The Relationship between Self- Efficacy and Motivation to Abstinence among Drug Surrenderees towards Community-Based Rehabilitation Program

The Relationship between Self- Efficacy and Motivation to Abstinence among Drug Surrenderees towards Community-Based Rehabilitation Program

Crizah May L. Paudac, Joellah Mariz K. Nonoy, Chyle Geeves S. Razonado, Rain Heart M. Salimbangon, Elmie A. Allanic and Jose F. Cuevas Jr.

College of Criminology, Misamis University, Ozamiz City, Philippines. 

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8120193

Received: 06 December 2024; Accepted: 10 December 2024; Published: 11 January 2025

ABSTRACT

The Community-Based Rehabilitation Program (CBRP) provides localized support and resources to help drug surrenderees reintegrate into society by fostering personal growth, family involvement, and social accountability. This study explored the self- efficacy and motivation to abstinence among drug surrenderees towards CBRP. This study utilized the use of quantitative study and used the descriptive-correlational research design. The data were gathered from 105 participants using a structured questionnaire. The data were analyzed through mean and standard deviation and regression analysis, with results presented in tabular form for interpretation. Findings of the study reveal that drug surrenderees exhibit very high self-efficacy and strong motivation to abstain, driven by family support and fear of consequences, highlighting their resilience and readiness for recovery. Additionally, the CBRP is perceived as highly effective in enhancing family self-efficacy, though it shows limited impact on moral and social self-efficacy, suggesting a need for targeted improvements in these areas. In conclusion, CBRP effectively enhance family self-efficacy and support recovery among drug surrenderees, but targeted interventions are needed to improve moral and social self-efficacy for more comprehensive rehabilitation. Thus, CBRP should incorporate targeted interventions to strengthen moral and social self-efficacy, ensuring a more holistic and sustainable recovery for drug surrenderees.

Keywords: Community-Based Rehabilitation, Drug Surrenderees, Family Support, Motivation to Abstinence,  Self-Efficacy

INTRODUCTION

 Drug addiction is an encumbrance to a nation because the cost of addiction is enormous. The battle against drug addiction has always been an expensive undertaking. Drug addiction has become an increasingly pressing societal issue, leaving a trail of destruction in its path (Takahashi et al., 2021). It tears families apart and claims countless lives as many individuals struggle to break free from its hold. Drug addiction is a disease that alters the brain and behavior, impairing a person’s ability to control their use of legal or illegal substances (Lee et al., 2021). It often begins with recreational use or prescribed medications, with some drugs posing a higher risk of dependency. Over time, Ceceli et al., (2022) mentioned that continued use leads to dependence, making it difficult to function without the substance and resulting in withdrawal symptoms and intense cravings. Attempts to stop use may cause health damage to the physical and wellness of the person (Mayo, 2022). Thus, a process is needed to reduce the impact of a broad range of health conditions on the effect of drugs.

The war on drugs is the policy of a global campaign led by the United States federal government of drug prohibition, military aid, and military intervention, intending to reduce the illegal drug trade in the United States (Ramirez, 2022). However, former Philippine President Rodrigo R. Duterte launched a campaign against illegal drugs in 2016, targeting users, peddlers, producers, and suppliers. According to Simbulan and Estacio (2019), the Dangerous Drugs Board reports 1.8 million current drug users and 4.8 million Filipinos having used illegal drugs at least once. In the past five years, drug statistics in the Philippines have shown notable trends. On

October 15, 2020, the Philippine News Agency reported the estimated 1.67 million Filipinos aged 10-69 as current drug users, reflecting a prevalence rate of 2.05%, significantly lower than the global average of 5.3%. Lifetime users numbered approximately 4.73 million, with marijuana and methamphetamine (shabu) being the most commonly abused substances. This decline is attributed to intensified government anti-drug efforts. Awareness of these initiatives remains high, with public approval exceeding 80% (Gacayan, 2020).

The Philippine Department of Justice, as reported by Kishi and Buenaventura (2021), has reviewed 52 deaths during police anti-drug operations and concluded that 154 officers should face criminal charges, indicating potential complicity in drug war abuses. The DOJ plans to investigate thousands of other killings from anti-drug operations. The problem of drug addiction is understood as a symptom representing a “sick” system of relatedness to which all those involved have contributed (Prinsloo, 2019). Therefore, this study aimed to explore and come to know the journey of rehabilitated drug users and their fights against the case. In 2022, 70 treatment and rehabilitation facilities reported 3,865 admissions, 3,343 new admissions, 79 readmitted or relapsed cases, and 443 outpatient cases. The Dangerous Drug Board (2022) stated 42.73% increase in admissions was observed, attributed to the resumption of operations and increased willingness of Persons Who Use Drugs (PWUDs) to undergo treatment and rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation provides invaluable support for individuals battling drug or alcohol addiction (Briones et al., 2023). Overcoming addiction alone can be challenging, but rehab offers a healing environment with personalized treatment plans to address the root causes of dependency. Beyond helping individuals break free from addiction, rehab equips participants with essential tools to build healthier, more fulfilling lives (Tibus, 2022). The process focuses on long-term recovery, fostering personal growth, resilience, and the skills needed for a productive and positive future.

According to Ii et al. (2020), Community-Based Rehabilitation Programs (CBRP) significantly impact society, and the society influences the operations of a country. It is beneficial in helping drug surrenderees, resulting in a safer, healthier, and more united community. CBRPs have proven effective in supporting drug surrenderees, leading to safer, healthier, and more cohesive communities (Kiblasan et al., 2020). By reducing drug-related crimes, CBRPs enhance public safety and encourage societal reintegration. These programs promote social unity and strengthen ties by helping individuals return as productive members of society. Employers also benefit, as vocational training and support services provided through CBRPs create a motivated, skilled workforce (Avengoza-Almadrones & Babala, 2024). This aids in addressing labor shortages and reducing turnover, fostering successful reintegration into the workforce while contributing positively to industries.

