Research Article (Open access)

SSR Inst. Int. J. Life Sci., 9(3): 3206-3214, May 2023

Comparative Study to Assess Stress and Coping Strategies among Working and Non-Working Women of Selected Areas of Bagalkot

 

Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar1*, Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar2, Deelip Somaninga Natekar3

1Student, Department of Community Health Nursing Shri B. V. V. S Sajjalashree Institute of Nursing Sciences, Navanagar, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India

2Associate Professor Department of Community Health Nursing Shri B. V. V. S Sajjalashree Institute of Nursing Sciences, Navanagar, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India

3Principal, Department of Community Health Nursing Shri B. V. V. S Sajjalashree Institute of Nursing Sciences, Navanagar, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India

 

 

*Address for Correspondence: Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar, Student, Department of Community Health Nursing Shri B. V. V. S Sajjalashree Institute of Nursing Sciences, Navanagar, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India

E-mail: venkybond.143@gmail.com  

 

ABSTRACT- Background: As a woman, she is a wonderful invention by God, and she has a complex personality with pleasantness, morality, adjusting, and tolerance in their life. Stress affects our physical, physiological, and mental health, so to manage Stress in daily life, an individual may learn to cope with that by using coping strategies.

Methods: In the present study, a nonexperimental design was adopted at different organizations and homes in the Bagalkot, Vidyagiri, and Navanagar areas of Bagalkot. A convenient technique was used. A sample consists of 100 with 50 working and 50 non-working women. Cohen's perceived stress scale collected data to check the Stress and the Brief COPE scale to check the level of coping.

Result: Mean and SD of Stress among working women were 20.66±3.2, and S.E.M was 0.45. The mean and SD of Stress among non-working women was 19.76±2.43, S.E.M was 0.34, and 't'-value (1.571) at a 5% significance level. The Mean and SD of coping among working women were 63.3±8.43 and S.E.M was 1.19. The mean and SD of coping among non-working women was 61.58±5.98, S.E.M was 0.84, ‘t’ value (1.186) at a 5% l.o.s.

Conclusion: The study's overall findings show that there is higher perceived Stress in working women compared to non-working women, and coping is higher in working women than non-working women.

Key Words: Cervical Cancer, Women, Perception Barriers, Effectiveness


 

INTRODUCTION- A perfect woman, we can see, is a working woman, not a worthless, not a fine lady, but one who uses her hands, mind, and heart for the good of others-Thomas Hardy.

India is by tradition and is found in diverse religions, traditions, cultures, and customs. Women's position in India usually pertains to the home and is limited to their problems.[1] Then the Female labor act intensified in several industries, embracing health, imparting knowledge, fabric and material, and community work.[2] As globalization and industrialization started, women were encouraged to be educated and work as their wish.[3]

“Stress” is derived from the Latin word, “Stringere” means to hold “tight”.[4] Stress is defined by “The Oxford Dictionary of Psychology" as a state of mental or emotional strain resulting from adverse or demanding circumstances and generated by the overall state of health or fitness and experiences that are hard to handle.[5] In Indian society, women have to work only in their homes and look after their offspring and family.[6] Then, Stress can harm an individual’s life, attitude toward a beloved one, and health condition.[7]

Nowadays, women play a dual role as a housewife and working women.[8] So, the family sometimes does not support a woman to leave the household work and go to an office.[9]

 How the individual deals with stressful situations are known as 'coping’.[10] Coping strategies are behaviours adopted by an individual as a response to reducing the side effects of the stressors. Therefore, being a housewife or working woman may depend on their economic status, accessibility to work, children's age, support from their partner, desire for work, knowledge, and wellness.[11]

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design- A non-experimental descriptive design.

 

Study Population- The sample comprises subjects selected from the accessible population. The present study sample comprised working and non-working women in selected areas of Bagalkot, India.

Data Collection Procedure- A Non-experimental design was adopted for the study. The area has been selected by convenient sampling technique, and the sample has been selected with the help of the Purposive sampling technique. The present study was conducted in different organizations and homes of Bagalkot, Vidyagiri, and Navanagar, areas of Bagalkot. Participants: The study sample size is 100, with (n1= 50) working women and (n2= 50) non-working women between 20-55 years. The present study data were collected between 9 am to 4 pm, depending upon the availability of subjects. The data collection period was from 19- 07-2022 to 31-07-2022.

