.   disaster response frameworks in Malaysia: Opportunities
                   Guest editorial: Predictive  modeling  in logistics  and   and challenges. Asian J Gov. 2022;6(2):58-73.
                   supply chain management  research using partial  least   21.  Ringle  CM,  Wende S, Becker  JM.  SmartPLS 3.
                   squares structural equation modeling. Int J Phys Distrib   Boenningstedt:  SmartPLS GmbH; 2015.  Available
                   Logist Manage. 2023;53(7-8):709-717.                 from: https://www.smartpls.com  [Last accessed  on
                   doi: 10.1108/IJPDLM-08-2023-0552                     2025 May 25].
                9.  Chinnaraju A. Partial  least  squares structural  equation   22.  Fornell  C, Larcker  DF. Evaluating  structural  equation
                   modeling (PLS-SEM) in the  AI era: Innovative        models with unobservable variables  and measurement
                   methodological  guide and framework for business     error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39-50.
                   research. Magna Sci Adv Res Rev. 2025;13(2):62-108.     doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
                   doi: 10.30574/msarr.2025.13.2.0048               23.  Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A Primer
                10.  Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative,   on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling
                   and  Mixed  Methods  Approaches.  4 ed.  New  Delhi:   (PLS-SEM). 2 ed. United Kingdom: Sage; 2019.
                                                                                   nd
                                                  th
                   SAGE Publications; 2014.                         24.  Chin WW. The partial least squares approach to structural
                11.  Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A Primer   equation modeling. In: Marcoulides GA, editor. Modern
                   on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation         Methods for Business Research. United States: Lawrence
                   Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2 ed. New  Delhi: SAGE           Erlbaum Associates; 1998. p. 295-336.
                                          nd
                   Publications; 2017.                              25.  Nguyen  TT, Simkin L, Canhoto  AI.  The role of
                12.  Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP.   human resources in crisis management  and disaster
                   Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical   response:  A  strategic  perspective.  J  Strateg Mark.
                   review of the literature  and recommended  remedies.   2021;29(7):583-602.
                   J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879-903.                  doi: 10.1080/0965254X.2020.1740762
                   doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879                  26.  Abdullah H, Saad N. Strengthening  humanitarian
                13.  Bryman A, Bell  E.  Business Research Methods. 4 ed.   collaboration in flood response: The role of civil society.
                                                             th
                   Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.               J Disaster Risk Stud. 2017;9(3):112-120.













                Volume 22 Issue 4 (2025)                       150                           doi: 10.36922/AJWEP025220182
   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163