Thus, this study assessed the effectiveness of the Community Based Drug Rehabilitation Program. In this approach, the researchers addressed the gap in helping drug users move forward and take the road to change. Furthermore, the community, industries, or other government units may be enlightened about the issues and problems surrounding the rehabilitation program. Furthermore, this study served as a reference in enhancing the methodology and aiding the gap needed to bridge to intervene in an effective Community-Based Drug Rehabilitation Center. Thus, it may carry out an action plan to support the grand design to enhance the contemporary state.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used a descriptive-correlational approach of research design n to explore the effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program towards self-efficacy and motivation to abstinence among drug surrenderees in Lanao del Norte, Philippines. It attempted to describe the effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBRP) in the municipality of Magsaysay based on the data gathered. On the other hand, correlational approach has been used to investigate the significant relationship between the variables. Participants were selected through purposive sampling, and interviews were conducted to gather in-depth insights. The study adhered to strict ethical guidelines, ensuring informed consent, confidentiality, and participant well-being. The researchers used mean, standard deviation, and regression analysis method to determine the relationships between effectiveness of CBRP and self-efficacy and the relationship between effectiveness of CBRP and motivation to abstinence.

The data collected from the survey were analyzed through mean and standard deviation to measures the level of self-efficacy, level of motivation to abstinence, and level of effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program among drug surrenderees. Regression analysis were also used to determine relationships between effectiveness of CBRP and self-efficacy and the relationship between effectiveness of CBRP and motivation to abstinence. It can be used to build predictive models and understand the impact of independent variables on the dependent variable of interest.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Level of Self-Efficacy in terms of Moral Self-efficacy, Family Self-efficacy, and Social Self efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief in their ability to succeed in specific situations, and it can be categorized into moral self-efficacy, family self-efficacy, and social self-efficacy. Moral self-efficacy involves confidence in one’s ability to uphold ethical standards, family selfefficacy is the belief in managing family responsibilities effectively, and social self-efficacy refers to the capacity to navigate social interactions and relationships with confidence. Table 1 presents the level of self-efficacy in terms of moral self-efficacy, family self-efficacy and social selfefficacy.

Table 1 Level of Self-efficacy in terms of Moral Self-efficacy, Family Self-efficacy, and Social Self-efficacy

(N=105)

Note. Self-Efficacy: 4.20-5.00 (Very High Self-Efficacy); 3.40-4.19 (High Self-Efficacy) 2.60-3.39 (Moderate Self-Efficacy); 1.80-2.59 (Low Self-Efficacy); 1.00-1.79(Very Low Self-Efficacy)

The results indicate very high self-efficacy across all three domains: moral self-efficacy, family self-efficacy, and social self-efficacy, with means of 4.58, 4.54, and 4.58, respectively. These high scores suggest that individuals possess a strong belief in their ability to perform ethically, manage family responsibilities, and navigate social interactions effectively. The standard deviations are relatively low, ranging from 0.10 to 0.15, indicating that there is minimal variation in the responses, further reinforcing the consistency of these high self-efficacy beliefs among participants. The classification system used to interpret the results places all three domains within the “Very High Self-Efficacy” range (4.20-5.00), reflecting a high level of confidence in one’s abilities in these areas. This suggests that participants generally feel well-equipped to handle moral dilemmas, manage family dynamics, and engage successfully in social contexts, which may contribute to their overall sense of competence and well-being.

The results of this study align with findings that indicate high levels of self-efficacy in various domains. For instance, a study by Sagone et al. (2020) found that individuals with high moral, social, and family self-efficacy tend to exhibit greater resilience and better coping strategies in challenging situations. This is consistent with the very high self-efficacy scores observed in the current study, where participants demonstrated strong confidence in their abilities across all three domains. However, some research, such as a study by Linge et al. (2021), suggests that selfefficacy can fluctuate depending on contextual factors like stress or family dynamics, which might explain lower self-efficacy in certain individuals. Although this study reports consistently high levels of self-efficacy, Damuag et al. (2024) emphasize the influence of external pressures on selfperception. Their findings suggest that variations in individual contexts and experiences may result in a wider spectrum of self-efficacy levels within the general population.

The very high self-efficacy scores observed in this study have important implications for interventions and support programs targeting personal and community development. Given that individuals demonstrate strong confidence in their moral, family, and social capabilities, these results suggest that reinforcing these self-beliefs could further enhance resilience and positive outcomes in these areas. Programs designed to strengthen self-efficacy, particularly in challenging contexts like family dynamics or ethical decision-making, may benefit from focusing on nurturing existing strengths. Furthermore, the consistent high scores across domains highlight the potential for integrated approaches that build on individuals’ overall sense of competence, promoting personal growth and enhancing social cohesion. By recognizing and leveraging this high selfefficacy, interventions can be tailored to empower individuals to tackle complex situations with greater confidence and effectiveness.

Level of Motivation to Abstinence among Drug surrenderees in terms of Family Constraints, and Fear of Consequences

Motivation to abstain from drug use among drug surrenderees in terms of family constraints refers to the influence of family expectations, support, and obligations that encourage individuals to stay drug-free for the sake of their loved ones. Fear of consequences, on the other hand, involves the anticipation of negative outcomes such as legal penalties, health deterioration, or social stigma, which motivates individuals to avoid relapse and maintain sobriety. Table 2 presents the level of motivation to abstinence among drug surrenderees in terms of family constraints, and fear of consequences.

