PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AND LIFE SATISFACTION OF SHIFT STAFFS WORKING IN A DRUG REHABILITATION CENTER AND PSYCHIATRIC REHABILITATION CENTER: A COMPARATIVE STUDY IN KARACHI, PAKISTAN

Authors

  • Pakeeza Arif (Addiction + EMDR Therapist), Senior Research Coordinator at Interactive Research and Development, Studied at Bahria University Karachi Campus, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v4i1.2023

Keywords:

Psychological well-being, drug rehabilitation, psychiatric rehabilitation, life satisfaction, shift staff working.

Abstract

The objective of the current research was to compare the psychological well-being and life satisfaction of shift staff working in a drug rehabilitation center and a psychiatric rehabilitation center. It was hypothesized that shift staff working in psychiatric rehabilitation centers would have lower levels of psychological well-being and life satisfaction compared to shift staff working in drug rehabilitation centers. The total sample size comprised 189 participants, including 178 males and 11 females. Participants were recruited via purposive sampling from shift staff working in both types of rehabilitation centers. They were surveyed using the Urdu version of Ryff’s Psychological Well-Being Scale (Ryff, 1989; translated by Jibeen & Khalid, 2012) and the Urdu version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; translated by Butt, Ghani, & Khan, 2014). Hypotheses were tested using descriptive statistics and independent sample t-tests. Findings showed no significant difference in psychological well-being or life satisfaction between shift staff working in psychiatric rehabilitation centers and those working in drug rehabilitation centers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-06

How to Cite

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AND LIFE SATISFACTION OF SHIFT STAFFS WORKING IN A DRUG REHABILITATION CENTER AND PSYCHIATRIC REHABILITATION CENTER: A COMPARATIVE STUDY IN KARACHI, PAKISTAN. (2026). Contemporary Journal of Social Science Review, 4(1), 140-151. https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v4i1.2023