essay about procrastination in school

Procrastination Essay for Students and Children

500+ words on procrastination essay.

Have you ever put off your homework till the last minute? Or perhaps studied for the test only a day before? Maybe delayed writing an essay till the last possible hour? All of us are guilty of delaying tasks and putting off important work until a later date.  This is essentially procrastinating. It is the action of purposefully delaying any task or activity. In this procrastination essay, we will see the reasons and the solutions to this problem.

As we will see in this procrastination essay, this is not a rare phenomenon. Almost everyone is guilty of it at some point in their lives. So we ask ourselves this question – why do people procrastinate even when they are so busy most of the time? We live in the 21st century, where time is our most precious commodity. And yet, we waste this precious resource procrastinating our time away.

Why do we Procrastinate?

The reasons for a person procrastinating can be varied. It depends on person-to-person and situation-to-situation. However, there are some universal reasons that cause people to delay their tasks and actions. One of the most important ones is the fear of failure. When a person delays doing an important task or is disinterested in finishing it, the cause could be a deep-rooted fear of failure. It is in human nature to avoid and fear failure. So by choosing to never finish the task, we can avoid the consequences as well.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Another reason is the lack of focus and determination. Feeling directionless and unfocused can often cause people to lose their wills to do their jobs. This leads to procrastination. Sometimes the lack of goals and objectives is also the reason a person loses their focus. Since they do not have an end-goal in mind, they end up wasting energy in other useless tasks.

There are other reasons a person may procrastinate. Sometimes, a person may be too much of a perfectionist. This distracts them from other tasks. And then there are other reasons like laziness, low energy levels, easy distractions, etc.

Read 10 Ways to Stop Procrastinating here.

How to Stop Procrastinating?

While procrastinating is a very natural fault we all share, if it gets out of hand it can get quite troublesome. Excessive procrastination can disrupt your life and cause you to lose control of your schedules and deadlines. So when the procrastination gets out of hand, you need to reign it in and get back in control.

One way to stop procrastinating is to break down the dreaded task into little steps. If the work or the task is too overwhelming, we tend to procrastinate about it. But if the job is broken down, then we can tackle one step at a time without being overwhelmed. You can also create a detailed timetable or a timeline of some sort to help you with the steps.

At other times changing your work environment may be beneficial. It can provide you with the boost necessary to stop procrastinating and finish the task. If possible get a friend or a parent to keep a check on your progress. It helps keep the motivation levels up and encourages you to finish the task on time.

The main concern is not to over-focus or blame yourself for procrastinating sometimes. We are all a victim to procrastination from time-to-time. As long as it does not derail your entire schedule, give yourself a break and just get back to work!

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is Procrastination?

Putting off tasks we don't enjoy is common, despite the consequences

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Why Do You Procrastinate?

Types of procrastination.

• The Negative Impact
• Strategies to Stop

Procrastination is the act of delaying or putting off tasks until the last minute, or past their deadline. Some researchers define procrastination as a "form of self-regulation failure characterized by the irrational delay of tasks despite potentially negative consequences."

According to Joseph Ferrari, a professor of psychology at DePaul University in Chicago and author of "Still Procrastinating: The No Regret Guide to Getting It Done," around 20% of U.S. adults are chronic procrastinators.

No matter how well-organized and committed you are, chances are that you have found yourself frittering away hours on trivial pursuits (watching TV, updating your Facebook status, shopping online) when you should have been spending that time on work or school-related projects.

Whether you're putting off finishing a project for work, avoiding homework assignments, or ignoring household chores, procrastination can have a major impact on your job, your grades, and your life.

In most cases, procrastination is not a sign of a serious problem. It's a common tendency that most people give in to at some point or another.

Remember that time that you thought you had a week left to finish a project that was really due the next day? How about the time you decided not to clean up your apartment because you "didn't feel like doing it right now?"

We often assume that projects won't take as long to finish as they really will, which can lead to a false sense of security when we believe that we still have plenty of time to complete these tasks.

One of the biggest factors contributing to procrastination is the notion that we have to feel inspired or motivated to work on a task at a particular moment.

The reality is that if you wait until you're in the right frame of mind to do certain tasks (especially undesirable ones), you will probably find that the right time simply never comes along and the task never gets completed.

The following are a few other factors that cause procrastination.

Researchers suggest that procrastination can be particularly pronounced among students. A 2007 meta analysis published in the Psychological Bulletin found that a whopping 80% to 95% of college students procrastinated on a regular basis, particularly when it came to completing assignments and coursework.  

According to researchers, there are some major cognitive distortions that lead to academic procrastination.   Students tend to:

• Overestimate how much time they have left to perform tasks
• Overestimate how motivated they will be in the future
• Underestimate how long certain activities will take to complete
• Mistakenly assume that they need to be in the right frame of mind to work on a project

Present Bias

The present bias is a phenomenon observed in human behavior that may result in procrastination. The present bias means that we tend to be motivated more by immediate gratification or rewards than we are by long-term rewards. This is why it feels good in the moment to procrastinate.

For example, the immediate reward of staying in bed and watching TV is more appealing than the long-term reward of publishing a blog post, which would take much longer to accomplish.

Procrastination can also be a result of depression . Feelings of hopelessness , helplessness, and a lack of energy can make it difficult to start (and finish) the simplest task. Depression can also lead to self-doubt . When you can't figure out how to tackle a project or feel insecure about your abilities, you might find it easier to put it off.

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

Procrastination is also pretty common in people with obsessive-compulsive disorder . One reason is that OCD is often linked with maladaptive perfectionism, which causes fears about making new mistakes, doubts about whether you are doing something correctly, and worry over others' expectations of you.

People with OCD also often have a propensity toward indecision, causing them to procrastinate rather than make a decision.

Many adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) struggle with procrastination. When you're so distracted by outside stimuli, as well as internal thoughts, it can be hard to get started on a task, especially if that task is difficult or not interesting to you.

Is Procrastination a Mental Illness?

Procrastination itself is not a mental illness. But in some cases, it may be symptomatic of an underlying mental health condition such as depression, OCD, or ADHD.

We often come up with a number of excuses or rationalizations to justify our behavior. According to researchers, there are 15 key reasons why people say they procrastinate:

• Not knowing what needs to be done
• Not knowing how to do something
• Not wanting to do something
• Not caring if it gets done or not
• Not caring when something gets done
• Not feeling in the mood to do it
• Being in the habit of waiting until the last minute
• Believing that you work better under pressure
• Thinking that you can finish it at the last minute
• Lacking the initiative to get started
• Blaming sickness or poor health
• Waiting for the right moment
• Needing time to think about the task
• Delaying one task in favor of working on another

Press Play for Advice On Completing Tasks

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares how to get tasks done with a science-backed trick known as 'temptation bundling.' Click below to listen now.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

Some researchers classify two types of procrastinators: passive and active procrastinators.

• Passive procrastinators : Delay the task because they have trouble making decisions and acting on them
• Active procrastinators : Delay the task purposefully because working under pressure allows them to "feel challenged and motivated"

Others define the types of procrastinators based on different behavioral styles of procrastination, including:

• Perfectionist : Puts off tasks out of the fear of not being able to complete a task perfectly
• Dreamer : Puts off tasks because they are not good at paying attention to detail
• Defier : Doesn't believe someone should dictate their time schedule
• Worrier : Puts off tasks out of fear of change or leaving the comfort of "the known"
• Crisis-maker : Puts off tasks because they like working under pressure
• Overdoer : Takes on too much and struggles with finding time to start and complete task

Procrastinators vs. Non-Procrastinators

"Non-procrastinators focus on the task that needs to be done. They have a stronger personal identity and are less concerned about what psychologists call 'social esteem'—how others like us—as opposed to self-esteem which is how we feel about ourselves," explained Dr. Ferrari in an interview with the American Psychological Association (APA).  

According to psychologist Piers Steel, people who don't procrastinate tend to be high in the personality trait known as conscientiousness , one of the broad dispositions identified by the Big Five theory of personality. People who are high in conscientiousness also tend to be high in other areas including self-discipline, persistence, and personal responsibility.

The Negative Impact of Procrastination

It is only in cases where procrastination becomes chronic and begins to have a serious impact on a person's daily life that it becomes a more serious issue. In such instances, it's not just a matter of having poor time management skills, it's a major part of their lifestyle.

Perhaps they pay their bills late, don't start work on big projects until the night before the deadline, delay gift shopping until the day before a birthday, and even file their income tax returns late.

Unfortunately, this procrastination can have a serious impact on a number of life areas, including a person's mental health and social, professional, and financial well-being:

• Higher levels of stress and illness
• Increased burden placed on social relationships
• Resentment from friends, family, co-workers, and fellow students
• Consequences of delinquent bills and income tax returns

How to Overcome Procrastination

You might find yourself wondering, How can I stop procrastinating?

Fortunately, there are a number of different things you can do to fight procrastination and start getting things done on time. Consider these your procrastination exercises:

• Make a to-do list : To help keep you on track, consider placing a due date next to each item.
• Take baby steps : Break down the items on your list into small, manageable steps so that your tasks don’t seem so overwhelming.
• Recognize the warning signs : Pay attention to any thoughts of procrastination and do your best to resist the urge. If you begin to think about procrastinating, force yourself to spend a few minutes working on your task.
• Eliminate distraction : Ask yourself what pulls your attention away the most—whether it's Instagram, Facebook updates, or the local news—and turn off those sources of distraction.
• Pat yourself on the back : When you finish an item on your to-do list on time, congratulate yourself and reward yourself by indulging in something you find fun.    

Prem R, Scheel TE, Weigelt O, Hoffmann K, Korunka C. Procrastination in daily working life: A diary study on within-person processes that link work characteristics to workplace procrastination . Front Psychol . 2018;9:1087. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01087

American Psychological Association. The Psychology of Procrastination: Why People Put Off Important Tasks Until the Last Minute . 2010.