Statistical Analysis- The data was analyzed by using SPSS 18 statistical package. The data obtained from the sample was organized and summarized with the help of descriptive statistics like mean and SD. Calculating mean, standard deviation, mean standard error, 't'-test of Stress and level of cope. Application of chi-square test to find the association between socio-demographic variables with stress scores of working and non-working women.

Ethical Consideration- Ethical clearance certificate was obtained from Shri B.V.V.S Sajjalashree Institute of Nursing Sciences, the institutional ethical committee. Written Consent was obtained from each participant.

RESULTS- Percentage-wise distribution of working women according to their age group reveals that most working women (40%) belong to the age group 41-45 years. 96% of them work in urban areas. 66% of working women residing in Bagalkot. 64% of them belong to the Hindu religion. 54% of them had graduated and above. 96% of working women are married. 40% are with 30,001 and above family monthly income. 60% belongs to the nuclear family. 52% of them with 6-10 years of working experience. 62% with five and above family members. 60% have 0-2 children. Percentage-wise distribution of non-working women according to their age group reveals that most non-working women (40%) belong to the age group 41-45 years. 52% of non-working women residing in Bagalkot. 60% of them belong to the Hindu religion. 34% of them had higher secondary. 94% of non-working women are married. 40% are with 20,001-30,000 family monthly income. 62% belong to the nuclear family. 58% with five and above family members. 50% have 0-2 children (Table 1).

Table 1: Distribution of working and non-working women according to their Sociodemographic characteristics

S.No.

Socio-Demographic factors

Score

Character

Working women (N1=50)

Non-working women (N2=50)

F

Percentage (%)

F

Percentage (%)

1

Age in years

1

20-30

14

28

11

22

2

31-40

16

32

19

38

3

41-55

20

40

20

40

2

Place of working

1

Rural

2

4

0

0

2

Urban

48

96

0

0

3

Place of residency

1

Bagalkot

33

66

26

52

2

Navanagar

10

20

24

48

3

Vidyagiri

7

14

0

0

4

Religion

1

Hindu

32

64

30

60

2

Muslim

7

14

11

22

3

Christian

8

16

5

10

4

Others

3

6

4

8

  

    5

 

 

 

Educational status

1

No formal education

1

2

7

14

2

Primary

5

10

12

24

3

Higher Secondary

17

34

17

34

4

Graduation and above

27

54

14

28

6

Marital status

1

Married

48

96

47

94

2

Unmarried

2

4

3

6

7

Family monthly

 

income

1

0-10,000rs

6

12

4

8

2

10,001-20,000rs

12

24%

11

22

3

20,001-30,000rs

12

24

20

40

    4

 

30,001rs and

above

     20

40

     15

     30

8

Type of Family

1

Joint Family

20

40

19

38

2

Nuclear Family

30

60

31

62

9

Years of Experience with working women

1

1month-5years

10

20

0

0

2

6-10years

26

52

0

0

3

11-15years

9

18

0

0

4

16 and above

5

10

0

0

10

Total number of family members

1

Two

0

0

0

0

2

Three

3

6%

3

6

3

Four

16

32

18

36

4

Five and above

31

62

29

58

  11

Total number of children

1

0-1

30

60

25

    50

    2

03-5

20

40

  25

50

 

The comparison of the level of Stress among working and non-working women reveals that most non-working women (98%) had moderate Stress, (2%) of them had high Stress and there was no low-level stress, whereas in working women majority of them had (94%) moderate Stress, (4%) had high Stress, and (2%) had low levels of Stress. (Table 2, Fig. 1).

Table 2: Comparison between Levels of Stress among both women

S. No.

Level of Stress

Non-working women (%)

Working women (%)

1

Low level

00(0)

1(2)

2

Moderate level

49(98)

47(94)

3

High perceived Stress

01(2)

02(4)

 

Total

50(100)

50(100)

 

Fig 1: 3D Clustered column chart depicts the percentage-wise total no of children of working and non-working women

 

The comparison of the level of coping among working and non-working women reveals that most of the non-working women (94%) had good cope, no very good cope, and (6%) had average cope. There was no poor cope, whereas working women majority of them had (88%) good cope, (2%) had very good cope, (4%) of them had average cope, and (2%) had a poor level of coping (Table 3).

