A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed, consisting of a quantitative phase followed by a qualitative phase to further explain and contextualise the findings (Creswell 2018). The validated 41-item PREPARED tool was used to assess psychological preparedness across three dimensions: WIF, BIF and IIF (Pertiwi et al. 2023, 2026). The questionnaire was administered in both online and printed formats to accommodate limited digital literacy and demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.916). In the qualitative phase, focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted to explore participants’ experiences and provide a deeper interpretation of the quantitative results. Findings from both phases were integrated through triangulation to enhance interpretive validity (Fetters & Tajima 2022; Guetterman, Fetters & Creswell 2015). The procedural flow of the study is presented in Figure 2.

Purposive sampling was used to recruit adults involved in early childhood caregiving or education, including parents, teachers and community members, residing in Tubo sub-district, a Mount Gamalama hazard-prone area (Marfai, Mei & Retnowati 2019; Taherdoost 2018). Inclusion criteria included being aged 18 years or older, residing in the eruption-prone area, and having at least a high school education. Participants who were unwilling or unable to complete the questionnaire were excluded.

Quantitative participants were recruited offline through face-to-face questionnaire distribution conducted in collaboration with Khairun University. Recruitment was carried out through community networks and ECE settings in eruption-prone areas of Ternate Island. No randomisation was applied, as the study focused on participants with direct experience living in volcanic hazard areas.

For the qualitative phase, participants with low to moderate PREPARED scores were invited to join FGDs to further explain the quantitative findings. Six FGDs were conducted with teachers (n = 7), parents (n = 6) and community members (n = 6), each lasting approximately 75–90 min.

Participants were contacted through WhatsApp and direct visits within the community. Before data collection began, all participants received information about the study, provided written informed consent and completed a demographic form together with the PREPARED tool, an instrument designed to assess psychological preparedness across 15 constructs within three domains. Preparedness scores were then grouped into five categories ranging from very low to very high. Focus group discussions were carried out face-to-face using a semi-structured interview guide adapted from the PREPARED framework. Prior to the main data collection, the guide was piloted with five individuals to ensure clarity and relevance. With participants’ permission, all discussions were audio-recorded and conducted at mutually agreed times and locations (Pertiwi et al. 2023).

Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS version IBM 27. Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations and percentages) were used to summarise demographic characteristics, preparedness levels and group differences.

Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006). Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. Two researchers independently coded the transcripts, compared coding results and resolved discrepancies through discussion. Coding continued until data saturation was achieved and no new themes emerged. Identified codes were then organised into patterns and overarching themes reflecting participants’ experiences of psychological preparedness.

Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings was conducted at the interpretation stage to generate meta-inferences explaining preparedness levels within the tripusat pendidikan framework featured in a joint display (Fetters & Tajima 2022).

Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Gadjah Mada (Ref. No.8649/UNI/FPSi.1.3/SD/PT.01.04/2024). Participation was voluntary, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Confidentiality was ensured through anonymisation and the use of pseudonyms. Audio files and transcripts were stored securely with restricted access.

A total of 127 participants were included in the quantitative phase. The majority were female (81%) and had completed high school (61.42%). Most identified as Ternate tribe members (89.92%). In terms of occupation, homemakers comprised the largest group (32.28%), followed by government or state employees (17.32%) and teachers (14.96%). Regarding roles in early childhood caregiving, most participants were parents (70.08%), followed by community members (20.47%) and teachers (9.24%) (Table 1).

Quantitative analysis showed that most participants demonstrated moderate to high psychological preparedness (Table 2). Within-individual factors had the highest mean (M = 22.94, s.d. = 5.69), followed by IIF (M = 6.46, s.d. = 1.94) and BIF (M = 1.89, s.d. = 1.07).

Prior to inferential analysis, normality tests were conducted for the PREPARED sub-scale scores using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The results indicated that the distributions of teachers, parents and community member’s scores significantly deviated from normality (p < 0.05) (Table 3).

Therefore as shown in Table 4, the Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to examine differences in psychological preparedness across stakeholder groups. No significant differences were found among teachers, parents and community members (p > 0.05), indicating relatively similar levels of psychological preparedness across ECE stakeholder groups. Shared exposure to volcanic risk and similar socio-cultural experiences may help explain the relatively consistent preparedness perceptions observed among stakeholders within the tripusat pendidikan system.