Bisin A, Hyndman K. Present-bias, procrastination and deadlines in a field experiment . Games and Economic Behavior. 2020;119:339-357. doi:10.1016/j.geb.2019.11.010

Steel P. The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure . Psychol Bull . 2007;133(1):65-94. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 

Ferrari, Joseph & Johnson, Judith & McCown, William. (1995). Procrastination and Task Avoidance - Theory, Research and Treatment . doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-0227-6

Beutel ME, Klein EM, Aufenanger S, et al. Procrastination, distress and life satisfaction across the age range - A German representative community study .  PLoS One . 2016;11(2):e0148054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148054

Limburg K, Watson HJ, Hagger MS, Egan SJ.  The relationship between perfectionism and psychopathology: A meta-analysis .  J Clin Psychol.  2017;73(10):1301-1326. doi:10.1002/jclp.22435

Altgassen M, Scheres A, Edel MA.  Prospective memory (partially) mediates the link between ADHD symptoms and procrastination .  Atten Defic Hyperact Disord . 2019;11(1):59-71. doi:10.1007/s12402-018-0273-x

Tuckman BW, Abry DA, Smith DR. (2008). Learning and Motivation Strategies: Your Guide to Success (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Zohar AH, Shimone LP, Hen M. Active and passive procrastination in terms of temperament and character .  PeerJ . 2019;7:e6988. doi:10.7717/peerj.6988

American Psychological Association. The first step to overcoming procrastination: Know thyself .

Svartdal F, Nemtcan E. Past negative consequences of unnecessary delay as a marker of procrastination . Front Psychol. 2022;13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.787337

Schrager S, Sadowski E. Getting more done: Strategies to increase scholarly productivity .  J Grad Med Educ . 2016;8(1):10-13. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-15-00165.1

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• Our Mission

3 Reasons Students Procrastinate—and How to Help Them Stop

Psychologists have uncovered reasons why students put off important work. But there are a few simple things teachers can do to keep students on track.

Leonardo da Vinci spent nearly 16 years painting the Mona Lisa —and never completed it . The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy author Douglas Adams famously wrote , “I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by.” And Frank Lloyd Wright spent a mere two hours designing Fallingwater —after delaying for nine months.

“Procrastination is extremely prevalent,” Piers Steel, a business professor at the University of Calgary, noted in a 2007 study . “Estimates indicate that 80 to 95 percent of college students engage in procrastination, approximately 75 percent consider themselves procrastinators, and almost 50 percent procrastinate consistently and problematically.”

If you’re a middle or high school teacher, it’s likely that you have procrastinators in your class—students who consistently wait until the last minute to turn in their assignments, or put off studying until the night before a test. This delaying has a cost: A 2015 study found that the longer business school students waited to turn in an assignment, the worse their grades were, with last-minute hand-ins costing them five percentage points on average, or half a grade. And a 2015 meta-analysis confirmed this result, finding that procrastination was associated with lower grades across 33 studies that included over 38,000 students (most of whom were in college). Even worse, medical research has linked procrastination to higher levels of stress, depression, anxiety, and fatigue.

It’s a common perception that students who procrastinate do so because they don’t care about the assignment—and that’s usually wrong, argued Devon Price, a social psychology professor at Loyola University, in 2018. More often than not, the underlying reasons for procrastination fall under two categories: fear of failure or confusion about the first steps of an assignment.

“Procrastination is more likely when the task is meaningful and the individual cares about doing it well,” Price explained. Procrastinators can stare at a screen or book for hours, paralyzed by fear. At that point, the best solution is to take a short break and engage in a relaxing activity.

Joseph Ferrari, a professor of psychology at DePaul University and leading expert on procrastination, has performed several studies on why students put off important work. In a groundbreaking 1989 study , Ferrari found that college students often procrastinated because of indecision: They spent too much time worrying about whether they were doing an assignment correctly, prolonging the time they spent on even simple tasks. For these students, procrastination was a coping mechanism to avoid stressful experiences.

“It is very helpful and useful to gather information to make an informed decision, but when one simply continues to gather beyond the point of adequate resources, then they are being indecisive and the waiting is counterproductive,” Ferrari told an interviewer in 2010 .

In a follow-up study , Ferrari found another reason why some students procrastinate: fear of criticism. He discovered that many college students engaged in self-sabotage because they could then blame low grades on the deadlines rather than their own abilities. These students preferred to “choose situations in which their public image would not be damaged by poor performance.” Once again, procrastination was a coping mechanism—in this case, to protect the students’ self-esteem and perceptions of their identity.

Ferrari discovered yet another, very different, motive for procrastination in a 1992 study . Some college students delayed starting on an assignment because they enjoyed the perceived thrill of working against a deadline. Putting assignments off until the last minute was a way of “adding drama to life,” giving these students a rush of adrenaline.

Indecisiveness, avoidance, and thrill-seeking are thus more likely explanations for procrastination than laziness or lack of motivation. So what can teachers do? Here are some suggestions.

5 Ways to Encourage Students Not to Procrastinate

1. Spread deadlines out. Researchers have investigated the impact of three types of deadlines for a series of tasks: evenly spaced, self-imposed, or a single, final deadline. In the first experiment, students were assigned three papers and were asked to either turn one in at the end of each month, choose their own deadlines, or submit all three papers by the end of the course. In the second experiment, students were given a task—to proofread three passages—and submitted their assignments weekly, at their own self-chosen pace, or all at once. In both experiments, evenly spaced deadlines not only yielded better student work but also decreased the chances that students would miss their deadlines.

The takeaway for teachers? Instead of giving students a big project with a single deadline, break it into smaller tasks with evenly spaced out deadlines. Ask for multiple drafts of a paper, for example. In a project-based learning unit, have students present their progress at specified checkpoints. This can be especially helpful for students who are paralyzed by large projects—by making each part more manageable, you can reduce the anxiety associated with intimidating deadlines.

2. Provide supportive feedback. Students with low self-esteem may be reluctant to put forth their best work if they’re worried about criticism or afraid of failing. Avoid giving highly critical or negative feedback, which may have the unintended consequence of making students feel nervous or self-conscious. Students may also respond poorly to feedback that feels controlling, so avoid being too explicit about what needs to be corrected. Finally, be cautious about giving feedback to students in front of their peers—they may feel uncomfortable and become disengaged.

3. Teach time management and study skills. A 2017 study found that many students lack the metacognitive skills they need to be able to study effectively, such as the ability to schedule ample time for studying or knowing when to ask for help. Many study participants were surprised when their initial scores were lower than they had expected—they did not have an accurate sense of how well prepared they were. They were then encouraged to plan ahead for an upcoming test, and were shown examples of how they could prepare. The results were significant: Compared to their peers, the students who participated in the metacognitive activities scored a third of a letter grade higher, on average.

4. Be mindful of workload. According to a 2015 study , the likelihood that students will turn in late work increases when deadlines for different projects coincide—something that can easily happen in middle and high school, when students have multiple teachers. Students also experience higher stress levels if they can’t manage multiple assignments that are due at the same time. Consider coordinating with other teachers to spread out major deadlines.

And when students face adversity that impacts their ability to finish assignments on time, such as taking care of a family member or having to financially support their family, being flexible about deadlines can help them stay on track.

5. Have clear instructions and examples. Students are more likely to put off a project if they don’t understand how to start. Ensure that all students know your expectations and the requirements of the assignment—it’s best to put instructions in writing so that students can refer to them as needed. You can also use exemplars , such as examples of past student work, to help them better understand what the assignment is.

Understanding procrastination: A case of a study skills course

• Open access
• Published: 22 March 2021
• Volume 24 , pages 589–606, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• T. Hailikari   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1355-2985 1 ,
• N. Katajavuori   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5093-2402 1 &
• H. Asikainen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3858-211X 1  

92k Accesses

22 Citations

26 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Procrastination is consistently viewed as problematic to academic success and students’ general well-being. There are prevailing questions regarding the underlying and maintaining mechanisms of procrastination which are yet to be learnt. The aim of the present study was to combine different ways to explain procrastination and explore how students’ time and effort management skills, psychological flexibility and academic self-efficacy are connected to procrastination as they have been commonly addressed separately in previous studies. The data were collected from 135 students who participated in a voluntary time management and well-being course in autumn 2019. The results showed that students’ ability to organize their time and effort has the strongest association with procrastination out of the variables included in the study. Psychological flexibility also has a strong individual role in explaining procrastination along with time and effort management skills. Surprisingly, academic self-efficacy did not have a direct association with procrastination. Interestingly, our findings further suggest that time and effort management and psychological flexibility are closely related and appear to go hand in hand and, thus, both need to be considered when the aim is to reduce procrastination. The implications of the findings are further discussed.

Similar content being viewed by others

Examining the relations of time management and procrastination within a model of self-regulated learning

Why are you waiting procrastination on academic tasks among undergraduate and graduate students, predictors of procrastination in first-year university students: role of achievement goals and learning strategies.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Academic procrastination is very common among university students: almost all occasionally procrastinate in one or another domain of their studies, and approximately every second student regularly procrastinates (Rothblum et al., 1986 ; Steel, 2007 ). Considerable attention has been given to procrastination in university setting (Klassen et al., 2008 ). The student population is especially prone to procrastination, with an estimated prevalence of 50–95% (Steel, 2007 ). Procrastination may be defined as ‘the voluntary delay of an intended and necessary and/or [personally] important activity, despite expecting potential negative consequences that outweigh the positive consequences of the delay’ (Klingsieck, 2013 , 26). Typical for procrastination is that it is irrational and not imposed by external matters and it is often accompanied by subjective discomfort and negative consequences (Klingsieck, 2013 ). Procrastination is often associated with several negative factors, such as lower academic performance (Steel et al., 2001 ), increased stress (Sirois et al., 2003 ) and poorer mental health (Stead et al., 2010 ). Therefore, it is necessary to understand the causes and the factors that maintain procrastination in order to be able to reduce it. The challenge is that research in the area of procrastination often lacks a coherent, theoretical explanation of the behaviour (Glick et al., 2014 ) which has made it difficult to understand the phenomenon and to follow the research (e.g., Klingsieck, 2013 ; Schraw et al., 2007 ; Steel, 2007 ). Therefore, there are prevailing questions regarding the underlying and maintaining mechanisms of procrastination which are yet to be learnt (Katz et al., 2014 ; Visser et al., 2018 ).