Table 3: Percentage wise distribution of working women by comparing with the cope level of working and non-working women

S. No.

Level of cope

Working women (%)

Non-working women (%)

No. of Score

No. of score

1

Very good

1(2)

0(0)

2

Good

44(88)

47(94)

3

Average

2(4)

3(6)

4

Poor cope

1(2)

0(0)

 

Total

50(100)

50(100)

 

In Table 4, the calculated chi-square value is 7.04 less than the table value 5.9, there is a significant association between place of residency and Stress of non-working women and remaining are more than the table value so, there is no significant difference between age, religion, educational status, marital status, family monthly income, type of family, total number of family members, total number of children.

 

Table 4: Association of the stress scores of non-working women with their socio-demographic variable

S. No

Socio-demographic variables

Df

Chi-square value

Table value

Significance

1

Age

2

1.675

5.991

p<0.05

2

Place of residency

2

7.04

5.991

p<0.05

3

Religion

4

6.021

9.488

p<0.05

4

Educational status

4

0.837

9.488

p<0.05

5

Marital status

2

1.809

5.991

p<0.05

6

Family monthly income

4

1.915

9.488

p<0.05

7

Type of family

2

0.225

5.991

p<0.05

8

Total number of family members

3

2.774

7.815

p<0.05

9

Total number of children

5

7.548

11.07

p<0.05   No

p≤0.05; Two-tailed= No Significant

Calculated chi-square value is (9.620) less than the table value (9.488) so, there is a significant association between the total number of children and the Stress of working women and remaining are more than the table value so there is no significant association between age, place of residency, religion, educational status, marital status, family monthly income, type of family, total family members, total number of children with Stress of working women (Table 5).

Table 5: Association of the stress scores of working women with their socio-demographic variable

S. No

Socio-demographic variables

Df

Chi-square value

Table value

Significance

 

1

Age

4

0.149

9.488

p<0.05

2

Place of residency

2

2.443

5.991

p<0.05

3

Religion

3

0.601

7.815

p<0.05

4

Educational status

3

3.366

7.815

p<0.05

5

Marital status

1

0.12

3.841

p<0.05

6

Family monthly income

3

4.533

7.815

p<0.05

7

Type of family

1

3.00

3.841

p<0.05

 

8

 

Total number of family members

 

2

 

4.056

 

5.991

 

p<0.05

9

Total number of children

4

9.620

9.488

p≤0.05

p≤0.05; Two-tailed= No Significant

Findings depict a comparison of Stress and coping among working and non-working women. Stress among working women was 20.66±3.2 and S.E.M. 0.45. In non-working women was 19.76±2.43 and S.E.M. of Stress was 0.34. Coping among working women 63.3±8.43 and S.E.M.1.19. In non-working women 61.58±5.98, S.E.M. of 0.84 (Table 6).

Table 6: Comparison of Stress and coping among working and non-working women

 

 

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

 

Stress among working women

20.66

3.2

0.45

Stress among non-working women

19.76

2.43

0.34

 

Coping among working women

63.3

8.43

1.19

 

Coping among non-working women

61.58

5.98

0.84

 

Here the calculated t value is 1.571 which is less than the table ‘t’ value 1.645 at a 5% level of significance and mean is 0.9, standard mean is 4.05, standard error mean is 0.57, degree of freedom is 49 for 95% level of confidence is at lower limit -0.25 and at upper limit is 2.05. Hence there is no significance at 0.05 (Table 7).

Table 7: Comparing Stress among working and non-working women with ‘t-test

Mean

S. D

S.E.M.

95% Confidence

“t” value

Table value

df

Significance

Lower

Upper

0.9

 

 

 

4.05

 

 

0.57

 

 

 

-0.25

 

 

 

2.05

 

 

 

1.571

 

 

 

1.645

 

49

 

 

No Significant

 

 

 

  p≤0.05 Two-tailed, α=0.05

The calculated t value is 1.186 which is more than the table t value (1.645) at a 5% level of significance and mean is 1.72, standard mean is 10.25, standard error mean is 1.45, degree of freedom is 49 for 95% of level of confidence for lower limit it is -1.19 and upper limit is 4.63. Hence there is no significance at 0.05 (Table 8).

Table 8: Comparing Coping among working women and nonworking women with ‘t-test          

Mean

S. D

S.E.M.

