INTRODUCTION:

Hostels are not just places where students live but also managed environments that shape how safe, engaged, and supported by the institution students feel. Alongside the physical structure of a hostel, the quality of support services provided at these hostels has a profound impact on the overall residential experience of the students. Support services at hostels comprise, among other aspects, the security of students, the possibility for leisure activities, availability of good internet connection, and the quality of service offered by hostel staff members. Taken together, they all contribute to ensuring the atmosphere conducive to studying and being productive and socially active. However, lack of sufficient security, leisure options, unreliable internet access, or inadequate staff behaviour can negatively affect students' perception of hostels despite decent facilities provided. Therefore, exploring students' perception of hostel support services is crucial in assessing hostel performance. The present paper aims to explore the connection between students' perception of hostel support services and overall satisfaction.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

Assessment of Level of Students’ Satisfaction with Quality of Management Services in Private Student Accommodation by Mampuru and Aigbavboa (2019) explored the satisfaction of students regarding management-oriented services within private accommodations in South Africa. It is interesting to note from this study that elements like internet availability, rules and regulations implementation, and management’s responsiveness are vital factors impacting students’ level of satisfaction. This study also pointed out that administration and positive staff behaviour contribute towards providing a safe and comfortable environment for students. Even though certain physical attributes are included, the results of this study clearly reflect the significance of the management and administrative process as important support services.

On-Campus Accommodation Service Quality and Students’ Satisfaction: A Survey by Gabbianelli and Pencarelli (2021) analysed the level of student satisfaction with accommodation services provided at one of the Italian universities. As highlighted by the authors, recreational zones and social interactions play a crucial role in improving the quality of life of students. Though general facilities were included in the evaluation process, it should be highlighted that special attention was paid to the necessity of providing the living atmosphere that is stimulating enough.

University Students’ Preference for On-Campus Hostel Attributes by Wong and Jie (2022) explores the expectations that Gen Z university students have of their hostels in Malaysia through an application of the Means-End Chain model. It was established that today’s youth places great importance on elements such as technological connectivity, recreational facilities, and a feeling of community in a hostel setting. It is important to note that all these elements contribute to both academics and social aspects of student life.

Students’ Satisfaction with Academic Support Services at the University of Benin by Agbonifoh and Dania (2025) analysed student satisfaction with different academic support services like security, ICT amenities, administrative services, and hostel services. According to the findings, there is a significant correlation between security and ICT services and student satisfaction. This research underscores the significance of academic support services in providing comfort, academic efficiency, and safety in the hostel setting.

Hostel Life in Universities: Comparing Service Quality and Satisfaction in Government and Private Institutions by Sharma and Rathore (2024) focused on the comparison of the quality of hostel services provided by governmental and private universities in India. The researchers considered several factors, including security services, entertainment opportunities, and administrative structures. They concluded that private hostels usually demonstrated superior performance in providing support services, which resulted in increased satisfaction among their residents. Therefore, this study offered a relevant context that proved the significance of support services as a distinctive characteristic of university hostels.

A Review of Physical and Non-Physical Facilities Performance on Student Satisfaction in Northern Nigerian Universities (Author unknown, 2019) investigated the effect of physical and non-physical facilities on student satisfaction. It is evident from the results obtained that the non-physical aspects like security, staff attitude, administration, and recreational activities are vital in determining the satisfaction level of the student regarding their living environment. From the findings, it is clear that even when the physical aspect is sufficient, poor support services can lower the level of student satisfaction.

Students’ Satisfaction Survey, Bhushan (2021) concluded that non-academic services like security in hostels, recreation centers, and ICT have a substantial impact on how students perceive the quality of the institution. This report has shown that students nowadays demand a secure, interactive, and technologically advanced environment for themselves. In the same manner, the Student’s Satisfaction Survey & ATR 2021-22 underlined the role of constant feedback in ensuring better management and security in hostels.

2.1 Consolidated Summary:

It is evident from the literature that the support services such as security, recreational activities, internet connection, and hostel management have a crucial impact on students' experience in hostels. Several studies from various national and institutional perspectives indicate that the provision of efficient security measures increases students' level of safety, and the presence of recreational facilities improves their socializing experience and reduces stress levels. Moreover, today, the importance of internet connection cannot be undermined because of its direct influence on students' performance and communication process. Another important aspect to consider regarding hostel life includes the behaviour, responsiveness, and approach of management towards the hostel occupants. The current research implies that even if there are no problems with living conditions in the hostels, support services become the main issue contributing to dissatisfaction among students.