The core characteristic of procrastination is the intention-action gap suggesting that the procrastinators often have good intentions, but the challenge lies in the implementation of these intentions (Dewitte and Lens, 2000 ). Thus, procrastination has traditionally been understood as a self-regulation or time management problem (Wolters et al., 2017 ). There is a strong body of evidence suggesting that lower levels of self-regulating behaviours are related to higher levels of procrastination, and thus self-regulation is one of the keys to understanding procrastination (Ferrari, 2001 ). However, Visser et al. ( 2018 ) suggest that procrastination is complex behaviour that involves both cognitive and emotional elements as well as evaluations of one’s own competence. Recent research suggests that instead of being purely a self-regulation or time management problem, procrastination is also strongly influenced by psychological factors, such as the low confidence in one’s own abilities to perform (Steel, 2007 ) and inability to cope with negative emotions that arise in challenging situations referring to the centrality of psychological flexibility in understanding procrastination (Dionne, 2016 ; Gagnon et al., 2016 ). In this article, we aim to bring together these central constructs that have usually been addressed separately in previous studies in order to understand the phenomenon of procrastination and its underlying mechanisms better.

1.1 Factors explaining academic procrastination

There are several theoretical perspectives that have been used when exploring procrastination: the differential psychology perspective; the motivational and volitional psychology perspective; the clinical psychology perspective; and the situational perspective (Klingsieck, 2013 ). In the context of higher education, the motivational-volitional psychology and situational perspectives may be regarded as the most relevant because they provide tangible tools and theories for educational developers to try to influence students’ procrastination tendencies whereas the other perspectives focus more on aspects that are not so easily influenced, such as personality traits, depression or personality disorders. The motivational-volitional perspective is focused on the relationship between different motivational and volitional variables such as motivation, self-regulation, time management and learning strategies which are central in successful studying in higher education (Lindblom-Ylänne et al., 2015 ; Klingsieck, 2013 ). The situational perspective, on the other hand, focuses on procrastination evoked by situational features, such as the perceived difficulty of the task (Klingsieck, 2013 ). This situational perspective can be further extended to include the person’s reactions to the challenges posed by the situation.

From the motivational-volitional perspective, academic procrastination has been found to be related to lower levels of self-regulation and academic self-efficacy and is associated with higher levels of stress and anxiety (e.g., Ferrari et al., 2005 ; Howell et al., 2006 ; Schraw et al., 2007 ; Wolters, 2003 ). Klassen et al. ( 2008 ) state that among all the variables that have been investigated in relation to academic procrastination, self-regulation, self-efficacy, and self-esteem have received the most attention (see e.g., Cassady and Johnson, 2002 ; Chun Chu and Choi, 2005 ; Ferrari, 2001 ; Howell et al., 2006 ; Steel, 2007 ; Wolters, 2003 ). Procrastination has traditionally been considered to be a form of self-regulation failure, as a weakness of will and low ability to organise own studying (e.g., Ferrari, 2001 ; Senecal et al., 1995 ; Steel, 2007 ) and, thus, one common theory is that procrastination results from a person’s inability to manage time (Burka and Yuen, 1982 ; Glick and Orsillo, 2015 ).

1.2 Time and effort management skills behind procrastination

Research focusing on exploring university students’ study progress has consistently shown that time and effort management skills are among the most crucial factors (e.g., Ariely and Wertenbroch, 2002 ; Entwistle, 2009 ; Haarala-Muhonen et al., 2011 ; Häfner et al., 2015 ; Pintrich, 2004 ). In the higher education context, time and effort management skills refer to students’ ability to set goals for themselves and to study according to their goals, to manage their time usage and to prioritise the tasks to be conducted (Entwistle et al., 2001 ). It has further been suggested that time and effort management skills provide a foundation for cognitive engagement and student achievement as they refer to how much the students are willing to invest in their learning (Appleton et al., 2008; Fredricks et al., 2004). Previous studies indicate that many higher education students struggle with time and effort management skills (Parpala et al., 2010 ) and that these skills remain constant throughout the studies and are hard to change (Parpala et al., 2017a ). Many students study without study schedules and thus fail to pass the courses because they run out of preparation time, such as for exams (Asikainen et al., 2013 ). Thus, many interventions to reduce procrastination have focused on improving time management skills (e.g., Ariely and Wertenbroch, 2002 ; Häfner et al., 2015 ; Levrini and Prevatt, 2012 ).

There are also critical voices claiming that time and effort management skills, or lack thereof, are not enough to explain the phenomena and that research focusing on the role of time and effort management skills in procrastination does not take the persons’ internal experiences enough into account (Glick and Orsillo, 2015 ). It has been suggested that when exploring factors that maintain and cause procrastination, we have to widen the perspective to include a broader theory of regulation of inner experiences, namely, psychological flexibility (Hayes, 2004 ; Hayes et al., 2012 ). Recent studies concerning procrastination have brought up the importance of psychological flexibility in decreasing procrastination and suggest that procrastination may also result from person’s psychological inflexibility (Eisenbeck et al., 2019 ; Gagnon et al., 2016 ; Glick et al., 2014 ; Scent and Boes, 2014 ).

1.3 Psychological flexibility and academic self-efficacy beliefs

Psychological flexibility refers to one’s ability to be consciously present, confronting and accepting the negative experiences, emotions and thoughts one might have, and being able to take action about achieving one’s own goals despite unpleasant feelings and thoughts, and further, being able to react to negative feelings and thoughts from a new perspective (Chawla and Ostafin, 2007 ; Hayes et al., 2006 ). Thus, it is a central factor influencing the way students react in a stressful and challenging situation. Procrastinators often fail to regulate their actions in situations that are challenging and involve high levels of stress and cognitive workload and avoiding the unpleasant feelings generated by the situation (Ferrari, 2001 ). This experiential avoidance, or an unwillingness to encounter unpleasant experiences, such as anxiety, is a key component of psychological inflexibility (Sutcliff et al., 2019 ). Tasks that are considered to be difficult and challenging and do not provide instant rewards tend to be delayed and avoided (Blunt and Pychyl, 2000 ; Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ; Steel, 2007 ). Escaping from stressful and aversive situations might relieve stress and are thus rewarding. As an example, students are always faced with a trade-off when choosing between procrastinating or studying (Kirby et al., 2005 ; Olsen et al., 2018 ) . One alternative is to complete the challenging academic tasks on time which leads to delayed rewards in the form of achieving academic and career goals (see e.g., Sutcliff et al., 2019 ). These goals often strongly align with students' values. However, students always have an alternative to choose an immediate, positive reinforcers in the form of avoidance or escape from negative internal experiences elicited by challenging tasks, such as engaging in social or leisure activities that are not related to the task at hand. Consequently, a number of recent studies have suggested that procrastination is strongly characterised by avoidant tendencies and aversive experiences and is thus mainly involved with the person’s ability to deal with negative emotions, in addition to their time and effort management skills (Sirois, 2014 ; Ticeand Bratslavsky, 2000 ; Hailikari et al., submitted).

Psychological flexibility is thought to be constructed of six core psychological processes, which are cognitive defusion, self-as-context, being present, acceptance, values and committed actions (Hayes et al., 2012 ). These processes include the ability to observe and recognise ones’ own thoughts and seeing them just as thoughts rather than truths; keeping a flexible perspective-taking attitude on one’s thinking and feeling; the ability to remain in the present moment and be mindful of thoughts, feelings, and sensations without judging them; confronting negative thoughts and emotions without attempting to change them; clarifying one’s hopes, values and goals in life and finally, doing and taking actions which are consistent with one’s hopes, values and goals (Flaxman et al., 2013 ; Hayes et al., 2012 ). Each of these processes is a psychological skill that can be enhanced in different life domains.

Previous research has clearly shown a link between high levels of procrastination and psychological inflexibility. Eisenbeck et al. ( 2019 ) found that procrastination and psychological distress were associated with psychological inflexibility and further, psychological inflexibility mediated the relationship between general psychological distress and procrastination. The role of psychological flexibility’s sub-processes in procrastination among university students has also been studied, and it was found that committed actions were moderately negatively correlated with procrastination suggesting that committed action could be a promising variable in the study of procrastination (Gagnon et al. 2016 ). Another study showed that procrastination was negatively and moderately related to lower levels of acceptance, adding support to the negative link between psychological flexibility and procrastination (Glick et al., 2014 ). The significance of psychological flexibility in the university context has been studied less, but recent research in this context showed that psychological flexibility has a strong relationship with student engagement and study progression (Asikainen, 2018 ; Asikainen et al., 2018 ).

A recent study by Jeffords et al. ( 2018 ), showed that psychological flexibility is closely related to self-efficacy. Self-efficacy has often been studied previously, focusing on procrastination with results showing an inverse relationship with procrastination (Howell and Watson, 2007; Steel, 2007 ; Wolters, 2003 ). Academic Self-efficacy beliefs describe students’ beliefs in their own capabilities to learn new things and to complete given tasks successfully (Bandura, 1997 ). According to the study by Jeffords et al. ( 2018 ) students who reported greater psychological flexibility felt more efficacious in their ability to complete their studies, whereas students who reported greater inflexibility also reported feeling less efficacious. Similar findings have been reported in relation to students’ time and effort management skills. Bembenutty ( 2009 ) showed that college students who have greater academic self-efficacy also tend to show increased management of their time and study environment (see also Burlison et al., 2009 ; Park and Sperling, 2012 ). Academic Self-efficacy beliefs have been proposed as a possible explanation for procrastination in the academic context, indicating that low academic self-efficacy beliefs are associated with an increased tendency to procrastinate (Judge and Bono, 2001 ). If one’s academic self-efficacy beliefs are low, the motivation to initiate work or to commit to required action should also be low, resulting in avoidance behaviour and consequently procrastination (Grunschel et al. 2013 ). On the other hand, students who believe that they can and will do well are more likely to be motivated to self-regulate, persist and engage in studying (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002 ; Zimmerman, 2000 ). Academic Self-efficacy beliefs have been found to be among the strongest predictive factors of performance in various domains (e.g., Lane and Lane, 2001 ; Pajares, 1996 ). Thus, when exploring the maintaining factors of procrastination, it is important to include academic self-efficacy.