Table 2 Level of Motivation to Abstinence among Drug Surrenderees in terms of Family Constraints and Fear of Consequences

(N=105)

Family Constraints                Fear of Consequences Variable

Note. Motivation to Abstinence: 4.20-5.00 (Very Highly Motivated); 3.40-4.19 (Highly Motivated); 2.60-3.39 (Moderately Motivated); 1.80-2.59 (Less Motivated); 1.00-1.79(Very Not Motivated)

The results show that motivation to abstain from drug use is very high in both family constraints (mean = 4.60) and fear of consequences (mean = 4.68), as both domains fall within the “Very Highly Motivated” range (4.20-5.00). These findings suggest that participants are strongly driven to maintain sobriety due to the perceived importance of family obligations and the fear of adverse consequences. The relatively low standard deviations (0.11 for family constraints and 0.12 for fear of consequences) indicate that the responses were consistent among participants, suggesting that these motivational factors are universally significant in driving abstinence behaviors. The high mean scores in both domains emphasize the substantial role that family dynamics and the anticipation of negative outcomes, such as legal or health repercussions, play in motivating individuals to resist drug use. This indicates that individuals in the study are highly aware of the personal and social stakes involved in their recovery, which could be leveraged in support programs aimed at reinforcing these motivations to prevent relapse and foster long-term abstinence.

The findings of this study, which show very high motivation to abstain from drug use driven by family constraints and fear of consequences, align with existing research that underscores the importance of external factors in promoting sobriety. For example, studies by Lookatch et al. (2019) found that social support, particularly from family members, plays a crucial role in motivating individuals to stay drug-free, as it creates a sense of accountability and emotional encouragement. Similarly, research by Guenzel and McChargue (2023) highlighted that the fear of legal or health consequences often serves as a strong deterrent against relapse, especially for individuals with prior negative experiences. These studies support the results observed in the current research, emphasizing the critical influence of family obligations and anticipated negative consequences in driving abstinence. However, some studies, like those by Morris et al. (2022), suggest that intrinsic motivations, such as personal desire for change, might be more sustainable in the long term compared to extrinsic motivators like fear or external pressures. This highlights a potential limitation of the current study’s focus on external motivations, suggesting that a balance of intrinsic and extrinsic factors might be key to long-term success in abstinence.

The high levels of motivation to abstain from drug use driven by family constraints and fear of consequences suggest that interventions and recovery programs should strategically harness these external motivators to support individuals in their sobriety. Programs that emphasize the importance of family involvement, create a sense of accountability, and highlight the negative repercussions of relapse such as legal and health consequences could be more effective in encouraging short-term commitment to abstinence. Additionally, these findings imply that familycentered support and clear communication about the risks associated with drug use should be integrated into treatment plans. However, to ensure long-term success, it may also be beneficial to cultivate intrinsic motivations, such as personal growth and self-worth, which can provide a more sustainable foundation for recovery once the immediate external pressures fade.

Perceived Effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program among Drug Surrenderees

 The effectiveness of a community-based rehabilitation program among drug surrenderees refers to the program’s ability to help individuals overcome substance abuse through localized support systems, peer networks, and access to resources within their community. These programs aim to promote long-term recovery by integrating therapy, skill-building, and social reintegration within a familiar, supportive environment that encourages personal growth and accountability. Table 3 presents the perceived effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation program among drug surrenderees.

Table 3 Perceived Effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program among Drug Surrenderees

(N=105)

Note. Effectiveness of the Community-based Rehabilitation Program: 4.20-5.00 (Very Highly Effective); 3.40-4.19 (Highly Effective); 2.60-3.39 (Moderately Effective); 1.80-2.59 (Less Effective); 1.00-1.79(Very Not Effective)

The results indicate that the community-based rehabilitation program is perceived as very highly effective, with a mean score of 4.57, which falls within the “Very Highly Effective” range (4.20-5.00). This suggests that participants view the program as a highly successful intervention in supporting their recovery from drug use. The relatively low standard deviation of 0.11 indicates that the perception of effectiveness is consistent across participants, reinforcing the reliability of these findings. The effectiveness of the program may be attributed to its focus on local, community-driven support systems, which likely provide participants with a sense of familiarity, accountability, and belonging. Such programs often offer peer support, accessible resources, and a nurturing environment that fosters personal growth and long-term sobriety. The positive perception of the program highlights its potential as a viable and impactful approach for addressing drug addiction within communities, underscoring the importance of localized rehabilitation efforts in promoting recovery.

The results of this study, which indicate that the community-based rehabilitation program is perceived as very highly effective, align with findings from other studies that emphasize the success of community-driven approaches in drug rehabilitation. Research by Hechanova et al. (2023) found that community-based rehabilitation programs, which utilize local support systems and integrate individuals back into their social networks, contribute to higher rates of sustained recovery and lower relapse rates compared to traditional, facility-based programs. Similarly, a study by Strand et al. (2020) highlighted the effectiveness of peer-led support groups and community involvement in promoting long-term abstinence. These findings support the positive results observed in the current study, suggesting that a community-based approach provides the necessary social support and accountability for drug surrenderees. However, other studies, such as those by Mcniesh et al. (2021), have raised concerns about the potential limitations of communitybased programs, particularly in areas with insufficient resources or high levels of stigma, which may undermine their effectiveness. While the current study presents promising outcomes, it is important to consider that the success of such programs may depend on the specific context and available community resources.

The positive perception of the community-based rehabilitation program as highly effective suggests that this approach could be a valuable model for addressing substance abuse, particularly in regions where access to formal rehabilitation centers may be limited. The success of such programs highlights the importance of leveraging local resources, peer support, and community networks to foster long-term recovery and reintegration. As this model appears to facilitate accountability, social connection, and emotional support, it could be further developed and expanded to reach a wider population of drug surrenderees. Additionally, this study underscores the need for policymakers and rehabilitation centers to invest in strengthening community-based interventions, ensuring they are equipped with the necessary resources and support to address addiction effectively. Furthermore, attention should be given to minimizing stigma and enhancing accessibility so that the benefits of these programs can be maximized for individuals in need of recovery services.

Significant Relationship between the Effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program towards Self-efficacy among Drug Surrenderees

The effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation programs refers to the success of these programs in improving the well-being, recovery, and reintegration of individuals, particularly drug surrenderees, into society. A significant relationship between these programs and self-efficacy indicates that participants’ belief in their ability to overcome challenges and make positive changes is positively influenced by the rehabilitation program’s interventions and support. Table 4 presents the test of significant relationship between the effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation program towards self-efficacy among drug surrenderees.

