Disaster-affected communities are often portrayed as a homogenous and “vulnerable” group, limiting their experiences to mere disaster impacts. This reductive perspective overlooks heterogeneity within disaster-affected people, including the larger socioeconomic-cultural and political inequalities that exist among them. This problematic conceptualization extends to researching disaster-affected communities where the intersectionalities within the disaster-affected communities are not adequately captured through the existing methodological approaches available within singular disciplinary approaches. Therefore, paying attention to existing socioeconomic inequalities within disaster-affected communities leads to the collection of more representative data on disaster impacts. Thus, this chapter explores the need for utilizing flexible methodological approaches in order to capture the heterogeneity existing within disaster-affected communities in Sri Lanka, building a more “realistic” empirical picture of the affected communities. The chapter first brings examples of the available disaster studies in Sri Lanka in order to understand how such reductive methodological approaches become problematic when capturing grassroots-level penetrated socioeconomic inequalities in the Sri Lankan context. While highlighting the gaps and limitations of the existing rigid and fixed methodical approaches particularly in social sciences, the chapter extends its argument towards bringing more holistic, alternative, and flexible methodological approaches into the disaster research studies. The chapter explores not only methodological approaches but also methods often utilized in social science disaster research studies, such as survey questionnaires, in-depth/semi-structured interview methods, and focus group discussions, in order to indicate the gaps and limitations of such methods to capture ground-level “realities” where the intervention of flexible methods becomes significant. The chapter attempts to highlight the importance of going beyond the “conservative,” “traditional,” and rigid research methods often utilized in social sciences and explore the significance of bringing more flexible research frameworks including methods into disaster scholarship in Sri Lanka.