1.4 Aim of the study

Taken together, previous research suggests that time and effort management skills, psychological flexibility and self-efficacy are all closely related to procrastination. Although the studies in this area support a tentative connection between these factors, it is far from conclusive. To our knowledge, no previous study has brought together these central constructs in explaining procrastination. They have been explored separately as they represent different research traditions. The aim of the present study is to include all these variables and explore their interrelations and how they together predict procrastination among students that experiences challenges with their study skills. There is a need to understand the underlying mechanisms of procrastination and which constructs are especially important if the aim is to reduce procrastination among higher education students. This research focuses on answering the following research question: How are university students’ time and effort management skills, psychological flexibility and self-efficacy associated with (a) each other and (b) to their reported level of procrastination.

2 Methodology

2.1 participants.

The data were collected from students studying arts and humanities at a Finnish university. Prolonged study times are a great challenge at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities (Kurri, 2006 ). Recent research also suggests that students procrastinate more in the field of arts and humanities compared to other academic fields (Nordby et al., 2017 ). The data came from the students who participated in a voluntary time management and well-being course, and who were willing/eager to improve their study skills. This course was advertised for students who have challenges with their time-management and well-being. A total of 149 students voluntarily participated in the study and answered the questionnaire in autumn 2019. Students responded to the questionnaires at the beginning of the course as a part of their pre-assignment. Of these students, 14 were excluded because their answers had many missing values concerning the measured dimensions (> 50%). Thus, a total of 135 students provided the data. In the questionnaire, the students were asked to evaluate their own time and effort management skills, academic self-efficacy, tendency to procrastinate and psychological flexibility. Of these students, 22 were male students and 110 female students. Two students identified as ‘other gender’, and one did not answer this question. Approximately a quarter of the students in the Faculty of Arts are male and, thus, the sample distribution is similar to the population. The average age of the participants was 28.1 years (SD = 7.62).

2.2 Instruments

We used two scales, focusing on time and effort management skills and academic self-efficacy, from the HowULearn questionnaire (Parpala and Lindblom-Ylänen, 2012 ). HowULearn -questionnaire and its scales are widely used and validated in Finnish and international contexts (e.g., Cheung et al., 2020; Parpala et al., 2010 ; Postareff et al., 2018; Ruohoniemi et al., 2017 ; Rytkönen et al., 2012). The HowULearn questionnaire has also been translated in the context of Danish higher education (Herrmann et al., 2017 ). Time and effort management skills are measured with four items on a Likert-scale from 1 to 5 (e.g. 'I am generally systematic and organised in my studies’). Concerning students’ academic self-efficacy, we used a scale from HowULearn questionnaire which has been constructed based on (Pintrich and Garcia ( 1991 ) Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Five items, using a Likert scale from 1 to 5, were modified to suit the academic self-efficacy. As it is applied here, academic self-efficacy refers to students’ appraisal of their ability to master academic tasks including their judgements about their ability to accomplish a task as well as their confidence in their skill to perform that task. Based on these items, an academic self-efficacy scale for constructed (5 items, e.g., ‘I believe I will do well in my studies as long as I make an effort’). Psychological flexibility was measured according to the work-related acceptance and action questionnaire (WAAQ) (Bond et al., 2013) which was recently developed to fit the higher education context in Finland (7 items, e.g., ‘My worries do not prevent me from succeeding in my studies’ (Asikainen, 2018 ). The items used a 7-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree, 7 = totally agree). Procrastination was measured with a short version of the Pure procrastination scale (PPS) (Svartdahl and Steel, 2017 ) using a 5-point Likert scale (5 items, e.g.,’ In preparation for some deadlines, I often waste time by doing other things’). This short version of the original pure procrastination scale has been proven to be a robust instrument to measure academic procrastination (Svartdahl et al., 2017; see also Klein et al., 2019 ).

2.3 Statistical analysis

Missing value analysis was conducted on the items measuring the scales. There were only four separate missing values concerning different items and, thus, these were replaced with means. The relationships between the scales were analysed with Pearson’s correlation analysis. In addition, linear regression analysis was conducted on the scales measuring academic self-efficacy, time and effort management (= organised studying) and psychological flexibility explaining procrastination. In addition, the students were then divided into three score groups (low/medium/high) based on their scores measuring time and effort management and psychological flexibility where the middle group was formed using the mean + − a half standard deviation. The groups were combined and thus, six score groups were conducted. The differences in these groups in procrastination was analysed with One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test.

According to the Cronbach alpha analysis, the scales measuring psychological flexibility, procrastination and academic self-efficacy had very good reliability (α = 0.83–0.90). The reliability for the scale measuring time and effort management can be regarded as acceptable (see Table 1 ). Adding more items to measure the same dimension, would most probably have increased the alpha on Organised studying (Taber 2018). However, as the scale has been used in many previous studies with good reliability (Herrmann et al., 2017 ; Parpala et al., 2010 ; Ruohoniemi et al., 2017 ) its use can be considered to be acceptable.

The correlational analysis showed that there was a clear relationship between procrastination, psychological flexibility, academic self-efficacy and time and effort management skills. Procrastination was statistically significantly and negatively correlated with time and effort management skills (r =  − 0.584, p  < 0.001), academic self-efficacy ( p  =  − 0.358, p  < 0.001) and psychological flexibility (r =  − 0.461, p  < 0.001). In addition, academic self-efficacy was positively related to psychological flexibility ( p  = 0.322, p  < 0,001) and time and effort management skills ( p  = 0.357, p  < 0.001). In addition, time and effort management skills and psychological flexibility correlated positively with each other (r = 0.332, p  < 0.001). The correlations can be seen in Table 2 .

3.1 Regression analysis

A linear regression model was conducted with psychological flexibility, time and effort management and academic self-efficacy as predictors of procrastination. As presented in Table 3 , time and effort management skills, psychological flexibility and academic self-efficacy explained a significant level of variance in procrastination (Adjusted R Square = 0.382). Both time and effort management (t =  − 5.63, p  < 0.001) and psychological flexibility (t =  − 3.06, p  = 0.003) explained the variance in procrastination statistically significantly meaning that students who reported greater use of time and effort management strategies and higher psychological flexibility reported less tendency to procrastinate. Academic self-efficacy failed to emerge as an individual predictor of procrastination t =  − 1.04, p  = 0.301). The results of the regression analysis can be seen in Table 3 .

3.2 Differences in score groups

The One-way ANOVA of the score groups showed that there were differences in experiences of procrastination according to the score groups. According to the Tukey’s test, the group with a high score on time and effort management as well as psychological flexibility scored statistically significantly lower on procrastination than the other score groups (see Table 4 ). In addition, the group with a low score in time and effort management as well as on psychological flexibility scored higher in procrastination than the group scoring average on time and effort management and high on psychological flexibility as well as the group scoring high on time and effort management and average on psychological flexibility. The group scoring average on time and effort management and low on psychological flexibility also scored statistically significantly higher on procrastination than the group scoring high on time and effort management and average on psychological flexibility.

4 Discussion

Procrastination is consistently viewed as problematic to academic success and students’ general well-being (Steel, 2007 ). Students’ time management skills as well as ability to manage their own actions despite the negative feelings have been identified as central factors associated with procrastination along with students’ academic self-efficacy beliefs. To this point, however, only a few studies have included all these measures and compared their impact on procrastination. Thus, an aim with the present study was to explore how students’ time and effort management skills, psychological flexibility and academic self-efficacy are interrelated and associated with procrastination as they have been commonly addressed separately in previous studies.

Designed to address this limitation, our findings support three noteworthy findings regarding academic procrastination among students who experience problems in their time management skills. Firstly, our findings show that students’ ability to organise their time and effort had the strongest association with procrastination out of the variables included in the study. Secondly, our findings indicate that psychological flexibility has a strong individual role in explaining procrastination along with time and effort management skills, although to a slightly smaller degree. And thirdly, our findings suggest that these two constructs appear to be closely related and clearly go hand in hand and, thus, both need to be considered. In the remainder of this section, we review the findings that support these points, identify implications for research and practice, and discuss some limitations to these conclusions.

Time management has been repeatedly identified in previous studies as a major factor contributing to procrastination (Ferrari, 2001 ; Senécal et al., 1995 ; Steel, 2007 ; Wolters, 2003 ). Our findings add to this work by showing that in our study time and effort management skills were strongly related to self-reported level of procrastination and explained the largest variance of procrastination in the regression. This finding implies that students’ time and effort management skills can be used to understand their self-reported levels of academic procrastination. However, it appears that time and effort management skills alone are not enough to explain the phenomenon of procrastination as we assumed. In our study, psychological flexibility also had a strong individual role in explaining large variation of procrastination. This is in line with the recent research suggesting that psychological flexibility is also a central construct explaining procrastination (Dionne, 2016 ; Gagnon et al. 2016 ). These two factors were also strongly correlated with each other as well as with academic self-efficacy beliefs which suggests that they share common variance. Their central role was further explained by regression analysis which showed that together they explained almost 40% of the variance in procrastination. Interestingly, in the present study academic self-efficacy beliefs did not have a direct association with procrastination. This finding is in contrast with previous studies showing that lower self-efficacy beliefs are associated with an increased tendency to procrastinate (Judge and Bono, 2001 ; Wolters, 2003 ). However, some studies have similarly reported a non-significant association between self-efficacy and procrastination. For example, Klassen et al. ( 2010 ) showed with Canadian and Singaporean students that although procrastination negatively and significantly correlated with academic self-efficacy, in the regression model there was no association between academic self-efficacy and procrastination. Only self-efficacy for self-regulation and self-esteem had a significant relationship with procrastination (Klassen et al., 2010 ). This finding is very similar to our result. The most likely explanation for the result is that time and effort management skills and psychological flexibility have a more direct and stronger relationship with procrastination than academic self-efficacy even though it is closely related to all these constructs. It might be that if one is committed to value-based actions which are at the core of psychological flexibility, the negative thoughts one might have about oneself may not be hindering one’s goal-based actions (Hayes et al., 2006 ). This is an interesting finding, and it would be useful to study it in more detail in subsequent studies.