Table 4. Significant Relationship between the Effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program towards Self-efficacy among Drug Surrenderees (t-test)

The results of the t-test assessing the significant relationship between the effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation programs and various dimensions of self-efficacy among drug surrenderees reveal distinct outcomes. The relationship between the effectiveness of the program and moral self-efficacy yielded a t-value of 0.29 and a p-value of 0.77, indicating no significant difference and suggesting that the rehabilitation program had little to no impact on improving moral self-efficacy. Conversely, the relationship with family self-efficacy showed a t-value of 3.14 and a p-value of 0.035, which is statistically significant, implying that the rehabilitation program positively influenced participants’ belief in their ability to improve family dynamics. Finally, the relationship with social self-efficacy presented a t-value of 0.21 and a p-value of 0.83, also indicating no significant effect, suggesting that the program did not significantly enhance participants’ confidence in their social capabilities. These results suggest that while the community-based rehabilitation program effectively enhances family self-efficacy, it does not appear to significantly impact moral or social self-efficacy.

The results of this study, showing a significant relationship between the effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation programs and family self-efficacy, but no significant impact on moral or social self-efficacy, align with some previous research while contradicting others. For instance, studies like those by Umunnah et al. (2023) have found that community-based rehabilitation programs often lead to improvements in participants’ social and family dynamics, supporting the significant finding of family self-efficacy in this study. However, research by Dumagung et al. (2021) suggests that such programs can significantly enhance moral and social self-efficacy, particularly when integrating mental health and social support components, which contradicts the lack of significant findings in the current study for these dimensions. Differences in self-efficacy outcomes may stem from variations in program design, participant demographics, or the tools used to assess self-efficacy (Alvarado, 2020). While this study highlights the critical role of family involvement in rehabilitation, it also reveals a gap in improving moral and social self-efficacy. This highlights the importance of further research to identify and address the factors that enhance these dimensions, ensuring a more comprehensive approach to rehabilitation and recovery.

The findings of this study have important implications for the design and implementation of community-based rehabilitation programs. The significant impact on family self-efficacy suggests that these programs may benefit from focusing on strengthening familial relationships and support systems, which can be pivotal for the long-term recovery of drug surrenderees. However, the lack of significant effects on moral and social self-efficacy highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach that addresses these areas, perhaps through tailored interventions aimed at improving individuals’ sense of self-worth, social skills, and moral decision-making. To enhance overall program effectiveness, rehabilitation services could integrate more specific activities targeting these dimensions, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, peer support groups, and community engagement initiatives. These adjustments could ultimately improve the holistic development of drug surrenderees and their reintegration into society.

Significant relationship between the effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program and Motivation to Abstinence among Drug Surrenderees.

The effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Programs plays a crucial role in supporting individuals in their journey toward recovery from substance abuse. One key factor that influences the success of these programs is the motivation of drug surrenderees to maintain abstinence. Understanding the relationship between the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs and the motivation to abstain from drug use is essential for improving treatment outcomes and ensuring long-term recovery. Table 5 presents the test of a significant relationship between the effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation programs toward motivation to abstinence.

Table 5. Test of Significant Relationship between the Effectiveness of Community-Based Rehabilitation Program towards Motivation to Abstinence

The results show that there is no significant relationship between the effectiveness of the community-based rehabilitation program and the key factors influencing motivation for abstinence. Specifically, the analysis of family constraints revealed that while family pressures and expectations play a significant role in the lives of individuals undergoing rehabilitation, they did not appear to have a measurable impact on motivation to abstain from drug use. The calculated tvalue and p-value for family constraints (t = 0.387, p = 0.705) indicate that family dynamics, in this case, did not significantly affect participants’ motivation to remain drug-free despite the support or pressure from family members.

Similarly, the fear of consequences, whether legal, social, or health-related, was expected to be a driving factor in motivating individuals to maintain abstinence. However, the results did not support this hypothesis. The t-test for fear of consequences yielded a t-value of -1.714 and a p-value of 0.110, which suggests that the fear of negative repercussions, while intuitively important, did not translate into a statistically significant motivator for sustained abstinence among participants. These findings suggest that external fears, such as the potential for legal or health consequences, may not have had the anticipated influence on participants’ commitment to avoiding relapse.

Research indicates that while family constraints and fear of consequences are relevant, they may not significantly drive long-term abstinence motivation. Family pressures often provide emotional support but lack direct influence on intrinsic motivation, which is critical for sustained recovery (Perez et al., 2024). Similarly, fear of repercussions, though initially impactful, may not sustain abstinence without addressing deeper psychological or behavioral factors (Dumaguing et al., 2021). Effective rehabilitation programs often focus on fostering internal resilience and selfefficacy, as these factors have been found to outweigh external motivators like legal or family pressures in maintaining long-term sobriety (Sarno et al., 2021). These findings stress the importance of holistic, person-centered approaches in rehabilitation programs.