Qualitative findings offered a more nuanced understanding of participants’ psychological preparedness. Many participants described strong personal coping capacities, including awareness of disaster risks, confidence in responding to emergencies and reliance on religious beliefs and everyday coping practices. Although participants were generally familiar with the natural hazards surrounding them, knowledge related to eruption-specific characteristics of Mount Gamalama, such as hazard mapping and spatial risk zones, remained relatively limited. Participants also emphasised the importance of psychological support during eruption situations, particularly in helping children regulate emotions and maintain a sense of safety during times of crisis:

Relational and institutional preparedness appeared less consistent across participants. Several respondents described limited communication between schools and families, uneven eruption-specific knowledge among educational stakeholders and irregular institutional involvement in preparedness activities. These conditions may help explain the lower BIF and IIF scores identified in the quantitative findings. As one participant explained, ‘There hasn’t been a place-specific information session here about how to prepare for an eruption’. Overall, the findings highlight an ecological imbalance in which resilience at the microsystem level appeared stronger than coordination across broader mesosystem and exosystem structures.

Within the WIF domain, qualitative findings suggested that participants generally possessed broad knowledge about disasters although this understanding was not always specific to volcanic eruptions. Participants recognised Tubo as a hazard-prone area and were familiar with common volcanic threats. However, more detailed knowledge regarding eruption characteristics, hazard mapping and spatial proximity to Mount Gamalama remained limited. Disaster awareness was also closely tied to religious and cultural perspectives. Participants frequently interpreted disasters through religious narratives and viewed environmental signs, including unusual animal behaviour, as indicators of possible danger. In this context, disaster knowledge appeared to extend beyond technical understanding and included culturally shaped perceptions of risk and environmental change. The integrated findings suggest an important distinction between general disaster awareness and eruption-specific preparedness. While survey results indicated relatively adequate knowledge about disasters, qualitative narratives revealed limitations in more contextual aspects of preparedness, particularly regarding hazard maps, localised risk zones and awareness of spatial proximity to volcanic threats.

No statistically significant differences were found across stakeholder groups, suggesting relatively similar patterns of psychological preparedness among teachers, parents and community members. Qualitative findings helped explain this pattern further. Across groups, participants consistently emphasised the importance of supporting children’s emotional well-being during disaster situations, particularly through emotional reassurance, calm behaviour and maintaining daily routines during crises:

A parent similarly noted:

These narratives suggest that perspectives within the tripusat pendidikan ecosystem were shaped more by shared ecological exposure and collective disaster experiences than by differences in professional roles. Participants also acknowledged having limited training in child-focused psychosocial interventions. As a result, approaches to supporting children during disasters appeared to rely largely on intuitive and relational practices rather than on formally institutionalised systems.

Quantitative findings suggest that institutional preparedness remained relatively modest (IIF: M = 6.46, s.d. = 1.94), with Aim C scores lower than those observed at the individual level. Although some formal disaster mitigation frameworks and planning mechanisms were reported, their implementation appeared limited and inconsistent. The absence of significant differences across stakeholder groups also indicates relatively similar perceptions regarding institutional involvement in preparedness activities. Qualitative findings further supported this pattern, as several participants described disaster simulations and collaborations with local authorities as occurring only occasionally:

Others highlighted limited eruption-specific dissemination and irregular school-family communication:

The findings suggest partial convergence between the quantitative and qualitative results. While some institutional mechanisms for disaster preparedness were reported, their implementation appeared irregular and not yet fully systematised. Participants generally demonstrated strong individual coping capacities although coordination across relational and institutional levels remained fragmented. Such conditions may hinder the development of broader collective resilience within the community.

Table 5 presents the integration of findings through the tripusat pendidikan framework, which conceptualises preparedness as a dynamic interplay among tripusat pendidikan systems.

Table 5 highlights an ecological imbalance in psychological preparedness across the tripusat pendidikan system. Individual resilience appeared relatively strong and closely linked to cultural values and everyday coping practices, while relational coordination and institutional support remained less developed. Overall, preparedness in this volcanic small-island context seemed to rely more on adaptive cultural systems and community-based responses than on formal disaster governance structures.

This arrangement demonstrates that psychologically driven preparedness in small island volcanic environments is maintained primarily through adapted cultural systems rather than through active disaster management. Therefore, enhancing collaboration among components within the tripusat pendidikan ecosystem is necessary to transform robust individual coping mechanisms into sustainable, system-wide resilience capable of protecting young children.