2.2 Research Gap:

While there are several studies about student satisfaction from hostel facilities, there is little information available in relation to support services as a separate dimension. The previous studies have either combined core and support services or included support services as secondary aspects. There is a dearth of empirical studies which consider security, recreation, internet facility, and hostel staff as separate dimensions and examine their role independently as well as collectively in enhancing hostel satisfaction.

This study seeks to fill this vacuum by investigating the impact of support services provided at hostel facilities on student satisfaction. In other words, this study will explore the effect of security, recreation, internet facility, and hostel staff on overall student satisfaction in relation to students who are living in a university hostel.

2.3 Research Design:

The Design of this study has been Descriptive in nature. The aim has been to measure and describe the level of student satisfaction with support services of hostel facilities at a particular point in time.

2.4 Scope Definition:

The First, Second, Third and Fourth year Engineering students studying Computer Science and residing at Boys’ Hostel of Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology, Bhubaneswar were considered as Population for the study.

2.5 Survey Instrument and Data Collection Method: The approach of this study is deductive in nature. A structured questionnaire was used as the survey instrument to collect primary data. The Analysis comprises of 16 items designed to measure students’ satisfaction with four support service dimensions of hostel facilities, Security, Recreation, Internet and Hostel Staff, which served as independent variables, along with one dependent variable, Overall Satisfaction.

All items were measured using a uniform 5-point Likert scale to ensure consistency and facilitate reliable quantitative analysis. The questionnaire was administered to 110 students, and the responses were used to assess their perceptions of hostel support services in a structured and measurable manner.

2.6 Sampling Technique and Size:

Purposive Sampling technique was used for the Study. Through Pilot Study, it is observed that the First-Year students residing in the hostel would have expectation of having a homely feeling after joining the hostel. Gradually, the students get adjusted in every successive year. The students begin to get the information regarding other hostels from their classmates of the school. As such, the Second and Third-year students residing in the hostel are likely to be more impartial toward structured questionnaires. Moreover, practicality of fourth year students not staying in the hostel because of project/internship is also kept in mind.

Table 3.1: Purposive Sampling

Students

Year

1^st

2^nd

3^rd

4^th

Year

No. of Students

The sample size (N) was determined using Green's Rule (for individual predictors):

N ≥ 104 + k where, k = Number of Independent Variables.

N ≥ 104 + 4 ≈ 110

2.7 Data Collection Period:

The time scope of existing study was December 2025- January 2026.

2.8 Tool for Analysis:

The researcher collected Quantitative data on 04 service dimensions were assimilated and inserted into Jamovi Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), version 2.6.44 solid statistical software programme. The data were analysed in following stages:

1. Descriptive Statistics: To identify Level of Satisfaction using Mean, Standard Deviation and Percentage.

2. Reliability Test: To identify Internal Consistency using Cronbach’s Alpha.

3. Correlation Analysis: To quantify the linear association separately between each among 03 Independent Variables with 01 Dependent Variable using Pearson Correlation.

4. Hypothesis Testing: To confirm significance of relationship of each among 03 dimensions of hostel facilities with to overall satisfaction using Correlation Analysis. The researcher has tested following Null Hypothesis during the course of this study:

H₀₁: There is no significant relationship between Recreation and Overall hostel satisfaction.

H₀₂: There is no significant relationship between Security and Overall hostel satisfaction.

H₀₃: There is no significant relationship between Internet and Overall hostel satisfaction.

H₀₄: There is no significant relationship between Hostel Staff and Overall hostel satisfaction.

4. Descriptive Statistics:

4.1. Ranges & Mean Values for Descriptive Statistics: For Interpretation of Analysis, following Ranges for Mean Values as recommended by Boone & Boone (2012) were adopted:

Table 4.1: Mean Value vs Level of Satisfaction

Range for Mean Values	Level of Satisfaction
1.00–1.80	Very Low
1.81–2.60	Low
2.61–3.40	Moderate
3.41–4.20	High
4.21–5.00	Very high

4.2 Analysis and Interpretation of Descriptive Statistics:

4.3 The Analysis and Interpretation of Quantitative Survey through Descriptive Statistics are enumerated in successive paragraphs.