The results imply that external pressures, such as family constraints and fear of consequences, may not be as significant in driving motivation for abstinence as previously assumed. This underlines the importance of focusing on internal factors, such as intrinsic motivation and personal resilience, in designing effective rehabilitation programs. Additionally, it implies that Community-Based Rehabilitation Programs (CBRPs) should evaluate and enhance their approaches to address the unique psychological and emotional needs of participants, emphasizing internal motivators to foster long-term abstinence and recovery success.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that participants exhibit very high self-efficacy across moral, family, and social domains, reflecting their strong belief in their abilities to handle ethical challenges, family dynamics, and social interactions effectively. This highlights the potential for communitybased interventions to build on these strengths, further enhancing individual resilience and promoting positive social and personal outcomes. Drug surrenderees exhibit very high motivation to abstain from drug use, influenced by strong family support and the fear of adverse consequences such as legal or health issues. These findings underscore the importance of external motivators in sustaining sobriety and preventing relapse. The community-based rehabilitation program is highly effective in supporting drug surrenderees’ recovery, emphasizing the importance of localized support systems, peer networks, and accessible resources. This approach fosters accountability, social reintegration, and long-term sobriety, making it a valuable model for addressing substance abuse. It significantly improve family self-efficacy, highlighting the importance of familial support in the recovery process. However, the lack of significant effects on moral and social self-efficacy suggests the need for more targeted interventions in these areas to enhance overall rehabilitation outcomes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results of the study, the researchers recommend that community-based rehabilitation programs should focus on sustaining high self-efficacy levels by offering opportunities to practice moral, family, and social skills in real-life contexts while addressing specific challenges. Emphasizing family involvement and education on relapse risks can strengthen motivation for abstinence, alongside fostering intrinsic motivators like personal growth. Expanding these programs with additional resources and reducing stigma will enhance accessibility and effectiveness. Targeted interventions, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and peer support, should be integrated to improve moral and social self-efficacy. Future research should assess long-term impacts and explore how individual differences influence program effectiveness for more tailored recovery solutions.