As a third noteworthy finding, our findings provide insight into the relations between time and effort management and psychological flexibility as factors contributing to procrastination. Psychological flexibility and time and effort management skills appear to go hand in hand. When the students were divided to three groups based on their scores on psychological flexibility and time and effort management, the largest groups were the ones in which both time and effort managements skills and psychological flexibility were either low or high. The groups where one of these measures would be high and the other would be low were the smallest in implicating their close relationship. Therefore, it seems that if a person rates his/her time and effort management skills highly, he/she rates his/her psychological flexibility high as well. Also, significant correlations between these measures support this notion. A significant positive correlation between time and effort management and psychological flexibility has also been found in previous study (Asikainen et al., 2019 ). Interestingly, the group that rated both time and effort management and psychological flexibility highly rated their tendency to procrastinate as markedly low compared to other groups. The opposite phenomenon was true for the group that rated their time and effort management skills and psychological flexibility low. This group rated their tendency to procrastinate very highly. Interestingly, if the rating on one of these measures, especially on time and effort management studying was lower, the tendency to procrastinate increased drastically. Although this conclusion fits with common-sense expectations regarding these constructs and their relationship, our findings are the first to establish this relationship empirically.

One implication of this finding is that future efforts to remediate students’ procrastination should account for both these factors. Only when accounting for both time and effort management and psychological flexibility can students’ procrastination be understood. Instead of taking procrastination merely as a self-regulation problem, it is also strongly influenced by a person’s inability to cope with negative emotions that arise in challenging situations (Eisenbeck et al., 2019 ; Gagnon et al., 2016 ; Glick et al., 2014 ). It may be suggested that time and effort management support psychological flexibility. Some studies on time allocation suggest that psychological flexibility process includes allocating one’s time to important and value-based actions in everyday life (Kashdan and Rottenberg, 2010 ). Thus, when time is allocated to support value-based action well-being also increases (Sheldon et al., 2010 ). Thinking about your own values and setting goals can also be considered to be a central part of both time and effort management (Entwistle and McCune, 2004 ) and psychological flexibility (Hayes et al., 2006 ). Thus, we could suggest that when practising psychological flexibility, time management is a part of the process in which one needs to plan how to allocate time to support one’s own personal values. Fostering students’ psychological flexibility as well as time and effort managements skills, could be a promising tool to decrease procrastination. As procrastinators often fail to regulate their actions in challenging or stressful situations (Ferrari, 2001 ), it might be that psychological flexibility could be a central construct. More attention should be paid to encouraging students to pursue value-based committed actions, despite the negative thoughts and feelings one might have. Thus, students’ capacity to cope with their negative thoughts and emotions should be enhanced during their studying (Asikainen, 2018 ).

4.1 Limitations

There are also some limitations that should be addressed. The participants consisted of a selected sample of students which most probably influenced the results. The students took part in a time management and well-being course which was directed especially at those students who had experienced problems with their studies. Thus, the sample of the students in this study was selected and most probably consisted mostly of students who were eager and motivated to improve their time management skills and studying. That might also explain why the time and effort management skills were the strongest explanatory variable of procrastination in the present study. Thus, these results of the study are not generalisable to general student population and the selected sample most probably influenced the results. More research is still needed with a bigger and more representative population. Studies should also explore the role of time and effort management skills in procrastination with a more representative student population. The number of participants was rather low which gave limited opportunities for analysis. For example, the number of students in different score groups was rather low, and in some cases too low for the analysis. Therefore, the results should be interpreted with care. Still, we wanted to include the One Way Anova analysis in our study as it clearly showed that psychological flexibility and time and effort management skills are aligned with each other and students with high scores in both of these dimensions report much less procrastination than other students. Furthermore, one major limitation of the study is that the data are based solely on self-reports. This means that we have measured students’ experiences of these variables. However, we used validated questionnaires which have been shown to be reliable in measuring these constructs and thus, we argue that these results also bring valuable insights to research in procrastination which should be further explored. Future research should also include other measures such as accumulation of credits to see how these measures relate to students’ study progression. In addition, our data are also cross-sectional in nature and thus represents only one particular timeframe. Thus, it is not possible to draw any conclusions regarding the predictive value of the variables. In future research we should also include longitudinal data to explore more closely the relationship between these measures. Despite of the numerous limitations in our study, we argue that this paper provides a novel exploration of these predictors of procrastination together which has not been provided in previous studies.

4.2 Practical implications and conclusions

One promising way to support students’ psychological flexibility and learning processes could be to combine study skills courses, such as time and effort management intervention courses with acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-based intervention courses, in which students could practise tolerating stress and negative thoughts as well as developing their time and effort management. Recent studies (Asikainen et al., 2019 ) have shown that this kind of ACT-interventions including reflection of one’s own study processes and practising new ways to study, in this way practising new ways to study, can enhance students’ psychological flexibility and time and effort management and in this way, foster students’ well-being and study skills. ACT-based intervention has shown to have multiple positive effects on students’ well-being and studying (Asikainen et al., 2019 ; Levin et al. 2017 ; Räsänen et al. 2016 ). In addition, ACT-based training can help students to manage psychological inflexibility and encourage persistence behaviour, which in turn is likely to have a positive impact on students’ self-efficacy and further, to their academic performance (Jeffords et al. 2018 ). Earlier studies have found that ACT-based interventions targeted at students who suffer from procrastination can decrease experiences of procrastination (Scent and Boes, 2014 ; Wang et al., 2015 ). One study has suggested that different core processes of psychological flexibility have different effects on procrastination. That is, although all the components correlate with procrastination, acceptance and committed actions significantly predict experiences of procrastination (Gagnon et al., 2016 ). Thus, it seems that being more open and accepting of one’s emotional experiences or thoughts and being willing to engage in difficult activities to persist in the direction of important values is important in reducing procrastination.

As time and effort management in our study was the predominant factor associated with procrastination, we suggest that time management should be promoted for higher education students. It has been shown that many students have trouble with time management (Parpala et al., 2010 ). Many studies have shown that different time management strategies are beneficial for different students. These include things like setting goals and planning how to achieve these (Häfner et al., 2015 ), setting deadlines (Ariely and Wertenbroch, 2002 ) and monitoring time use (Asikainen et al., 2019 ). These skills should be enhanced during university study because it has been shown that time and effort management skills remain rather constant without a conscious effort to influence them (Lindblom-Ylänne et al., 2017 ).

To conclude, our study brings novel insights into the underlying mechanisms of procrastination. Our study showed that both psychological flexibility and time management are important factors influencing procrastination, and furthermore, they appear to be closely related factors and together influence procrastination behavior. Thus, both these factors should be considered when the focus is on reducing procrastination. Students who tend to procrastinate might benefit from trainings that focus on training both time management skills and psychological flexibility and not focusing on only either one. This might produce the best results.

Data availability

The data is available on demand.

Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: Self-control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13 (3), 219–224.

Google Scholar  

Asikainen, H. (2018). Examining indicators for effective studying – The interplay between student integration, psychological flexibility and self-regulation in learning. Psychology, Society, & Education, 10 (2), 225–237.

Asikainen, H., Hailikari, T., & Mattsson, M. (2018). The interplay between academic emotions, psychological flexibility and self-regulation as predictors of academic achievement. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42 (4), 439–453.

Asikainen, H. & Kaipainen, K. & Katajavuori, N. (2019). Understanding and promoting students’ well-being and performance in university studies. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 16 (5), 1–15.

Asikainen, H., Virtanen, V., Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2013). Understanding the variation in bioscience students’ conceptions of learning in the 21st century. International Journal of Educational Research, 62 , 36–42.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . Freeman.

Bembenutty, H. (2009). Academic delay of gratification, self-regulation of learning, gender differences, and expectancy-value. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (3), 347–352.

Blunt, A. K., & Pychyl, T. A. (2000). Task aversiveness and procrastination: A multi-dimensional approach to task aversiveness across stages of personal projects. Personality and Individual Differences, 28 (1), 153–167.

Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L. M. (1982). Mind games procrastinators play. Psychology Today, 16 (1), 32–34.

Burlison, J. D., Murphy, C. S., & Dwyer, W. O. (2009). Evaluation of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire for predicting academic performance in college students of varying scholastic aptitude. College Student Journal, 43 (4), 1313–1324.

Cassady, J. C., & Johnson, R. E. (2002). Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27 (2), 270–295.

Chawla, N., & Ostafin, B. (2007). Experiential avoidance as a functional dimensional approach to psychopathology: An empirical review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63 (9), 871–890.

Chun Chu, A. H., & Choi, J. N. (2005). Rethinking procrastination: Positive effects of “active” procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145 (3), 245–264.

Dewitte, S., & Lens, W. (2000). Procrastinators lack a broad action perspective. European Journal of Personality, 14 (2), 121–140.

Dionne, F. (2016). Using acceptance and mindfulness to reduce procrastination among university students: Results from a pilot study. Revista Prâksis, 1, 8–20.

Eisenbeck, N., Carrenob, D. F., & Uclés-Juárezb, U. (2019). From psychological distress to academic procrastination: Exploring the role of psychological inflexibility. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 13, 103–108.

Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university . Palgrave Macmillan.

Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (4), 325–346.

Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Walker, P. (2001). Conceptions, styles, approaches within higher education: analytic abstractions and everyday experience. In R. J. Sternberg & L.-F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 73–102). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Ferrari, J. R. (2001). Procrastination as self-regulation failure of performance: effects of cognitive load, self-awareness, and time limits on ‘working best under pressure. European journal of Personality, 15 (5), 391–406.

Ferrari, J. R., O’Callaghan, J., & Newbegin, I. (2005). Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia: arousal and avoidance delays among adults. North American Journal of Psychology, 7 (1), 1–6.

Flaxman, P., Bond, F., Livheim, F., & Hayes, S. (Eds.). (2013). The mindful and effective employee: An acceptance and commitment therapy training manual for improving well-being and performance . New Harbinger Publishers.

Gagnon, J., Dionne, F., & Pychyl, T. A. (2016). Committed action: An initial study on its association to procrastination in academic settings. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 5 (2), 97–102.

Glick, D. M., Millstein, D. J., & Orsillo, S. M. (2014). A preliminary investigation of the role of psychological inflexibility in academic procrastination. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3 (2), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002

Article   Google Scholar  

Glick, D. M., & Orsillo, S. M. (2015). An investigation of the efficacy of acceptance-based behavioral therapy for academic procrastination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144 (2), 400–409.

Grunschel, C., Patrzek, J., & Fries, S. (2013). Exploring the reasons and consequences of academic procrastination: An interview study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28 (3), 841–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0143-4

Haarala-Muhonen, A., Ruohoniemi, M., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2011). Factors affecting the study pace of first-year law students: in search of study counselling tools. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (8), 911–922.