Security:

6. Do you feel safe living in the hostel?

Table 4.2: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Safe Living

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Never	3	2.7%	3.54/ 0.762
Rarely	2	1.8%
Sometimes	45	40.9%
Often	53	48.2%
Always	7	6.4%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The average value of 3.54 (SD = 0.762) suggests that there is an overall positive view about the safety of the hostel environment. It was observed that the majority of the respondents felt safe either "often" (48.2%) or "always" (6.4%). However, there is also a significant portion of the students who felt safe "sometimes" (40.9%), indicating that the safety perception is not uniformly favourable for all students.

7. Do you agree that your hostel security (guards, CCTV, restricted entry) is adequate?

Table 4.3: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Guards & CCTV

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Strongly Disagree	2	1.8%	3.58/ 0.806
Disagree	6	5.5%
Neither Agree nor Disagree	38	34.5%
Agree	54	49.1%
Strongly Agree	10	9.1%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The average score of 3.58(standard deviation = 0.806) implies a relatively favourable view of the security measures provided at the hostels. A significant number of respondents agreed (49.1%) or strongly agreed (9.1%) that the security measures, including guards, CCTV cameras, and restricted access to the facilities, are sufficient. However, a significant portion of the respondents (34.5%) was neutral about the issue, indicating a lack of full confidence in the security measures among all respondents.

8. Are you satisfied with imposed entry restriction at your hostel?

Table 4.4 Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Restricted Entry

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Very Dissatisfied	3	2.7%	3.54/ 0.842
Dissatisfied	7	6.4%
Neutral	37	33.6%
Satisfied	54	49.1%
Very Satisfied	9	8.2%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The mean value of 3.54 (with SD of 0.842) implies that the students have a rather positive attitude towards the mandatory restrictions on entering the hostel. The number of respondents who were satisfied (49.1%) or highly satisfied (8.2%) with the restrictions was quite significant. At the same time, a considerable amount of neutral (33.6%) respondents as well as those dissatisfied with these restrictions was also observed, which means that the students' attitude towards entry restrictions is not identical among all of them.

Outcome of Analysis on Dimension-wise analysis of Service Dimension Security:

Table 4.5: Outcome of Analysis on Security

Services	Mean	Grand Mean	Level of Satisfaction
Feeling safe while living in hostel	3.54	3.55	Moderate to High Satisfaction
Security (guards, CCTV, restricted entry) aspect of hostel	3.58
Imposed entry restriction at hostel	3.54

Regarding the security aspect, the mean values are relatively constant between 3.54 and 3.58, yielding a grand mean value of 3.55, thus depicting a fairly positive student perception on the security aspect. Although students were generally satisfied with issues of safety, security measures and entry regulations, a significant number of neutral views for all questions indicates that there is no very strong satisfaction level.

Recreation:

9. Are you satisfied with available recreational spaces (indoor/outdoor)?

Table 4.6: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Recreation Space

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/SD	Histogram
Very Dissatisfied	2	1.8%	3.60/0.706
Dissatisfied	1	0.9%
Neutral	43	39.1%
Satisfied	57	51.8%
Very Satisfied	7	6.4%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

With a mean rating of 3.60 (SD = 0.706), this suggests a generally positive attitude towards the presence of recreational facilities. Students indicated satisfaction (51.8%) or very satisfaction (6.4%) about the existing facilities. Nonetheless, it should be noted that 39.1% of the respondents exhibited neutral attitudes, implying that while the facilities are sufficient, they may not be highly attractive or satisfying for all the students.

10. Do you agree that every floor in your hostel must have TV and music system?

Table 4.7: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on TV and Music System

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Strongly Disagree	2	1.8%	3.56/ 0.773
Disagree	3	2.7%
Neither Agree nor Disagree	46	41.8%
Agree	49	44.5%
Strongly Agree	10	9.1%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The mean value of 3.56 (SD = 0.773) suggests that there is a relatively positive attitude towards providing TV and music systems on each floor of the hostel. Most respondents (44.5% agree and 9.1% strongly agree) supported this point of view, while a significant number of students (41.8%) were indifferent. The attitudes revealed by students favour better entertainment facilities rather than their degree of satisfaction at the moment.