REFERENCES

1. Adan, A., Bituin, A., & Darian, J. (2023). Philipines Policy Of War On Drugs Under International Law. Journal of Social Political Sciences, 4(4), 339-351. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://e-journal.unas.ac.id/index.php/jsps/article/download/207/166
2. Agnew, R. (2020). The contribution of social-psychological strain theory to the explanation of crime and delinquency. In The legacy of anomie theory (pp. 113-137). Routledge. Retrieved on May 20, 2024 from: https://tinyurl.com/mwyktr22
3. Ahmed, Z. S. (2022). Preventive theory of Punishment. Law Corner. https://lawcorner.in/preventive-theory-of-punishment/
4. Alvarado, A. Y. (2020). Preparedness, Acceptance, and Commitment as Predictors of Efficacy of The Wellness Program for Drug Surrenderers. Globus Journal of Progressive Education, 10(1), 111-119. Retrieved on November 29, 2024 from https://www.globusedujournal.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/GPE-JJ20-Arjay Y.Alvarado-FINAL.pdf
5. Asadullah, M. (2021). Decolonization and Restorative Justice: A Proposed Theoretical Framework. Decolonization of Criminology and Justice, 3(1), 27-62. Retrieved on May 20, 2024 from: https://ojs.aut.ac.nz/dcj/article/view/25
6. Avengoza-Almadrones, R. J., & Babala, J. K. A. (2024). Level of Implementation of Drug Rehabilitation Program, Treatment and Intervention for Persons Who Use Drugs (PWUD) in
7. Basud, Camarines Norte, Philippines. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 5(4), 1240-1249. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.ijmaberjournal.org/index.php/ijmaber/article/download/1522/937
8. Barni, D., Danioni, F., & Benevene, P. (2019). Teachers’ self-efficacy: The role of personal values and motivations for teaching. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 465388. Retrieved on April 04, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/5dn2dx7v
9. Braithwaite, J. (2001). Restorative justice and a new criminal law of substance abuse. Youth & Society, 33(2), 227-248. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0044118×01033002005
10. Briones, R. B., Caballero, R., & Decatoria, J. (2023). Addiction, rehabilitation, and recovery of Filipino substance abusers: a phenomenological inquiry. Journal of positive school psychology, 7(7), 12-21. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/download/17095/10815
11. Burt, C. H. (2020). Self-control and crime: beyond Gottfredson & Hirschi’s theory. Annual Review of Criminology, 3, 43-73. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/2weja25r
12. Ceceli, A. O., Bradberry, C. W., & Goldstein, R. Z. (2022). The neurobiology of drug addiction: cross-species insights into the dysfunction and recovery of the prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychopharmacology, 47(1), 276-291. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8617203/
13. Clarke, R. V. (1995). Situational crime prevention. Crime and justice, 19, 91-150. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/449230
14. Cochran, J. K., Wood, P. B., Sellers, C. S., Wilkerson, W., & Chamlin, M. B. (1998). Academic dishonesty and low self‐control: An empirical test of a general theory of crime. Deviant Behavior, 19(3), 227-255. Retrieved on April 4, 2024 from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-04621-002
15. Córdova, D., ALERS ROJAS, F. R. A. N. C. H. E. S. K. A., Perron, B. E., SALAS WRIGHT, C. P., & Vaughn, M. G. (2017). Group Based Approaches to Preventing Adolescent Substance Abuse. Handbook of social work with groups, 287. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/4w4p4r3v
16. Cunanan, A. L., & Yabut, H. (2019). Lived Experiences of Stigma Among Filipino Former Drug Dependents: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 52(1), 127–154. https://doi.org/10.31710/pjp/0052.01.05
17. Damuag, E., Sayson, Y. C., Sabijon, D., Boniao, G. P., Tano, A. L., Abasa, L. A., & Alcontin, M. C. (2024). Experiences of Drug Surrenderees in Highly Urbanized Cities in Cebu: A Phenomenological Study. International Journal of Law and Politics Studies, 6(3), 32-44. Retrieved on November 29, 2024 from https://alkindipublisher.com/index.php/ijlps/article/download/7148/6011
18. Dangerous Drug Board (2022). 2022 Statistical Analysis. Retrieved from https://ddb.gov.ph/2022statistical-analysis/
19. De Luna, D. P., Valdez, M. L. A., & Diaz, C. C. H. (2020). Illegal Drug offenses among Children in Batangas, Philippines: A Narrative Introspection. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://ijels.com/upload_document/issue_files/25IJELS-111202027-Illegal.pdf
20. Department of Justice (2024). Parole and Probation Administration. Restorative Justice. Retrieved May 21, 2024, from https://probation.gov.ph/restorative-justice/
21. Domingo, S. S. (2021). Adverse Effects of Dangerous Drugs to Out-of-School Youth. Adverse Effects Of Dangerous Drugs To Out-Of-School Youth, 88(1), 15-15. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://scholar.archive.org/work/weooq6drs5g2plc7lkv4f53aeq/access/wayback/https://w ww.ijrp.org/filePermission/fileDownlaod/4/ec37734ebf415dfc240f52ac69f1e6a0/2
22. Dumaguing, J. J., Sonido, M., Quimque, E. A., Milallos, M. G. S., & Bejoc, J. A. (2021). The Road To Recovery and Role Modeling: The Journey of Persons Undergoing a Community-Based Drug Rehabilitation Program. The Malaysian Journal of Nursing (MJN), 13(1), 23-35. Retrieved on November 29, 2024 from https://ejournal.lucp.net/index.php/mjn/article/download/1217/1592
23. Fuentes, B. E., Gengania, J. B., Malon, K. A. A., Mayol, K. L. U., Allanic, E. A., & Cuevas Jr, J. F. (2023). Lived Experiences of Police Officers in the Implementation of Operational Plan Against Illegal Drugs. Mediterranean Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences (MJBAS), 7(3), 34-47. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.academia.edu/download/105856728/66464.pdf
24. Gacayan, C. B. A. (2020). Till death (s) do us part?: Policy ‘design trace’of the Philippine AntiIllegal Drug Campaign. Philippine Journal of Public Policy: Interdisciplinary Development Perspectives, 21(1), 1-33. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://cids.up.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Article_Gacayan.pdf
25. Goldblum, A. (2023). Restorative justice from theory to practice. In Reframing Campus Conflict (pp. 209-227). Routledge. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://in.ewu.edu/titleix/wp-content/uploads/sites/119/2020/10/RESTORATIVE_JUSTICE_FROM_THEORY_TO_P RACTICE.pdf
26. Guenzel N, McChargue D. Addiction Relapse Prevention. [Updated 2023 Jul 21]. In: StatPearls  [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-. Retrieved on November 17, 2024 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551500/
27. Hardy, K. (2022). A crime prevention framework for CVE. Terrorism and political violence, 34(3), 633-659. Retrieved on May 20, 2024 from : https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09546553.2020.1727450
28. Harkness, A. (Ed.). (2020). Rural crime prevention: Theory, tactics and techniques. Routledge. Retrieved on May 20, 2024 from: https://tinyurl.com/mrytpbrb
29. Hechanova, Ma. R. M., Teng-Calleja, M., Canoy, N. A., & de Guzman, J. M. (2023). Community Based Drug Rehabilitation and Care in Philippine Local Governments: Enablers, Barriers, and Outcomes. International Perspectives in Psychology, 12(1), 26–37. Retrieved on Nov. 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1027/2157-3891/a000058
30. Hirschi, T. (2004). Self-control and crime. Handbook of self-regulation, 537-552. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/mtjf36yk
31. Ii, J., Kiblasan, A., Tukaki, G., & Chakas, R. (2020). Community-Based Rehabilitation Program in the Municipality of Bauko, Mountain Province, Philippines. 20(4), 255. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://www.ijop.net/index.php/mlu/article/download/1809/1590
32. Jasper Joy Dumaguing, Marivic Sonido, Eliza A. Quimque, Mark Gilbert S. Milallos, & Jillian A. Bejoc. (2021). The Road To Recovery And Role Modeling: The Journey Of Persons Undergoing A Community-Based Drug Rehabilitation Program. The Malaysian Journal of Nursing (MJN), 13(1), 23-35. Retrieved on Nov. 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.31674/mjn.2021.v13i01.004