95% Confidence

“t” value

Table value

df

Significance

Lower

Upper

1.72

10.25

1.45

-1.19

4.63

1.186

1.645

49

Significant association

 

DISCUSSION- In the present study, a sample consists of 100 in the age group 20-55 years, with (n1= 50) working women as 20-30 years as (28%), 30-40 years as (32%), and 41-45 years (40%). Similarly, (n2= 50) non-working women are as 20-30 years as (22%), 30-40 years (38%), and 41-45 years (40%) by using a purposive sampling technique. One study was conducted by Kamala et al. [12] with a sample of 50 in the age group 25-35 years in working women 25-30 years (46%) and 31-35years (54%) similarly in nonworking women 25-30 years (38%) and 31-35years (62%) was selected randomly. The study result shows that in working women, 114.2±25.23, non-working women, 106.4±33.56, and the ‘t’ value is 4.35.

In the present study, many working women, according to their place of work, reveal that out of 50 working women, the highest percentage (96%) work in the urban area and (4%) in rural areas. Similarly, a non-experimental study by Mohanasundhari et al. [13] reveals that with the highest percentage (92%) of work in the urban area and (8%) of work in rural areas, the mean and SD of Stress was 79.37±25.201. In employed women, the mean and S.D 51.90±17.229 and the calculated paired “t” value of t=11.29 were statistically significant at p<0.001.

The study working and non-working shows percentage-wise based on their marital status reveals that in 50 working women, 48(96%) were married, and 2(4%) were unmarried. In 50 non-working women 47(94%) were married, 3(6%) were unmarried. Similarly, a cross-sectional study was conducted by Devi et al. [14]. Total, 50 working women, 24(48%) was married, 26(52%) were unmarried. In 50 nonworking women 37(74%) were married, 13(26%) were unmarried. The result showed that nonworking women reported high-stress levels than working women (14.1% vs. 4.1%, p=.001). Working women reported more use of informational support and venting to cope with Stress than nonworking women (94.0% vs 88.1%, p=.001).

Findings related to stress level among working and non-working women in 50 non-working women reveals that most of the non-working women (98%) had moderate Stress, (2%) of them had high Stress, and there no low-level stress, similarly in 50 working women majority of them had (94%) moderate Stress, (4%) had high Stress and (2%) low-level Stress. A Study was conducted by Bani et al. [15]. The result showed that most of the non-working women (90%) had moderate Stress, (2%) high Stress, (8%) low-level stress. Of working women (84%) had moderate Stress, (4%) had high Stress, (and 12%) had low levels of Stress.

The present study percentage-wise depicts that place of residency reveals that among 50 working women, 66% were residing in Bagalkot, 20% were in Navanagar, remaining 14% in Vidyagiri. Of non-working women, 52% were residing in Bagalkot, 48% were in Navanagar, remaining no one at Vidyagiri conducted at homes and organizations of Bagalkot. The result showed that the Stress was 19.76±2.42 among non-working women.

Similarly, a comparative study was conducted by Joseph et al. [16]. It reveals that place of residency in percentage reveals that among 30 working women, 56% were residing in rural, 44% were in urban, and for 30 non-working women, 45% were in rural, and 55% were in urban. The result showed that the Stress was 104.5±6.65 for working and 145.83±8.76 for non-working women. The calculated ‘t’ value was 20.57, which is significant at p<0.001.

The present study was a sample of 100 (50) working (50) non-working women between 20-55 yr. Selected by using the purposive sampling technique. The study shows a significant association between the place of residency and Stress of non-working women (χ2=7.04) p<0.05. Similarly, a non-experimental study was conducted by Kanta et al. [17]. A Convenient sampling technique was used in 500 women, n1=250 and n2=250 were selected. The association between stress level and place of residency revealed a significant association among working women and a nonsignificant association among nonworking women. In working women, place of residency and stress levels has a significant association. Then the calculated value is (2 =49.56) more than the table value (21.03) at a 0.05% significance level. The calculated value is (χ2=20.51), which is more than the tabled value (16.92) at a 0.05% level of significance. The study concluded that place of residency and stress levels are significantly associated.