11. Does hostel management regularly organizes cultural/ sports activities?

Table 4.8: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Cultural/ Sports Activities

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Never	3	2.7%	3.49/ 0.810
Rarely	5	4.5%
Sometimes	45	40.9%
Often	49	44.5%
Always	8	7.3%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

A moderately positive perception of the organization of cultural and sport activities in the hostel is revealed through the mean score of 3.49 (standard deviation = 0.810). Most of the respondents stated that there are cultural and sports activities in the hostel "often" (44.5%) and even "always" (7.3%). At the same time, 40.9% of the students noted that it happens "sometimes," indicating that not all students participate in these activities regularly.

Outcome of Analysis on Dimension-wise analysis of Service Dimension Recreation:

Table 4.9: Outcome of Analysis on Recreation

Services	Mean	Grand Mean	Level of Satisfaction
Available recreational spaces (indoor/outdoor)	3.60	3.55	Moderate to High Satisfaction
TV and music system in every floor of hostel	3.56
Regularly organized cultural/sports activities by management	3.49

In the recreation component, mean values lie between 3.49 and 3.60, while the grand mean is 3.55. This means that students have a mostly positive attitude towards recreation services. There is greater satisfaction regarding recreational areas. However, there seems to be lesser agreement in the case of organizing cultural and sports activities. Furthermore, the last question also suggests that the students prefer more entertainment facilities. As many students show neutrality on all questions, one can deduce that their satisfaction level is moderate rather than strong. Therefore, overall satisfaction is considered to be moderate to high.

Internet:

12. Do you agree that available Wi-Fi speed and coverage are adequate?

Table 4.10: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Wi-Fi Speed and Coverage

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/SD
Strongly Disagree	2	1.8%	3.65/ 0.747
Disagree	2	1.8%
Neither Agree nor Disagree	38	34.5%
Agree	58	52.7%
Strongly Agree	10	9.1%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

With an average rating of 3.65 (SD = 0.747), the service quality of the Wi-Fi network seems to be relatively well appreciated. The vast majority of the respondents stated that the speed and range of the Wi-Fi network were sufficient either "agree" (52.7%) or "strongly agree" (9.1%). Nevertheless, there are certain neutral responses as well (34.5%), which implies the diversity of experiences. Given that this item is related to both speed and range, the analysis of the findings requires careful consideration.

13. Does internet facility support your academic needs?

Table 4.11: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Internet for Academics

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Never	3	2.7%	3.53/ 0.775
Rarely	3	2.7%
Sometimes	44	40.0%
Often	53	48.2%
Always	7	6.4%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The average of 3.53 (SD= 0.775) shows a generally positive view towards the use of internet facility to meet academic requirements. Many students have perceived the internet to be useful for their academic activities "often" (48.2%), or "always" (6.4%). Nevertheless, a significant number of respondents felt that their academics are supported by internet facilities "sometimes" (40.0%), implying inconsistency in the reliability of internet facilities for academic support among internet users.

Outcome of Analysis on Component-wise analysis of Service Dimension Internet:

Table 4.12: Outcome of Analysis on Internet

Services	Mean	Grand Mean	Level of Satisfaction
Wi-Fi speed and coverage in hostel	3.65	3.59	Moderate to High Satisfaction
Internet facility supporting academic needs	3.53	3.59	Moderate to High Satisfaction

Regarding the Internet Dimension, there are mean values of 3.65 and 3.53, as well as a grand mean of 3.59. This demonstrates a rather positive perception of these services by students. A significant number of students indicated their positive experience with Wi-Fi services and the university's academic assistance. Nonetheless, the presence of a relatively high number of neutral answers to both questions implies that the level of satisfaction is quite inconsistent. Besides, it should be noted that the question related to Wi-Fi encompasses its both performance and availability.

Hostel Staff:

14. Do you agree that Warden and Caretakers should be lenient rather imposing strict rules?

Table 4.13: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Warden and Caretakers Rules

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Strongly Disagree	3	2.7%	3.58/ 0.817
Disagree	5	4.5%
Neither Agree nor Disagree	36	32.7%
Agree	57	51.8%
Strongly Agree	9	8.2%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The mean value of 3.58(SD=0.817) shows the overall tendency of the students to be on the side of relaxed hostel regulations. According to the respondents, many of them agree (51.8%) and strongly agree (8.2%) that it would be better if the wardens and caretakers showed greater flexibility, but 32.7% of the respondents were neutral about it. This can show the preferences of the students towards relaxed rules rather than satisfaction from the hostel workers.

