Hi Dear

With your comprehensive explanation, there is no need for an answer in this framework, and the question should be changed from a general form to a detailed question within the scope that you have defined.

Reza Sokouti I am not sure by what you mean. Could you please clarify your answer to me?

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung INRE:"clarification'. In a way, you answered your own question, "What Quantitative Studies are Suitable?" is then followed by a comprehensive list of suitable Quantitative Study types.

Any more specific answer would depend on the specific particulars of the area of interest and research goal, which isn't stated. The more specific the question, the higher quality of the answers.

Michael John Patrick indeed your observation is a reasonable one. I would like to look into the resilience of mid management among SCADA personnel. Would that warrant other approaches? Any feedback welcome.

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung That is barely a start - how about defining what you mean by 'resilience'. The prime difficulty about singular words at a very high level of abstraction is that they are used in many, many different knowledge of domains with what can be substantial differences in meaning. And 'resilience' ranges from a very refined meaning in the physical science ( like metallurgy, "... the ability of a substance or object to spring back into shape; elasticity, i.e. "nylon is excellent in wearability and resilience" ) to very vague and general meaning in the social sciences ( like psychology, APA, "... adapting to difficult or challenging life experiences, especially through mental, emotional, and behavioral flexibility and adjustment to external and internal demands ). In the social sciences, it also is used in reference from individuals to entire societies and cultures. It is also somewhat of a 'fashionable / hype' term, one used to see 'sustainability', now 'resilience' is the 'cool' term. So INHO, one needs to provide some detailed context around the definition. like examples, use cases, user stories, etc.

So there needs to be 'context': For instance if it is 'personnel" ( individuals? teams? supervision? management?, departments? industries? ) intersecting Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) ( theory?, technologies? design? engineering? operations? And from what perspective direction, from the humans or the machines? And since SCADA is fundamentally a 'feedback loop', which phases of that are being addressed? Then there is the real world functional domain - there is a vast literature on 'resilience' around flight crew management, marine vessel bridge communications, nuclear plants, and especially military combat systems. All of those have inherent elements of humans locked into relations with automated systems cycling between long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror.

Once you have some context, the choices available from your list, either one or possibly multiple will be pretty much dictate by the academic research conventions and literature about that context - some topics of interest go back literally hundreds of years to the beginning of the Industrial Age, others like AR/VR may barely exist yet.

Thanks for your detailed feedback Michael John Patrick . Perhaps you have something to add in the diagram shown in this question.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_might_the_Liquid_Holobiont_Learner_Build_Resilience_in_their_Learning_Ecosystem/1

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung There really isn't anything I could add ( or subtract) or even critique in any way. The semantics of any graphic artifact, i.e. it's meaning and eventual utility applied to the real world, depend on the level of abstraction / level of detail needed to support some type of rationality. The "Fig. 3. The Resilience Planning framework" (for me) falls into the same taxonomy category of similar diagrams I have encountered personally over five decades ( the first ones for me, if I remember were Paolo Soleri's in "City in the Image of Man" (1969), but other examples go back much further ). They are essentially ideological / theological concept maps ( https://fineartdrawinglca.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-diagram-as-art-and-spirit-guide.html ). These are sort of useless (IMHO) as a starting point, however, there a are similar ones which are the resulting end points based on iteration of recursive analysis and subsequent synthesis working from high levels of detail to the high level of abstraction ( the Systems Engineering 'V' is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSfZutP9H-U&t=5s ). Humans have been constructing global and local eco-socio-techo systems by design and evolution for a long time now, and many fields have documented their praxis.

Thanks Michael John Patrick for really interesting inputs. These graphic visualisations really capture the built and the natural environments overlapping one another. The only thing I cripple about is the waterfall linearity.

Do you have anything to say about health heat maps?

Heat Maps are a curse (second only to choropleth maps). That is not because of themselves, but rather that they ( along with clustering algorithms ) are based on statistical interpolation algorithms, and most folks don't understand how those work and where and where not they are appropriate. For 'health' ( overly broad term) mapping, the best introductory text I've run across is 'Spatial Epidemiology: Methods and Applications' ( https://books.google.com/books/about/Spatial_Epidemiology.html?id=NZyCQgAACAAJ ).

INRE:"visualisations really capture ...". If you are referring to Soleri's diagrams, they don't capture anything - those, and most like them are essentially self-referential 'noise' ( Although I give "Fig. 3. The Resilience Planning framework, also called "the Clouds heuristic" an A++ for honesty by using the visual metaphor of 'clouds': distort, distract, impair, muddle, muddy, obscure, perplex, puzzle - from Thesaurus.com ). They share the same characteristics as the prevalent medieval texts for alchemy and astrology (some cursory history of graphic artifacts at https://easyreadernews.com/mother-diagrams-right/ ).

INRE:"cripple about is the waterfall linearity". If this refers to my representation of the taxonomic relationships of various graphic artifacts relating to LoA/LoD, it exactly the reflects reality of knowledge production that results in implementing effective sociological / technological systems in the real world. The semantic core of 'waterfall' is the recognition and routing of dependencies ("each phase depends on the deliverables of the previous one and corresponds to a specialization of tasks. from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_model ).

'Waterfall' is an obsolete term, only a few years later it was recognized as partial subsumed into the loop of the Systems Engineering 'V' model ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-model ). There is some irony that all the other models basically generate a waterfall/SE-Vee model. What is missing from most simple diagrams of the SE-Vee is the continuous recursive iteration that occurs ( although this is noted in the SE video link I provided ).