In the present study (50) working women family monthly income reveal that (12%) belong to 0-10,000 and (24%) belong to 10,001-20,000 and (24%) belong to 20,001-30,000, and (40%) belong to 30,001 and above. Of 50 non-working women (8%) belong to 10,001-20,000 and (22%) belong to 20,001-30,000, and (30%) belong to 30,001 and above. A study was conducted by Vyas et al. [18]. A quantitative descriptive and by random sampling technique, 120 (60) working (60) nonworking women. A stress scale questionnaire was used to collect data and analyzed by mean, standard deviation, and F tests. There is a significant difference among women with several children concerning their conditions. The study concluded with stress levels ('t'= 6.23, p<0.01) in working women 8.61±3.12, and nonworking women 5.21±2.85.

A comparative study was conducted by Dubey et al. [19]. A sample of 100 women, 50 working and 50 non-working, were selected randomly, aged between 25-40 years. The result showed that the working women were 91.28 ±12.3, and non-working women were 84.24±10.26. The value of ‘t’ is 2.21 at 0.05 l.o.s. The study concluded that a significant association was found between the place of residency and Stress of non-working women (χ2=6.04) p<0.05. A present study assessing the stress level between working and non-working women in 50 non-working women reveals that most non-working women (98%) had moderate Stress, (2%) of them had high Stress. There was no low-level stress. Similarly, of 50 working women majority of them had (94%) moderate Stress, (4%) high Stress, and (2%) low-level Stress.

Similarly, a study was conducted by Sultanpur et al. [20] on stress levels between housewives and employed women, 100 women and 50 employed 50 Housewives at Kalaburagi. Then it concluded that Stress in working women (62%) was mild, hypercritical (22%) moderate (16%). In non-working women (44%) moderate (40%) mild, (16%) severe. The study concluded that mild Stress was more among non-working women, and severe levels in both were the same at 16%. The calculation shows the relationship between working and nonworking women’s stress levels with 0.05.

The present study has been distributed based on their type of family as a sample of 100 (50) working 40% belong to joint family and 60% belong to nuclear family. Of (50) non-working women 38% belong to joint family and 62% belong to nuclear family. The study shows that the Stress of working women is 20.66±3.2, S.E.M 0.45. Stress among non-working women was 19.76±2.43, S.E.M 0.34, ‘t’ value (1.571) at a 5% significance level and DF is 49.

A comparative study was conducted by Harilal et al. [21] on stress levels among working women and housewives concerning the state of Kerala. Data were collected from 180 respondents, 90 homemakers, and 90 employed women with the probability technique. Percentage-wise distribution of type of house is 45% belong to joint family and 55% belong to the nuclear family of homemakers. Similarly, 36% belong to a joint family and 64% belong to the nuclear family of employed women. The study showed a relationship between the stress levels of working women and housewives t value of 0.969 (p>0.05). The study showed that a significant difference between Stress and stress level was higher in working women than non-working women.

The present study reveals the percentage-wise distribution of 50 working women based on their years of experience of working women in selected areas of Bagalkot. It shows that 20% with 1 month-5 years, 52% with 6 years-10 years, 18% with 11 years-15 years, and 10% with 16 and above were experienced. Similarly, in a study conducted by Chore et al. [22], a non-experimental descriptive comparative research design was used. The selection of subjects with non-probability was 120 (60 working, 60 nonworking women). The study result showed that 85% of the working women had severe Stress, 15% had moderate Stress, and 35% of the nonworking women severe 65% had moderate, with average Stress of 22.5, which was 26.2 in unemployed women p<0.05. The study concluded that the stress level among working is significantly more than that in non-working women.

 

CONCLUSIONS- The present study concluded that after obtaining all the results, the researcher noticed higher perceived Stress among working women than non-working women.

Further studies are required to know the stresses and methods of coping for working and non-working women, how to improve coping levels, and how to avoid Stress.

 

CONTRIBUTION OF AUTHORS

Research Concept - Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar, Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar

Research Design- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar, Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar

Supervision- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar, Deelip Somaninga Natekar

Data Collection- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar.