15. Are you satisfied with work and behaviour of support staff in your hostel?

Table 4.14: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Behaviour of Support Staff

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Very Dissatisfied	3	2.7%	3.57/ 0.772
Dissatisfied	2	1.8%
Neutral	42	38.2%
Satisfied	55	50.0%
Very Satisfied	8	7.3%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

The mean score of 3.57(SD = 0.772) indicates a generally positive perception of the work and behaviour of hostel support staff. Many students reported being satisfied (50.0%) or very satisfied (7.3%) with staff behaviour. However, a substantial proportion (38.2%) expressed neutral responses, suggesting that satisfaction is not uniformly strong across all students. Overall, this reflects moderate to high satisfaction with hostel support staff, with some variability in student experiences.

Outcome of Analysis on Component-wise analysis of Service Dimension Hostel Staff:

Table 4.15: Outcome of Analysis on Hostel Staff

Services	Mean	Grand Mean	Level of Satisfaction
Rules imposed by Warden and caretakers	3.58	3.58	Moderate to High Satisfaction
Work and behaviour of support staff in hostel	3.57	3.58	Moderate to High Satisfaction

Hence, it may be concluded that, students are moderately satisfied to highly satisfied with dimension Hostel Staff.

Overall:

16. Are you satisfied with the overall hostel facilities?

Table 4.28: Statistics and Frequency Distribution on Overall Hostel Facilities

Options	Counts	% of Total	Mean/ SD
Very Dissatisfied	3	2.7%	3.61/ 0.679
Dissatisfied	46	41.8%
Neutral	52	47.3%
Satisfied	9	8.2%
Very Satisfied	3	2.7%

Histogram:

Interpretation:

Averagely, the mean satisfaction level towards the hostels was 3.61(SD = 0.679). This represents a positive trend. However, the frequency distribution clearly shows that more students indicated neutral responses (47.3%) as well as dissatisfaction responses (41.8%), while only very few (8.2%) were satisfied. Hence, it can be said that overall satisfaction is moderate, not high.

4.3 Overall Satisfaction Level vs Grand Mean of Satisfaction Level:

Table 4.16 Comparison among Overall vs Grand Mean of Facility Satisfactions

Dimensions	Facilities	Mean	Grand Mean of 04 Dimensions	Mean of Overall Facilities
Security	Feel safe	3.54	3.56	3.61
	Guards, CCTV	3.58
	Entry restriction	3.54
Recreation	Spaces	3.60
	TV and music system	3.56
	Cultural/sports activities	3.49
Internet	Speed and coverage	3.65
Internet	Support academic needs	3.53
Staff	Warden and caretakers	3.58
Staff	Behaviour	3.57

Interpretation:

Comparison of the grand mean score of service dimensions (3.56) with the mean score of overall satisfaction (3.61) shows that there is just a small variation, which implies that the general perceptions of students are generally consistent with their perceptions in individual service dimensions. Nevertheless, this minor improvement in overall satisfaction could have been influenced by general perception bias and other factors not accounted for by the service dimensions. Moreover, taking into consideration the high rate of neutral and dissatisfied students identified previously, it would be appropriate to conclude that the level of overall satisfaction is moderate rather than highly satisfied. Hence, while the hostel services are viewed positively, there is considerable room for improvement in terms of consistency and quality.

4.4 Reliability Analysis and Interpretation:

Reliability analysis was conducted for each dimension of hostel facilities using Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega. The results are tabulated as follows:

Table 4.17: Reliability Analysis by Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald's omega

Dimensions	No. of Items	Cronbach’s alpha	McDonald's omega
Dimensions	No. of Items	Threshold 0.7
Security	03	0.839	0.840
Recreation	03	0.811	0.811
Internet	02	0.602	0.603
Staff	02	0.719	0.721

Interpretation:

The above-mentioned Reliability Test depicts following:

Security:

This factor exhibits good internal consistency (α = 0.839, ω = 0.840), suggesting that students’ responses regarding safety, security and entry restrictions are consistent and reliable.

Recreation:

The recreation dimension also demonstrates good internal consistency (α = 0.811, ω = 0.811), indicating that items on recreational spaces, cultural and sports activities consistently measure students’ satisfaction.