Hailikari, T., Nieminen, J. H., & Asikainen, H. (submitted). The ability of psychological flexibility to predict study success and its relations to cognitive attributional strategies and academic emotions.

Hayes, S. C. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy, relational frame theory, and the third wave of behavioral and cognitive therapies. Behavior Therapy, 35 (4), 639–665.

Hayes, S., Luoma, J., Bond, F., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, processes, and outcomes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44 (1), 1–25.

Hayes, S. C., Pistorello, J., & Levin, M. E. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy as a unified model of behavior change. The Counseling Psychologist, 40 (7), 976–1002.

Herrmann, K. J., Bager-Elsborg, A., & Parpala, A. (2017). Measuring perceptions of the learning environment and approaches to learning: validation of the learn questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61 (5), 526–539.

Howell, A. J., Watson, D. C., Powell, R. A., & Buro, K. (2006). Academic procrastination: The pattern and correlates of behavioural postponement. Personality and Individual Differences, 40 (8), 1519–1530.

Häfner, A., Stock, A., & Oberst, V. (2015). Decreasing students’ stress through time management training: An intervention study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 30 (1), 81–94.

Jeffords, J. R., Bayly, B. L., Bumpus, M. F., & Hill, L. G. (2018). Investigating the relationship between university students’ psychological flexibility and college self-efficacy. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 22 (2), 351–372.

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80–92.

Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical psychology review, 30 (7), 865–878.

Katz, I., Eilot, K., & Nevo, N. (2014). “I’ll do it later”: Type of motivation, self-efficacy and homework procrastination. Motivation and Emotion, 38 (1), 111–119.

Kirby, K. N., Winston, G. C., & Santiesteban, M. (2005). Impatience and grades: Delay-discount rates correlate negatively with college GPA. Learning and Individual Differences, 15 (3), 213–222.

Klassen, R. M., Ang, R., Chong, W., Krawchuk, L., Huan, V., Wong, I., & Yeo, L. (2010). Academic Procrastination in two settings: Motivation correlates, behavioral patterns, and negative impact of procrastination in Canada and Singapore. Applied Psychology, 59 (3), 361–379.

Klassen, R. M., Krawchuk, L. L., & Rajani, S. (2008). Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33 (4), 915–931.

Klein, E. M., Beutel, M. E., Müller, K. W., Wölfling, K., Brähler, E., & Zenger, M. (2019). Assessing procrastination. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35, 633–640.

Klingsieck, K. B. (2013). Procrastination. When good things don’t come to those who wait.” European Psychologist, 18 (1), 24–34.

Kurri, E. (2006). Opintojen pitkittymisen dilemma. Tutkimus opintojen sujumattomuustekijöistä yliopistossa ja niihin vaikuttamisen keinoista [The Dilemma of Prolonged Studies. A Research on Reasons behind Prolonged Studies and How to Make a Change]. Otus (Research Foundation of the Finnish Student Unions) 27. Helsinki: University Press.

Lane, J., & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 29, 687–693.

Levin, M. E., Haeger, J. A., Pierce, B. G., & Twohig, M. P. (2017). Web-based acceptance and commitment therapy for mental health problems in college students: A randomized controlled trial. Behavior Modification, 41 (1), 141–162.

Levrini, A., & Prevatt, F. (2012). Succeeding with adult ADHD: Daily strategies to help you achieve your goals and manage your life . American Psychological Association.

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Haarala-Muhonen, A., Postareff, L., & Hailikari, T. (2017). Exploration of individual study paths of successful first-year students: an interview study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32 (4), 687–701.

Lindblom-Ylänne, S. A., Saariaho-Räsänen, E. J., Inkinen, M. S., Haarala-Muhonen, A. E., & Hailikari, T. K. (2015). Academic procrastinators, strategic delayers and something betwixt and between: An interview study. Frontline Learning Research, 3 (2), 47–62.

Nordby, K., Klingsieck, K. B., & Svartdal, F. (2017). Do procrastination-friendly environments make students delay unnecessarily? Social Psychology of Education, 20 (3), 491–512.

Olsen, R. A., Macaskill, A. C., & Hunt, M. J. (2018). A measure of delay discounting within the academic domain. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31 (4), 522–534.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66 (4), 543–578.

Park, S. W., & Sperling, R. A. (2012). Academic procrastinators and their self-regulation. Psychology, 3 (1), 12–23.

Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2012). Using a research instrument for developing quality at the university. Quality in Higher Education, 18 (3), 313–328.

Parpala, A., Asikainen, H., Ruohoniemi, M., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2017). The relationship between the development of time and effort management and experiences of the teaching-learning environment in a university context. International Journal of Learning and Change, 9 (2), 170–184.

Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T., & Hirsto, L. (2010). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching–learning environment in different disciplines. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 (2), 269–282.

Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maher & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 7, pp. 371–402). JAI Press.

Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (4), 385–407.

Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications . Prentice Hall.

Rothblum, E. D., Solomon, L. J., & Murakami, J. (1986). Affective, cognitive, and behavioral differences between high and low procrastinators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33 (4), 387–394.

Ruohoniemi, M., Forni, M., Mikkonen, J., & Parpala, A. (2017). Enhancing quality with a research-based student feedback instrument: A comparison of veterinary students’ learning experiences in two culturally different European universities. Quality in Higher education, 23 (3), 249–263.

Räsänen, P., Lappalainen, P., Muotka, J., Tolvanen, A., & Lappalainen, R. (2016). An online guided ACT intervention for enhancing the psychological wellbeing of university students: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 78, 30–42.

Scent, C. L., & Boes, S. R. (2014). Acceptance and commitment training: A brief intervention to reduce procrastination among college students. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 28 (2), 144–156.

Senecal, C., Koestner, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (1995). Self-regulation and academic procrastination. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135 (5), 607–619.

Schraw, G., Wadkins, T., & Olafson, L. (2007). Doing the things we do: A grounded theory of academic procrastination. Journal of Educational psychology, 99 (1), 12–25.

Sheldon, K. M., Cummins, R., & Khamble, S. (2010). Life-balance and well-being: Testing a two-pronged conceptual and measurement approach. Journal of Personality, 78, 1093–1134.

Sirois, F. M. (2014). Procrastination and stress: Exploring the role of self-compassion. Self and Identity, 13 (2), 128–145.

Sirois, F. M., Melia-Gordon, M. L., & Pychyl, T. A. (2003). “I’ll look after my health, later”: An investigation of procrastination and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1167–1184.

Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation: Consequences for future self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7 (2), 115–127.

Stead, R., Shanahan, M. J., & Neufeld, R. W. (2010). “I’ll go to therapy, eventually”: Procrastination, stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 49 (3), 175–180.

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological bulletin, 133 (1), 65–94.

Steel, P., Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2001). Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood. Personality and Individual Differences, 30 (1), 95–106.

Sutcliffe, K. R., Sedley, B., Hunt, M. J., & Macaskill, A. C. (2019). Relationships among academic procrastination, psychological flexibility, and delay discounting. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, 19 (4), 315–326.

Svartdal, F., & Steel, P. (2017). Irrational delay revisited: Examining five procrastination scales in a global sample. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1927.

Tice, D. M., & Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving in to feel good: The place of emotion regulation in the context of general self-control. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (3), 149–159.

Visser, L., Korthagen, F. A., & Schoonenboom, J. (2018). Differences in learning characteristics between students with high, average, and low levels of academic procrastination: students’ views on factors influencing their learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 808.

Wang, S., Zhou, Y., Yu, S., Ran, L. W., Liu, X. P., & Chen, Y. F. (2015). Acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive–behavioral therapy as treatments for academic procrastination: A randomized controlled group session. Research on Social Work Practice, 27 (1), 48–58.

Wolters, C. A. (2003). Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective. Journal of educational psychology, 95 (1), 179–187.

Wolters, C. A., Won, S., & Hussain, M. (2017). Examining the relations of time management and procrastination within a model of self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 12 (3), 381–399.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary educational psychology, 25 (1), 82–91.

Download references

Open access funding provided by University of Helsinki including Helsinki University Central Hospital. No funding provided for the study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Educational Sciences, Centre for University Teaching and Learning (HYPE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

T. Hailikari, N. Katajavuori & H. Asikainen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The idea for the article was by TH. All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by TH and the analysis were performed by HA. The first draft of the manuscript was written by TH and NK was responsible for writing the parts regarding psychological flexibility and discussion. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Hailikari .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

This study was conducted followed by the ethical principles of research with human participants and ethical review in the human sciences in Finland. https://tenk.fi/en/ethical-review/ethical-review-human-sciences

Consent to participate

The participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study and the use of materials. Written consent was obtained from all the participants.

Consent for publication

The participants were fully informed that the obtained materials will be used for research and publication purposes.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hailikari, T., Katajavuori, N. & Asikainen, H. Understanding procrastination: A case of a study skills course. Soc Psychol Educ 24 , 589–606 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-021-09621-2

Download citation

Received : 20 November 2020

Accepted : 22 February 2021

Published : 22 March 2021

Issue Date : April 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-021-09621-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Procrastination
• Time-management
• Psychological flexibility
• Academic self-efficacy
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Procrastination

The art of writing is the art of applying the seat of the pants to the seat of the chair. —Mary Heaton Vorse

What this handout is about

This handout will help you understand why you procrastinate and offer strategies to combat this common writer’s ailment.

Introduction

Everyone procrastinates. We put things off because we don’t want to do them, or because we have too many other things on our plates. Putting things off—big or small—is part of being human. If you are reading this handout, however, it is likely that your procrastination is troubling you. You suspect that you could be a much better writer if only you didn’t put off writing projects until the last minute. You find that just when you have really gotten going on a paper, it’s time to turn it in; so, you never really have time to revise or proofread carefully. You love the rush of adrenaline you get when you finish a paper ten minutes before it’s due, but you (and your body) are getting tired of pulling all-nighters. You feel okay about procrastinating while in college, but you worry that this habit will follow you into your working life.

You can tell whether or not you need to do something about your procrastination by examining its consequences. Procrastination can have external consequences (you get a zero on the paper because you never turned it in) or internal consequences (you feel anxious much of the time, even when you are doing something that you enjoy). If you put off washing the dishes, but the dishes don’t bother you, who cares? When your procrastination leaves you feeling discouraged and overburdened, however, it is time to take action.

