CLASSIFYING VOLUNTEERS PARTICIPATED IN SEARCH AND RESCUE ACTIVITIES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TOPSIS-SORT AND ORESTE-SORT METHODS

MakaleAçık ErişimScopus SJRQ4

Özet

Volunteers collaborate with professionals to provide institutional assistance in various areas; their management differs from that of professionals. To maximise volunteer productivity, categorising volunteers according to their knowledge and experience levels and distributing tasks increases volunteer retention and task efficiency. This study categorizes volunteers into four groups, fulfilling nine criteria identified through a literature review of search and rescue activities. TOPSIS-Sort and ORESTE-Sort (Optimist and Pessimist approaches) are employed in classification. Only one alternative is consistently assigned to the same class across all methods. While ORESTE-Sort offers greater flexibility and three distinct classification outcomes, it is more complex and sensitive to threshold values. TOPSIS-Sort, though simpler and producing a single classification, requires criterion weight. The Wilcoxon signed rank test is applied to evaluate the similarity between ORESTE-Sort and TOPSIS-Sort results; there are significant differences between the two methods. The study concludes by comparing the methods' applications, steps, and solution approaches, highlighting their respective advantages and disadvantages, and suggesting directions for future research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

RDL Kalıcı Bağlantı (PID)
https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/munzur/1192Resmi atıflarda kullanılan kalıcı adres
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2298/yjor250515006oYayıncı resmi DOI adresi
İndeks kayıtları
Kaydın indeks veri tabanlarındaki sayfası (aktarımda alınan kayıt numarasıyla). Erişim, indeksin kendi koşullarına bağlıdır.
Atıflar
Scopus
0
OpenAlex
0
Her kaynağın kendi saydığı toplam atıf; aktarım ve zenginleştirme sırasında alındı.
Tam Kayıt
AlanDeğerDil
dc.contributor.authorOzdemir, Umit
dc.contributor.authorMete, Suleyman
dc.contributor.authorGul, Muhammet
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-28T14:53:58.752744640Z
dc.date.available2026-10-28T14:53:58.752744640Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.description.abstractVolunteers collaborate with professionals to provide institutional assistance in various areas; their management differs from that of professionals. To maximise volunteer productivity, categorising volunteers according to their knowledge and experience levels and distributing tasks increases volunteer retention and task efficiency. This study categorizes volunteers into four groups, fulfilling nine criteria identified through a literature review of search and rescue activities. TOPSIS-Sort and ORESTE-Sort (Optimist and Pessimist approaches) are employed in classification. Only one alternative is consistently assigned to the same class across all methods. While ORESTE-Sort offers greater flexibility and three distinct classification outcomes, it is more complex and sensitive to threshold values. TOPSIS-Sort, though simpler and producing a single classification, requires criterion weight. The Wilcoxon signed rank test is applied to evaluate the similarity between ORESTE-Sort and TOPSIS-Sort results; there are significant differences between the two methods. The study concludes by comparing the methods' applications, steps, and solution approaches, highlighting their respective advantages and disadvantages, and suggesting directions for future research.
dc.identifier.doi10.2298/yjor250515006o
dc.identifier.endpage29
dc.identifier.issn0354-0243
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105040367571
dc.identifier.startpage1
dc.identifier.urihttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/munzur/1192
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherFaculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade
dc.relation.ispartofYugoslav Journal of Operations Research
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectORESTE-Sort
dc.subjectSearch and rescue
dc.subjectTOPSIS-Sort
dc.subjectvolunteer classification
dc.titleCLASSIFYING VOLUNTEERS PARTICIPATED IN SEARCH AND RESCUE ACTIVITIES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TOPSIS-SORT AND ORESTE-SORT METHODS
dc.typeArticle
rdl.citation.openalex0
rdl.citation.scopus0
rdl.oa.statusgold
rdl.oa.urlhttps://doi.org/10.2298/yjor250515006o
rdl.scopus.quartileQ4
rdl.source.indexSCOPUS