33. Jimenez, A. J. A. (2022, August). Implementation Of the Community Based Rehabilitation Program for Drug Surrenderers in Urdaneta City, Pangasinan. In Proceeding of International Conference on Management, Education and Social Science (Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 14-28). Retrieved on 04/05/24 https://tinyurl.com/2sjwakbj
34. Johnson, K., Pinchuk, I., Melgar, M. I. E., Agwogie, M. O., & Salazar Silva, F. (2022). The global movement towards a public health approach to substance use disorders. Annals of medicine, 54(1), 1797-1808. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07853890.2022.2079150
35. Johnstone, G., & Van Ness, D. W. (2013). The meaning of restorative justice. In Handbook of restorative justice (pp. 5-23). Willan. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/j263khw4
36. Kennedy, D. M. (2012). Deterrence and crime prevention: Reconsidering the prospect of sanction. Routledge. Retrieved on april 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/yf3t98ud
37. Kiblasan, J. I., Tukaki, G. B., & Chakas, R. F. (2020). Community-Based Rehabilitation Program in the Municipality of Bauko, Mountain Province, Philippines. Medico-Legal Update, 20(4). Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ahmad-Ahmad-79/publication/375343129
38. Kimani, D. (2023). The General Theory of Crime: Exploring Self-Control and Criminal. Retrieved on April 01, 2024 https://rb.gy/sxloln
39. Kishi, R., & Buenaventura, T. (2021). The Drug War Rages on in the Philippines: New Data on the Civilian Toll, State Responsibility, and Shifting Geographies of Violence. Retrieved on April 01, 2024 https://rb.gy/zpqaza
40. Kruglanski, A. W., Szumowska, E., Kopetz, C. H., Vallerand, R. J., & Pierro, A. (2021). On the psychology of extremism: How motivational imbalance breeds intemperance. Psychological Review, 128(2), 264. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-65605-001
41. Lanni, A. (2021). Taking restorative justice seriously. Buff. L. Rev., 69, 635. Retrieved on April April 05, 2024 from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage handle=hein.journals/buflr69&div=25&id=&p age=
42. Lasco, G. (2024). Political constructions of people who use drugs in the Philippines: A qualitative content analysis. International Journal of Drug Policy, 130, 104518. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395924002032
43. Lee, M. Y., Lee, B. H., Kim, H. Y., & Yang, C. H. (2021). Bidirectional role of acupuncture in the treatment of drug addiction. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 126, 382-397.
    Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763421001561
44. Leng, J., Guo, Q., Ma, B., Zhang, S., & Sun, P. (2020). Bridging personality and online prosocial behavior: The roles of empathy, moral identity, and social self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 575053. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/mrm3exay
45. Levison, P. K. (2019). Substance abuse, habitual behavior, and self-control. Routledge. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://rb.gy/jp488w
46. Liebmann, M. (2007). Restorative justice: How it works. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/26yuwz8m
47. Linge, A. D., Bjørkly, S. K., Jensen, C., & Hasle, B. (2021). Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Model Used to Explore Participants’ Experiences of Health, Lifestyle, and Work After Attending a Vocational Rehabilitation Program with Lifestyle Intervention – A Focus Group Study. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 14, 3533–3548. Retrieved on November 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S334620
48. Lookatch, S. J., Wimberly, A. S., & McKay, J. R. (2019). Effects of Social Support and 12-Step Involvement on Recovery among People in Continuing Care for Cocaine Dependence. Substance use & misuse, 54(13), 2144–2155. Retrieved on November 17. 2024 https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2019.1638406
49. Loue, S. (2003). The criminalization of the addictions. Journal of Legal Medicine, 24(3), 281-330. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/713832196
50. Mayo. (2022). Drug addiction (substance use disorder). Retrieved on April 01, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/sx7f49jf
51. McNeish, Roxann & Albizu-Jacob, Alexandra & Memmoli, Casey. (2021). Engaging the Community to Effectively Plan and Implement Community-Based Mental Health Programs. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research. 49.. Retrieved on Nov. 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-021-09767-z
52. Mitchell-Gillespie, B., Hashim, H., Griffin, M. et al. (2020). Sustainable support solutions for community-based rehabilitation workers in refugee camps: piloting telehealth acceptability and implementation. Global Health 16, 82. Retrieved on June 3, 2024 from https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-020-00614-y
53. Mondal, M. (n.d.). Preventive or Deterrence Theory: A doctrine concerning punishment. https://doi.org/10.29032/ijhsss.v7.i5.2021
54. Morris, L. S., Grehl, M. M., Rutter, S. B., Mehta, M., & Westwater, M. L. (2022). On what motivates us: a detailed review of intrinsic v. extrinsic motivation. Psychological medicine, 52(10), 1801–1816. Retrieved on nov. 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291722001611
55. Moura, A. D., Ferros, L. L., & Negreiros, J. (2015). The effectiveness of substance abuse treatment: development of a brief questionnaire. Archives of Clinical Psychiatry (São Paulo), 42(4), 83–89. Retrieved on April 06, 2024 from: https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-60830000000055
56. Mutiarin, D., Tomaro, Q. P. V., Almarez, D. N., & Haictin, K. M. (2020). Attitude and Behavioral Control: Factors behind Popular Support to Duterte’s Drug War. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 28, 2787-805. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from http://pertanika2.upm.edu.my/resources/files/Pertanika%20PAPERS/JSSH%20Vol.%2028%20(4)%20Dec.%202020/16%20JSSH-5424-2019.pdf
57. Nasution, N. P. A., Hamdani, F., & Fauzia, A. (2022). The concept of restorative justice in handling crimes in the criminal justice system. European Journal of Law and Political Science, 1(5), 32-41. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://ejpolitics.org/index.php/politics/article/download/37/40
58. National Institute of Justice. (2020). Practice Profile: Rehabilitation Programs for Adults
59. Convicted of a Crime. Retrieved on April 01, 2024 https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedpractices/101
60. Nfziger, S., & Johnson, T. (2020). Revisiting the concept of stability in the general theory of crime. Crime and Delinquency, 66(6–7), 739–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719890264
61. Nichter, M., Quintero, G., Nichter, M., Mock, J., & Shakib, S. (2004). Qualitative research: contributions to the study of drug use, drug abuse, and drug use (r)-related interventions. Substance use & misuse, 39(10-12), 1907-1969. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1081/JA-200033233
62. O’Hear, M. M. (2009). Rethinking drug courts: Restorative justice as a response to racial injustice. Stan. L. & Pol’y Rev., 20, 463. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/stanlp20&div=25&id=& page=
63. Paciello, M., Fida, R., Skovgaard-Smith, I., Barbaranelli, C., & Caprara, G. V. (2022). Withstanding Moral Disengagement: Moral Self-Efficacy as Moderator in Counterproductive Behavior Routinization. Group & Organization Management, 105960112210786. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221078665
64. Perez, A. R., Yusay, C. T., & Hechanova, M. R. (2024). Barriers and enablers to help seeking, treatment adherence and recovery among community-based drug rehabilitation clients in the Philippines. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 1-9. Retrieved on November 29, 2024 from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09687637.2024.2373073