Is there hope?

If you think you are a hopeless procrastinator, take heart! No one is beyond help. The fact that you procrastinate does not mean that you are inherently lazy or inefficient. Your procrastination is not an untamable beast. It is a habit that has some specific origin, and it is a habit that you can overcome. This handout will help you begin to understand why you procrastinate and give you some strategies for turning things around. For most procrastinators, however, there are no quick fixes. You aren’t going to wake up tomorrow and never procrastinate again. But you might wake up tomorrow and do one or two simple things that will help you finish that draft a little earlier or with less stress.

You may not be surprised to learn that procrastinators tend to be self-critical. So, as you consider your procrastination and struggle to develop different work habits, try to be gentle with yourself. Punishing yourself every time you realize you have put something off won’t help you change. Rewarding yourself when you make progress will.

If you don’t care why you procrastinate—you just want to know what to do about it—then you might as well skip the next section of this handout and go right to the section labeled “What to do about it.” If you skip to the strategies, however, you may only end up more frustrated. Taking the time to learn about why you procrastinate may help you avoid the cycle whereby you swear up and down that you will never procrastinate again, only to find that the next time you have a paper due, you are up until 3 a.m. trying to complete the first (and only) draft—without knowing why or how you got there.

Why we do it

In order to stop putting off your writing assignments, it is important to understand why you tend to do so in the first place. Some of the reasons that people procrastinate include the following:

Because we are afraid

• Fear of failure: If you are scared that a particular piece of writing isn’t going to turn out well, then you may avoid working on it in order to avoid feeling the fear.
• Fear of success: Some procrastinators (the author of this handout included) fear that if they start working at their full capacity, they will turn into workaholics. Since we procrastinate compulsively, we assume that we will also write compulsively; we envision ourselves locked in a library carrel, hunched over the computer, barely eating and sleeping and never seeing friends or going out. The procrastinator who fears success may also assume that if they work too hard, they will become mean and cold to the people around them, thus losing their capacity to be friendly and to have fun. Finally, this type of procrastinator may think that if they stop procrastinating, then they will start writing better, which will increase other people’s expectations, thus ultimately increasing the amount of pressure they experience.
• Fear of losing autonomy: Some people delay writing projects as a way of maintaining their independence. When they receive a writing assignment, they procrastinate as a way of saying, “You can’t make me do this. I am my own person.” Procrastinating helps them feel more in control of situations (such as college) in which they believe that other people have authority.
• Fear of being alone: Other writers procrastinate because they want to feel constantly connected to other people. For instance, you may procrastinate until you are in such a bind that someone has to come and rescue you. Procrastination therefore ensures that other people will be involved in your life. You may also put off writing because you don’t want to be alone, and writing is oftentimes a solitary activity. In its worst form, procrastination itself can become a companion, constantly reminding you of all that you have to do.
• Fear of attachment: Rather than fearing separation, some people procrastinate in order to create a barrier between themselves and others. They may delay in order to create chaos in their lives, believing that the chaos will keep other people away.

Whether these fears appear in our conscious or subconscious minds, they paralyze us and keep us from taking action, until discomfort and anxiety overwhelms us and forces us to either a) get the piece of writing done or b) give up. (The preceding is a summary of Chapters 2-4 of Jane B. Burka and Lenora M. Yuen’s Procrastination: Why You Do It, What to Do About It.)

Because we expect ourselves to be perfect

Procrastination and perfectionism often go hand in hand. Perfectionists tend to procrastinate because they expect so much of themselves, and they are scared about whether or not they can meet those high standards. Perfectionists sometimes think that it is better to give a half-hearted effort and maintain the belief that they could have written a great paper, than to give a full effort and risk writing a mediocre paper. Procrastinating guarantees failure, but it helps perfectionists maintain their belief that they could have excelled if they had tried harder. Another pitfall for perfectionists is that they tend to ignore progress toward a goal. As long as the writing project is incomplete, they feel as though they aren’t getting anywhere, rather than recognizing that each paragraph moves them closer to a finished product.

Because we don’t like our writing

You may procrastinate on writing because you don’t like to re-read what you have written; you hate writing a first draft and then being forced to evaluate it, in all its imperfection. By procrastinating, you ensure that you don’t have time to read over your work, thus avoiding that uncomfortable moment.

Because we’re too busy

Practical concerns: jobs, other classes, etc.

Because it works

Unfortunately, procrastination helps reinforce itself. When we avoid doing something we dread (like writing) by doing something we enjoy (such as watching TV, hanging out with friends, etc.), we escape the dreaded task. Given such a choice, it’s no wonder that many of us choose to procrastinate. When we write a paper at the last minute and still manage to get a good grade, we feel all the more compelled to procrastinate next time around.

What to do about it

Now that you know a little bit about why you may have procrastinated in the past, let’s explore some of the strategies you might use to combat your procrastination tendencies, now and in the future. Experiment with whichever of these strategies appeals to you; if you try something and it doesn’t work, try something else! Be patient; improvement will come with practice.

Take an inventory

Figuring out exactly when and how you procrastinate can help you stop the behavior. It can be difficult to tell when you are procrastinating. Think about the clues that tell you that’s what you’re doing: for example, a nagging voice in your head, a visual image of what you are avoiding or the consequences of not doing it, physical ailments (stomach tightness, headaches, muscle tension), inability to concentrate, inability to enjoy what you are doing.

How do you procrastinate?

• Try to ignore the task, hoping against hope that it will go away?
• Over- or under-estimate the degree of difficulty that the task involves?
• Minimize the impact that your performance now may have on your future?
• Substitute something important for something really important? (For example, cleaning instead of writing your paper.)
• Let a short break become a long one, or an evening in which you do no work at all? (For example, claiming that you are going to watch TV for ½ hour, then watching it all night.)
• Focus on one part of the task, at the expense of the rest? (For example, keep working on the introduction, while putting off writing the body and conclusion).
• Spend too much time researching or choosing a topic

Once you better understand how you procrastinate, you will be better able to catch yourself doing it. Too often, we don’t even realize that we are procrastinating—until it’s too late.

Create a productive environment

If you have made the decision to stop delaying on a particular writing project, it is critical that you find a place to work where you have at least half a chance of actually getting some writing done. Your dorm room may not be the place where you are most productive. Ditto the computer lab. If you have a laptop computer, try going someplace where you can’t connect to the Internet (e-mail and the Web are the bane of the procrastinator’s existence—as you probably already know). If you are a procrastinator, then chances are you are already pretty exasperated; don’t risk frustrating yourself even more by trying to write in an environment that doesn’t meet your needs.

CAUTION: The most skilled procrastinators will be tempted to take this suggestion too far, spending an inordinate amount of time “creating a productive environment” (cleaning, filing, etc.) and not nearly enough time actually writing. Don’t fall into that trap! While cleaning and filing are indeed worthy and necessary activities, if you only do this when you have an approaching writing deadline, then you are procrastinating.

While you are thinking about where to write, consider also when you will write. When are you most alert? Is it at 8 a.m., mid-morning, mid-afternoon, early evening, or late at night? Try to schedule writing time when you know you will be at your best. Don’t worry about when you “should” be able to write; just focus on when you are able to write.

Challenge your myths

In order to break the procrastination habit, we need to get past the idea that in order to write, we must have all the information pertaining to the topic, and we must have optimal writing conditions. In reality, writers never have all the information, and conditions are never optimal.

Think of a writing project that you are currently putting off. On one side of a piece of paper, write down all the reasons for your delay. On the other side, argue (as convincingly as possible!) against the delay.

Myth #1: “I can’t function in a messy environment. I can’t possibly write this paper until I have cleaned my apartment.”

Challenge: There are no conditions that are necessary in order for you to write, save two: 1) You must have a writing implement (e.g., a keyboard or a pen) and 2) you must have someplace for writing to go, such as into a computer or onto a piece of paper. If, when faced with a writing project, you start piling up prerequisites for all the things you must do before you can possibly start writing, consider whether you might in fact be making excuses—in other words, procrastinating.

Myth #2: “I know it’s time for me to start writing, but I just haven’t done enough research yet. I’ll spend one more night at the library, and then I’ll start writing my paper.”

Challenge: Truth be told, you will never collect all the information you possibly could for your paper. Better to write a tightly-crafted argument with the information you have NOW, AT THIS VERY MOMENT, than to keep doing research and risk throwing your paper together at the last minute.

Myth #3: “I do my best work under pressure.”

Challenge: There are lots of other ways to create pressure for yourself, besides waiting until the night before the paper is due to start writing it. You can set a time limit for yourself—for example, “I will write this paragraph in ½ hour”—or you can pretend that the paper is a timed essay exam. If you do this a week or two before the paper is due, you’ll have a draft in plenty of time to revise and edit it.

Myth #4: “In order to work on my paper, I must have six uninterrupted hours.”

Challenge: You can and should work on a paper in one hour blocks (or shorter). This will help you break the writing task down into smaller pieces, thereby making it seem more manageable. If you know that you can work on one part of the paper for one hour, then it won’t seem so daunting, and you will be less likely to procrastinate.

Some writers find, however, that they do need longer blocks of time in order to really produce anything. Therefore, like all of the strategies outlined here, if this one doesn’t work for you, throw it out and try something else. You might still find, however, that you are more productive when you plan to write “all morning” rather than “all day.”

Myth #5 : “What I write has to be perfect, ” AND/OR “I can’t write anything until I have a perfect thesis statement/intro.”

Challenge: A first draft (or a second, or a third, or even—egad!—the final product) does not have to be perfect. When we write an early draft, we need to turn off our internal critic and just get some words down on the page. The great thing about starting early on a writing project is that it leaves us plenty of time for revision, editing, and proofreading; so, we can set ourselves free to just let our writing flow, without worrying about sentence-level concerns such as grammar, punctuation, and style. You’ll find some other thoughts on editing in our video on proofreading and our handout on revision .

Break it down

The day you get the paper assignment (ideally), or shortly thereafter, break the writing assignment up into the smallest possible chunks. By doing this, the paper never has a chance to take on gargantuan proportions in your mind. You can say to yourself, “Right now, I’m going to write the introduction. That’s all, just the introduction!” And you may be more likely to sit down and do that, than you will to sit down and “write the paper.”

