STRESS LEVEL DIFFERENCES AMONG STUDENT ASSISTANTS AND NON-WORKING

COLLEGE STUDENTS OF SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY

Department of Psychology
Silliman University

Jeff A. Enrera
Garneth G. Katada
Micah M. Peregrino

Submitted to:

Margaret Helen U. Alvarez, Ph.D.

 Acknowledgements

To our Savior and Creator, thank you for guiding us spiritually and mentally through this

research. We would like to express our greatest appreciation to Dr. Margaret Helen U. Alvarez for

guiding us throughout the research, constantly reminding us of the importance of the study. To our

adviser, Ma'am Rochelle Marie Remollo for patiently guiding us, offering encouragement and

useful critiques on this research work. I also wish to acknowledge the help provided by the Office

of Student Scholarship and Aid Division for giving us enough details and information about the

student assistants. Special thanks also for the professors Prof. Victor Emmanuel H. Enario and

Assistant Prof. Sonia B. Sygaco for giving us half of their time to conduct our survey to their class

and most importantly to the participants who participated in this research for without them the data

would not be complete. To our families and loved ones who supported us all through the way.

Lastly, to the members of the panel for offering their expertise and critiques.

ii
 Abstract

This study made use of a comparative design and was aimed to know if there was a

significant difference on the stress level between the student assistants and non-working college

students of Silliman University. It involved 59 working student assistants from the Office of the

Student Scholarship and Aid Division of Silliman University and another set of randomly selected

59 non-working students from different colleges enrolled on the 2nd semester of the school year

2017-2018, who were third year college students using the International Stress Management

Association UK – 2013 test questionnaire that are answerable with "yes" or "no". Mean and

standard deviation were used to determine the stress level of both the student assistants and non-

working students. t-test was used to analyze the significant difference of stress level between

student assistants and non-working students. The results showed that there was no significant

difference on the stress levels between the third-year student assistants and non-working college

students.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii

CHAPTER PAGE
I Background of the Study ....................................................................................................1

Review of the Related Literature ................................................................................................ 2

Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................. 7

Statement of the Hypothesis ........................................................................................................ 7

Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................. 7

II Variables................................................................................................................................9

Participants .................................................................................................................................... 9

Instruments .................................................................................................................................... 9

Procedure ..................................................................................................................................... 10

Statistical Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 12

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................... 12

III Results .................................................................................................................................13

IV Discussion ..........................................................................................................................16

Scope and Limitation ........................................................................................................17

iv
 Recommendations ..............................................................................................................18

V Summary ...........................................................................................................................20

Conclusion .........................................................................................................................21

REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................22

APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................................24

A Research Informed Consent

B International Stress Management Association (ISMA) Stress Questionnaire

C International Stress Management Association (ISMA) Score Interpreter

D Letter of Request for the List of Student Assistant’s

E Letter for Consent for the Professors

F Letter of Consent for Office of Student Scholarship and Aid Division.

v
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Mean Result on the Stress Level of Students ………………………………. 14

2 Results on the Significant Difference of Stress Levels………………………15

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES
Table Page

1 The Transactional Model of Stress and Coping by Lazarus and Folkman…...5

2 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………….6

vii