Data Analysis and Interpretation- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar

Literature Search- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar

Writing Article- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar

Critical Review- Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar, Deelip Somaninga Natekar

Article Editing- Rajeshwari Tippanna Ghattennavar, Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar, Deelip Somaninga Natekar

Final Approval- Renukaraj Yallappa Nagammanavar, Deelip Somaninga Natekar

 

REFERENCES

  1. Yellen JL. net. The history of women’s work and wages and how it has created success for us all. [Updated 2021; May 12; Cited 2021 Jul 24]. Available at https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-history-of-womens-work-and-wages-and-how-it-has-created-success-for-us-all/.
  2. Chapman T, Mishra V. net. Rewriting the Rules: Women and Work in India. [Updated 2021 May 10; Cited 2021 Jul 2023]. Available        at https://www.orfonline.org/research/rewriting-the-rules-women-and-work-in-india.

3.     Bhardwaj VK. Level of Stress among Working and non-working women about Healthliness, well-being, and Depression: A Comparative study. IJCRT 2018; 5(3): 1884-90.

4.     Ghosh S. Stress: Working and non-working women. Inter J Appl Res., 2020; 6(3): 375-77.

5.     Shukla S, Jaiswal M, Agrahari K, Shingh A. A study on stress levels among working and nonworking women. Inter J Home Sci., 2017; 3(1): 349-57.

6.     Maheshwari P. Occupational Stress in Working Women: Its Relationship with their Level of Emotional Intelligence and the Coping Strategies Used to Deal with Stress. Inter J Cross-Discipl Subj Educ, 2013; 3(2): 1441-46. doi: 10.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2013.0201.

7.     Shristi T. A comparative study to assess the level of Stress and coping strategies among married working and non-working women residing in selected urban areas of Dehradun, Uttarakhand. JMSCR, 2019; 7(11): 989-95. doi: 10.18535/jmscr/v7i11.171.

8.     Nazir A. To compare the level of Stress among working and non-working women in Srinagar. J Res Humanities Soc Sci., 2021; 9(3): 47-52.

9.     Neeru G. Occupational Stress and Challenges Faced by Working Women in India. - Ind J Res., 2014; 3(7): 1-3.

10.  Dhurandher D, Janghel G. Coping Strategy of Stress in Employed Women and Non-Employed Women. Int J Sci Res., 2015; 5(4): 1-3.

11.  Shueh YL, Cai LT. Work Stress, Coping Strategies, and Resilience: A Study among Working Females. Asian Soc Sci., 2014: 10. doi: 10.5539/ass.v10n12p41.

12.  Kamala DB. Stress Management: A Comparative Study of Working and Non-Working Women. 2020 September 30th; 9(3): 22-26.

13.  Mohanasundhari SK. A Comparative Study to assess the level of Stress between working and nonworking women in Sir Ivan Stedeford Hospital at Ambattur. 2018; 7(4): 573-76. doi: 10.5958/2349-2996.2017.00111.2.

14.  Devi SS. A quasi-experimental study to evaluate the effectiveness of pranayama on Stress and coping among housewives in selected community areas, in Pudukkottai. 2018; pp. 1-37.

15.  Bani IW, RN, Radwan H, Shujairi, Arwa Al, Hijazi H, et al. Salivary cortisol, perceived Stress, and coping strategies: A comparative study of working and non-working women. J Nurs Manag., 2022; 30(3): 3553-67. doi: 10.2147/jmdh.s229396.

16.  Joseph JK. A comparative study to assess the level of Stress among working and non-working women. Int J Recent Sci Res., 2019; 10(04): 32094-97. doi:10.24327/ijrsr.2019.1004.3397.

17.  Kanta D. Level of stress among working and non-working women in Chandigarh. Int J Sci Eng Res., 2016; 7(4) 1086-88.

18.  Vyas. R. Level of Anxiety, Depression, and Stress among Working and Non-Working Women. Int J Indian Psychol., 2019; 7:801-06. doi: 10.25215/0703.087.

19.  Dubey K. A comparative study on stress management of working and non-working women with special reference to Rewa district. International Journal of Advanced Academic Studies.2021; 3(3): 171-73.

20.  Sultanpur NM. Stress level between housewives and employed women. Int Educ Res J., 2019; 5(6): 20-23.

21.  Harilal A, Santhosh VA. A comparative study on stress levels among working women and housewives concerning the state of Kerala. NMIMS J Econ Public Policy, 2017; II (1): 29-35. doi: 10.36106/gjra.

22.  Chore SN. Assess the level of Stress among working and nonworking women residing in selected areas in a view to developing an information booklet. Sinhgad J Nur., 2020; X(I): 38-42. doi: 10.52711/2454-2652.2021.00085.