65. Prinsloo, M. (2019). Drug Addiction As A Problem-Determined System: A Case Study. Retrieved on April 02, 204 https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/43166584.pdf
66. Ramirez, S. A. (2022). Roadmap for Anti-Racism: First Unwind the War on Drugs Now. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1725&context=facpubs
67. Rosansky, J. A., & Rosenberg, H. (2019). Self-reported reasons for abstinence from illicit drugs. Substance Use & Misuse, 54(, 1272-1285. Retrieved on April 5,2024 from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10826084.2019.1566364
68. Ruan, S., Wang, X., Zhao, C., Li, Q., Li, W. M., Zhang, G., Pan, J., & Yang, X. (2024). Psychosocial Correlates of Motivation for Abstinence Among People Who Used Drugs After Community Rehabilitation Treatment in China: A Structural Equation Modelling. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 17, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S440876
69. Rullo, M., Lalot, F., & Heering, M. S. (2022). Moral identity, moral self-efficacy, and moral elevation: A sequential mediation model predicting moral intentions and behaviour. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 17(4), 545–560. Retrieved on April 5, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2021.1871942
70. Sagone, E., De Caroli, M. E., Falanga, R., & Indiana, M. L. (2020). Resilience and perceived selfefficacy in life skills from early to late adolescence. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 882–890. Retrieved on November 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2020.1771599
71. Sarno, J. M. D., Baluran, J. F., Santillan, A. L. P., & Gamban, R. B. (2021). Operation Tokhang Enforcement: Sentiments And Dilemmas Among Drug-User Surrenderees In Brgy
    Sinawilan, Digos City. International Journal of Legal Studies (IJOLS), 9(1), 153-180. Retrieved on November 29, 2024 from https://ijols.com/article/150433/en
72. Schunk, D. H. (2023). Self-regulation of self-efficacy and attributions in academic settings. In Self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 75-99). Routledge. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/bdd6d9pj
73. Schupack, A. R. (2022). When Punishment Doesn’t Work: The Ideology and Infrastructure of Restorative Justice in Public Schools. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2022/228/
74. Schwarzer, R. (2012, January). The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). ResearchGate. Retrieved on April 06, 2024 from:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298348466_The_General_SelfEfficacy_Scale_GSE
75. Shumba, T.W., Haufiku, D. and Mitonga, K.H. (2020), “The evolution of community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programmes: a call for mixed evaluation methodologies”, Journal of Health Research, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 505-514. Retrieved on June 3, 2024 from https://doi.org/10.1108/JHR-08-2019-0183
76. Simbulan, N., & Estacio, L. (2019). The Manila Declaration on the Drug Problem in the
    Philippines. Retrieved on April 03, 2024 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6634291/
77. Soriano, C. R. R., David, C. C., & Atun, J. M. (2021). Crystallising the official narrative: News discourses about the killings from the Philippine government’s campaign against illegal drugs. Journalism, 22(9), 2386-2403. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm?abstractid=3311422
78. Strand, M., Eng, L.S. & Gammon, D. (2020) Combining online and offline peer support groups in community mental health care settings: a qualitative study of service users’ experiences. Int J Ment Health Syst 14, 39 (2020). Retrieved https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-02000370-x
79. Stritzke, W. G. K., & Butt, J. C. M. (2001). Motives for Abstaining from Alcohol Questionnaire (MAAQ) [Database record]. APA PsycTests. Retrieved on April 06, 2024 from: https://doi.org/10.1037/t17130-000
80. Sulistyo, E. (2021). Restorative Justice as a Resolution for the Crime of Rape with Child Perpetrators. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 10, 595-602. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://www.lifescienceglobalca.com/index.php/ijcs/article/download/7221/3771
81. Takahashi, T. T., Ornello, R., Quatrosi, G., Torrente, A., Albanese, M., Vigneri, S., … & European Headache Federation School of Advanced Studies (EHF-SAS). (2021). Medication overuse and drug addiction: a narrative review from addiction perspective. The journal of headache and pain, 22(1), 32. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from
    https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s10194-021-01224-8.pdf
82. Tibus, V. C. M. (2022). Integral mission and drug abuse in a changing landscape: mobilizing the United Church of Christ in the Philippines together towards life (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University). Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://scholar.sun.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10019.1/124731/tibus_mission_2022.pdf?seque nce=1
83. Umbreit, M., & Armour, M. P. (2010). Restorative justice dialogue: An essential guide for research and practice. Springer publishing company. Retrieved on April 05, 2024
    https://tinyurl.com/2dpeaw6b
84. Umunnah, Joseph & Adegoke, Babatunde & Uchenwoke, Chigozie & Igwesi-Chidobe, Chinonso & Grace, Alom. (2023). Impact of community-based rehabilitation on quality of life and self-esteem of persons with physical disabilities and their family members. Global Health Journal. 7. Retrieved on Nov. 17, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glohj.2023.04.001.
85. Vazsonyi, A. T., & Huang, L. (2010). Where self-control comes from: on the development of selfcontrol and its relationship to deviance over time. Developmental psychology, 46(1), 245. Retrieved on April 4, 2024 from: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-24671-014
86. Vicente, R. M. (2023). Exploring the factors influencing the involvement of Philippine police personnel in administrative offenses. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sci-ences, 12(5). Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/May2023/G-3049.pdf
87. Vøllestad, J., Nielsen, M. B., & Nielsen, G. H. (2012). Mindfulness‐and acceptance‐based interventions for anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. British journal of clinical psychology, 51(3), 239-260. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/yukypfj8
88. Waluya, S. B. (2020, August). Mathematical representation ability and self-efficacy. In Journal of
    Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1613, No. 1, p. 012062). IOP Publishing. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/ujmer/article/view/33111
89. Wickert, C. (2019). General Theory of Crime (Gottfredson & Hirschi). SozTheo.
    https://soztheo.de/theories-of-crime/control/general-theory-of-crime-gottfredsonhirschi/?lang=en
90. Wikström, P. O. H. (2010). Explaining crime as moral actions. Handbook of the Sociology of Morality, 211-239. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-6896-8_12
91. Xiang, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Untying Moral Efficacy and Meaningfulness in Promoting Students’ Social Entrepreneurial Intentions: The Mediating Role of Positive Reciprocity. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.915725
92. Yadao, R. A., Almerino, J. J. T., Pangilinan, A. S., & Sicat, A. T. (2020) A Community- Based Rehabilitation Program (CBRP) for Reformists at the Bahay Pagbabagos. Retrieved on 04/05/24 https://tinyurl.com/mze878bw
93. Ybañez, A. D., Masagca, S. A. M., & Masagca, M. J. H. (2020). The Application of Restorative Justice in the City of Dasmariñas, Cavite, Philippines: A Developing Response to Crime Prevention. Retrieved on November 28, 2024 from https://casjournal.cas.ac.th/admin/filedocuments/1003547859.pdf
94. Ziesemer, F., Hüttel, A., & Balderjahn, I. (2021). Young people as drivers or inhibitors of the sustainability movement: The case of anti-consumption. Journal of Consumer Policy, 44(3), 427-453. Retrieved on April 05, 2024 https://li