Internet:

The internal consistency (α = 0.602, ω = 0.603) of this factor falls within the questionable range, indicating that the items may not fully represent a single coherent construct. This may reflect variability in student experiences with Wi-Fi speed, coverage, and academic usability. Some students may just not use Hostel Wi-Fi, rather, use their own Mobile Internet.

Staff:

This factor shows acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.719, ω = 0.721), suggesting consistency in how students rated wardens, caretakers and support staff behaviour.

The dependent variable (overall satisfaction) was measured using a single-item scale; therefore, reliability analysis was not applicable.

4.5 Corelation Matrix:

The Corelation Matrix was made to understand how strongly each of 04 Independent Variable (Security, Recreation, Internet, and Hostel Staff) of hostel facilities relates to Dependent Variable Overall Satisfaction of students. The Corelation Matrix is as follows:

The correlation analysis indicates that all four dimensions are positively and significantly associated with overall satisfaction (p<.001). This suggests that higher satisfaction with individual hostel service dimensions is related to higher overall satisfaction among students.

Among the variables, Security (r = 0.724) and Recreation (r = 0.681) exhibit comparatively stronger positive associations with overall satisfaction. This indicates that students who perceive higher levels of safety and better recreational facilities tend to report higher overall satisfaction. However, these relationships should be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects.

The Hostel Staff (r = 0.564) dimension shows a moderate to strong positive association with overall satisfaction, suggesting that supportive staff behaviour contributes positively to students’ perceptions, though not as strongly as security and recreation factors.

The Internet (r = 0.432) dimension demonstrates a moderate positive association with overall satisfaction. While internet services are recognized as important, their comparatively lower association may indicate variability in user experiences. Additionally, the relatively lower internal consistency of this dimension suggests that results should be interpreted with caution.

Overall, the findings indicate that all service dimensions are relevant to students’ overall satisfaction, with security and recreation showing relatively stronger associations. However, the presence of substantial neutral responses in earlier analyses suggests that satisfaction is moderate rather than strongly established, and improvements across all service areas remain necessary.

4.6 Hypothesis Testing from Corelation Matrix & Interpretation:

From Corelation Matrix, Hypothesis testing was carried out of 04 Independent Variables (Recreation, Security, Internet and Staff) of hostel facilities with Dependent Variable Overall Satisfaction of students as follows:

Recreation and Overall Satisfaction (H1):

H_₀1: There is no significant relationship between recreation and overall hostel satisfaction.

H₁₁: There is a significant relationship between recreation and overall hostel satisfaction.

Result: r = 0.681, p<.001. Decision: Reject H₀1.

Interpretation:

With a correlation value of r = 0.681 and a significance value of p<.001, it can be concluded that there is a highly significant positive association between recreation facilities and hostel satisfaction. In other words, those who are satisfied with the recreational facilities will most likely report higher levels of overall satisfaction. With a statistically significant result, the null hypothesis H₀₁ is rejected while the alternative hypothesis H₁₁ is accepted. Nonetheless, there is no cause-and-effect relationship here.

Security and Overall Satisfaction (H2):

H₀₂: There is no significant relationship between security and overall hostel satisfaction.

H₁₂: There is a significant relationship between security and overall hostel satisfaction.

Result: r = 0.724, p < .001. Decision: Reject H₀₂.

Interpretation:

Result from the correlation test (r = 0.724; p<.001) shows a highly positive relationship between security and total hostel satisfaction. In other words, students who view themselves to be safer within the hostels have high levels of total satisfaction. Because of its significance, we reject the null hypothesis (H₀₂) and accept the alternative hypothesis (H₁₂). It is important to note that the above is just an association and not causation.

Internet and Overall Satisfaction (H3):

H₀₃: There is no significant relationship between internet and overall hostel satisfaction.

H₁₃: There is a significant relationship between internet and overall hostel satisfaction.

Result: r = 0.432, p < .001. Decision: Reject H₀₃.

Interpretation:

Conclusion based on correlation result (r = 0.432; p < .001) shows a moderate positive relationship between the internet service and overall satisfaction in the hostels. In other words, it shows that students who experience more positive internet service also have positive overall hostel satisfaction. Since there exists statistical significance, we reject the null hypothesis (H₀₃) and accept the alternative hypothesis (H₁₃). But, since there is a low level of relationship strength and also internal consistency for the internet variable, this result must be viewed carefully.