The findings indicate that psychological preparedness among young children in volcanic small-island settings is closely shaped by relationships within the tripusat pendidikan system of family, school and community. Preparedness did not appear to develop solely as an individual capacity, but through emotional support, everyday interactions and children’s relationships with significant adults. Participants frequently emphasised the importance of calm communication, emotional reassurance and guided coping practices in helping children deal with fear and uncertainty during eruption situations. These interactions reflect processes of co-regulation and emotional scaffolding, where adults help children understand danger, regulate emotions and maintain a sense of safety during crises (Bowlby 1979; De Castro & Pereira 2019). In this setting, teachers, parents and community members functioned not only as sources of disaster-related information but also as important emotional support systems for children.

The findings also showed uneven preparedness across the tripusat pendidikan system. Although participants generally demonstrated strong individual coping capacities, communication and institutional coordination remained inconsistent. Limited collaboration, irregular preparedness activities and fragmented institutional support suggest that preparedness within the community relied more on informal caregiving practices and collective support than on structured institutional systems. From a socio-ecological perspective, tripusat pendidikan can therefore be understood as a culturally grounded support system through which children’s psychological preparedness develops through co-regulation, emotional support and shared caregiving practices. Beyond relational support within the tripusat pendidikan system, preparedness was also shaped by broader cultural meanings and place-based experiences associated with living in a volcanic environment.

Psychological preparedness in volcanic small-island communities appeared to be closely connected to cultural values, spirituality, collective memory and everyday experiences of living with environmental risk. Participants described local cultural expressions such as ‘bakujaga torang pe ana’, traditional beliefs related to natural signs (kose) and collective practices like ‘kololie kie’ as important parts of community-based preparedness. These cultural practices shaped how disaster risks were understood, communicated and emotionally managed within the community.

Spiritual and cultural practices also functioned as important psychological resources during disaster situations (Mercer et al. 2012; Rahiem & Rahim 2020). Participants often interpreted volcanic events through religious and collective cultural meanings that helped maintain emotional stability and social cohesion during periods of uncertainty. In this context, preparedness extended beyond technical disaster knowledge and included culturally grounded understandings of danger, safety and collective responsibility.

Place-based experiences further shaped preparedness within the Ternate community. Repeated exposure to Mount Gamalama’s volcanic activity appeared to strengthen adaptive coping practices, community solidarity and emotional attachment to place. These findings highlight the importance of culturally grounded and place-based approaches to disaster preparedness in small-island and hazard-prone settings. These relational and cultural dimensions of preparedness have important implications for the development of child-centred disaster preparedness programmes in hazard-prone communities.

The findings highlight several implications for child-centred disaster preparedness in volcanic small-island settings. Disaster risk reduction programmes for young children should incorporate not only physical safety procedures but also psychological and relational aspects of preparedness. Emotional support, co-regulation and developmentally appropriate communication appeared important in helping children cope with fear and uncertainty during disasters. The findings also emphasise the importance of interventions that involve family, school and community as interconnected support systems within the tripusat pendidikan framework. In addition, psychosocial support activities, including emotional regulation practices, visual learning media and child-friendly simulations, may help strengthen children’s adaptive coping capacities in disaster situations. Practically, disaster preparedness programmes may benefit from more culturally grounded and child-centred approaches that integrate local values, collective caregiving and community participation.

Several methodological and contextual limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. The predominance of female participants may have reduced the diversity of perspectives represented, particularly regarding caregiving practices and preparedness experiences among male caregivers. In addition, the study was conducted in Ternate Island, a volcanic small-island setting with distinct socio-cultural and environmental characteristics, which may limit the transferability of the findings to other disaster contexts. The relatively small qualitative sample may also have constrained the range of preparedness experiences captured in the study. Another limitation concerns the use of the PREPARED tool, which was developed within a broader Indonesian population context. Although the instrument demonstrated strong reliability, it may not fully capture the cultural specificity of the Ternate, Gamalama community, including local meanings, spiritual beliefs and indigenous preparedness practices related to volcanic hazards. Future research may therefore benefit from developing more context-sensitive assessment approaches for volcanic small-island communities. The qualitative phase also involved only participants with low to moderate PREPARED scores. Consequently, the experiences of highly prepared stakeholders were not represented in the FGDs, which may have placed greater emphasis on preparedness challenges and vulnerabilities than on adaptive practices among highly prepared individuals. In addition, because the study used a cross-sectional design, it was not possible to examine long-term changes in psychological preparedness, relational dynamics or institutional adaptation over time. Future studies would benefit from longitudinal approaches and more diverse participant backgrounds to better capture the complexity of children’s socio-ecological preparedness systems across disaster contexts.