Staff and Overall Satisfaction (H4):

H₀₄: There is no significant relationship between staff support and overall hostel satisfaction.

H₁₄: There is a significant relationship between staff support and overall hostel satisfaction.

Result: r = 0.564, p < .001. Decision: Reject H₀₄.

Interpretation:

The results of the correlation analysis show (r = 0.564; p <.001), that there is a moderate or high positive correlation between support from hostel personnel and satisfaction with hostels overall. This means that those students whose experience with hostel personnel is relatively good also report a relatively high level of satisfaction. Since there is a significant statistical relationship, the null hypothesis (H₀₄) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H₁₄) is accepted. Nevertheless, this relation demonstrates association and not causality. It must also be mentioned that one of the aspects evaluated in the staff dimension expresses students' attitude towards permissive regulation.

5. FINDINGS:

The results of the study reveal that mean scores on all service dimensions are in the 'moderate to high' range. However, the distribution of the responses indicates a considerable number of neutral responses and dissatisfaction which implies that there is no strong satisfaction. Security and Recreation dimensions are moderately related to overall satisfaction whereas internet services have weak internal consistencies and a comparatively low association with overall satisfaction. Hostel Staff dimensions have a moderate relationship with overall satisfaction. On the whole, these findings suggest that the basic requirements of hostel services are fulfilled, but there is considerable room for improvement regarding consistency and quality. Reliability test suggests that the overall instrument was reliable; nevertheless, the weak reliability scores on Internet dimension indicate the aspect wherein students do not find any differences provided by Internet services at the hostel, as they are freely available elsewhere except for Hostel WiFi.

Findings of correlation analysis imply that all factors have a positive and statistically significant relationship with overall satisfaction. However, Security and Recreation have a comparatively more important contribution to overall satisfaction.

The findings from hypothesis testing reveal that all four dimensions of hostel facilities have a significant and positive relationship with overall satisfaction.

6. CONCLUSION:

This research reveals that students have poor to average satisfaction regarding hostel services, wherein high satisfaction and dissatisfaction were prevalent due to poor average scores. Of the variables, security and recreation showed more correlation with overall satisfaction, whereas internet services had less correlation and impact. The hostel staff services helped in building up overall satisfaction to a moderate degree. This implies that while the basic requirements for services were met, there is still a need to improve on service quality and consistency.

7. LIMITATION:

Purposive sampling and the narrow scope of the institution may affect the results' transferability to other settings. Moreover, the employment of a variety of answers on some dimensions in the survey form may have impacted their reliability.

8. REFERENCES:

1. Mampuru, L., and Aigbavboa, C. Assessment of level of students’ satisfaction with quality of management services in private student accommodation. Journal of Construction Project Management and Innovation. 2019; 9(1): 1942–1956.

2. Gabbianelli, L., and Pencarelli, T. On-campus accommodation service quality and students’ satisfaction: A survey. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis. 2021; 14(4): 813–830.

3. Wong, K. M., and Jie, F. University students’ preference for on-campus hostel attributes: A means–end chain analysis. Journal of Facilities Management. 2022; 20(3): 357–372.

4. Agbonifoh, B. A., and Dania, P. O. (2025). Students’ satisfaction with academic support services at the University of Benin.

5. Sharma, R., and Rathore, S. (2024). Hostel life in universities: Comparing service quality and satisfaction in government and private institutions.

6. A review of physical and non-physical facilities performance on student satisfaction in Northern Nigerian universities. (2019).

7. Bhushan, B. (2021). Students’ satisfaction survey report. Ministry of Education, Government of India.

8. Student Satisfaction Survey and Action Taken Report (ATR). (2021–2022). Institutional report.

Received on 26.05.2026 Revised on 18.06.2026

Accepted on 08.07.2026 Published on 22.08.2026

Available online from August 25, 2026

Res. J. of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2026;17(3):189-198.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5828.2026.00035

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License.

Factors	Correlation with Overall Satisfaction (r)	Significance (p)	Strength of Relationship
Recreation	0.681	< .001	Strong Positive
Security	0.724	< .001	Very Strong Positive
Internet	0.432	< .001	Moderate Positive
Staff	0.564	< .001	Moderate-to-Strong Positive