Get a new attitude

We shoot ourselves in the foot, to begin with, by telling ourselves how horrible a particular writing assignment is. Changing our attitude toward the task, when possible, may go a long way toward keeping us from procrastinating. Tell yourself that the task isn’t so bad or difficult, that you either know how to do it, or that you can learn how while you’re doing it. You may find, too, that if you start early on a particular assignment, your attitude never has a chance to get very negative in the first place! Simply starting to write can often help us feel more positive about writing.

Ask for help

• Get an anti-procrastination coach. If you are really determined not to procrastinate, then get help from the supportive people in your life. Tell someone about your writing goal and timeline, and ask them to help you determine whether or not your plan is realistic. Once or twice a week, email with a friend, relative, or mentor, in order to report (admit?) on your progress, and declare your promise for the next week (or few days). If, despite your very good intentions, you start procrastinating again, do not think, “All is lost!” Instead, talk to someone about it. They may be able to help you put your slip into perspective and get back on track.
• Get a buddy. See if you can find a friend to work alongside you. They don’t have to be writing a paper; in fact, they can be playing Solitaire, for all you care. What matters is that you arrange to meet them at the library (or wherever you have decided to write) at a particular time and stay there for a specific period of time, thus creating accountability.
• Get help with your writing. If you are procrastinating because you think you are a weak writer, then ask someone (a Writing Center writing coach, a current or former professor or teaching assistant, a friend) to help you improve.
• Form a writing group. A writing group is a great way for undergraduate and more advanced writers alike to create accountability, get feedback, and simply get reminded that you are not alone in the struggle to produce and to improve your writing. See our writing group packet at for more information on how to form and sustain a writing group. Dissertation writers may benefit not only from joining a writing group but also from reading our handout on the dissertation . This handout was written by a former Writing Center staff member who eventually completed her dissertation.

Get unblocked

Sometimes, we procrastinate because we feel stuck on a particular essay or section of an essay. If this happens, you have several options:

• Turn off the screen. Type with a dark screen, so you can’t see what you’ve written, decide you don’t like it, and delete it immediately. Sometimes procrastination stems from insecurity about what to say, or whether we have anything to say. The important thing, in that case, is to get started and KEEP GOING. Turning off the screen may help lessen your fear and turn off your internal critic. When you turn it back on (or print out what you’ve written), you may find that you do have something to say, after all.
• Write about writing. Take 15 minutes and write a letter to yourself about why you don’t want to write this. This lets you vent your frustrations and anxieties. Then, Take 15 minutes and write about what you could do to get unstuck. You can also try writing about what you’re going to write, making an initial assessment of the assignment. You won’t have the pressure of writing an actual draft, but you will be able to get something down on paper.
• Write the easiest part first. You don’t have to start at the beginning. Whatever section you can do, do it! If you think that’s wimpy, and you would rather do the hardest part first so that you can get it out of the way, that’s fine—whatever works for you. If you start writing and you get stuck, write about why you’re stuck.
• Talk it out. Try tape-recording yourself speaking the ideas you want to include in the paper, and then transcribe the tape.

Make yourself accountable

Set a writing deadline (other than the paper’s due date) for yourself by making an appointment at the Writing Center or telling your TA (or a former TA) that you’re going to give them a draft on such-and-such a date. If you make your Writing Center appointment for several days before the paper is due, then you may be motivated to have a draft finished. Or set an earlier appointment at the Writing Center to have a conversation about your plans for the draft. Talking out your ideas with someone will help you get them organized for subsequent writing.

Leave your work out

Keeping your work (books, notes, articles, etc.) physically out, in full view, gives you a reminder that you are in the middle of the paper, or that you need to start. Also, if you write in more than one shift, it can be helpful to leave off in the middle of a paragraph and leave your ‘tools’ where they are. When you return to the paper, you’ll be able to “warm up” by finishing that paragraph. Starting a new section cold may be more difficult.

Work on improving your writing when you don’t have a deadline

Investigate your writing process. First of all, you may not think you have a thing called a “writing process.” But you do—everyone does. Describe your writing process in detail.

Ask yourself:

• When do I usually start on a paper?
• What tools do I need (or think I need) in order to write?
• Where do I write?
• Do I like quiet or noise when I write?
• How long a block of time do I need?
• What do I do before I start?
• What do I do at the end?
• How do I feel at the end (after I have turned it in)?

Then ask yourself:

• What do I like about my writing process?
• What do I want to change?

Once you can see your writing process, then you can make a decision to change it. But take it easy with this—only work on one part at a time. Otherwise, you’ll get overwhelmed and frustrated—and we all know where that leads, straight down the procrastination road.

Evaluate your writing’s strengths and weaknesses

If you aren’t ready to evaluate your writing process completely (and it’s okay if you aren’t), then you could try just listing your strengths and weaknesses as a writer. For instance, perhaps you are great at creating thesis statements, but you have trouble developing arguments. Or, your papers are very well-organized, but your thesis and argument tend to fall a little flat. Identifying these issues will help you do two things: 1) When you write, you can play to your strength; and 2) You can choose one weakness and do something about it when you DON’T have a deadline.

Now, doing anything when you don’t have a deadline may sound strange to a procrastinator, but bear with me. Let’s say you’ve decided that your writing is too wordy, and you want to work on being more concise. So, some time when you don’t have a paper—but you do have a free hour—you waltz into the Writing Center and tell your tutor, “Hey, I want learn to how to write more clearly.” You confer, and you come away with some simple strategies for eliminating wordiness.

Here is why this may make a difference the next time you write a paper, regardless of whether or not you have procrastinated (again!): You print out your draft. It’s 1 a.m. You go to bed. The next morning, you read over your paper (it’s due at noon). You say to yourself, “Hmmm, I notice I’m being too wordy.” BUT, rather than concluding, “Oh, well, it’s too late, there isn’t anything I can do about that,” (as you may have in the past), you can choose to employ some of what you learned (previously, when you weren’t under the gun) to make your writing more concise. You edit the paper accordingly. You turn it in.

When your instructor hands the papers back the following week, there are far fewer instances of “awkward,” “unclear,” etc. in the margins. Voila! You’ve made a positive change in your writing process!

What does this have to do with procrastination? Well, making one small change in your writing process creates momentum. You begin to feel more positive about your writing. You begin to be less intimidated by writing assignments. And—eventually—you start them earlier, because they just aren’t as big a deal as they used to be.

Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses in your writing gives you a sense of control. Your writing problems are solvable problems. Working on your writing when you don’t have a deadline helps you gain insight and momentum. Soon, writing becomes something that, while you may not look forward to it, you don’t dread quite as much. Thus, you don’t procrastinate quite as much.

This strategy also accounts for the fact that if you perceive procrastination as having been successful for you in the past, you aren’t going to give it up right away

Hone your proofreading and editing skills

If you procrastinate on writing because you don’t like to re-read what you have written, the good news is this: you can learn specific proofreading , revising , and editing strategies. If you finish your paper ahead of time, and you re-read it, and you don’t like it, you have options. Writing a first draft that you don’t like doesn’t mean you’re a terrible writer. Many writers—in fact, I would venture to say most—hate their first drafts. Neither Leo Tolstoy nor Toni Morrison produce(d) brilliant prose the first time around. In fact, Morrison (a big fan of revision) said recently that you don’t have to love your writing just because you wrote it! If you practice some revision and editing strategies, you may feel more comfortable with the idea of re-reading your papers. You’ll know that if you find weaknesses in the draft (and you will), you can do something to improve those areas.

Learn how to tell time

One of the best ways to combat procrastination is to develop a more realistic understanding of time. Procrastinators’ views of time tend to be fairly unrealistic. “This paper is only going to take me about five hours to write,” you think. “Therefore, I don’t need to start on it until the night before.” What you may be forgetting, however, is that our time is often filled with more activities than we realize. On the night in question, for instance, let’s say you go to the gym at 4:45 p.m. You work out (1 hour), take a shower and dress (30 minutes), eat dinner (45 minutes), and go to a sorority meeting (1 hour). By the time you get back to your dorm room to begin work on the paper, it is already 8:00 p.m. But now you need to check your email and return a couple of phone calls. It’s 8:30 p.m. before you finally sit down to write the paper. If the paper does indeed take five hours to write, you will be up until 1:30 in the morning—and that doesn’t include the time that you will inevitably spend watching TV.

And, as it turns out, it takes about five hours to write a first draft of the essay. You have forgotten to allow time for revision, editing, and proofreading. You get the paper done and turn it in the next morning. But you know it isn’t your best work, and you are pretty tired from the late night, and so you make yourself a promise: “Next time, I’ll start early!”

Make an unschedule

The next time you have a writing deadline, try using an unschedule to outline a realistic plan for when you will write. An unschedule is a weekly calendar of all the ways in which your time is already accounted for. When you make an unschedule, you consider not only your timed commitments such as classes and meetings, but also your untimed activities such as meals, exercise, errands, laundry, time with friends and family, and the like. It is not a list of what you should do in a given week; rather it is an outline of the time that you will necessarily spend doing other things besides writing.

Once you have made your unschedule, take a look at the blank spaces. These represent the maximum number of hours that you could potentially spend writing. By starting with these blank spaces as a guide, you will be able to more accurately predict how much time you will be able to write on any given day. You may be able to see, for instance, that you really don’t have five hours to spend writing on the night before the paper is due. By planning accordingly, you will not only get a better night’s sleep, you may also end up with a better paper!

The unschedule might also be a good way to get started on a larger writing project, such as a term paper or an honors thesis. You may think that you have “all semester” to get the writing done, but if you really sit down and map out how much time you have available to write on a daily and weekly basis, you will see that you need to get started sooner, rather than later. In addition, the unschedule may reveal especially busy weeks or months, which will help you budget time for long-term projects.

Perhaps most importantly, the unschedule can help you examine how you spend your time. You may be surprised at how much (or how little) time you spend watching television, and decide to make a change. It’s especially important that you build time for fun activities into your unschedule. Otherwise, you will procrastinate in order to steal time for relaxation.

You can also use the unschedule to record your progress towards your goal. Each time you work on your paper, for example, mark it on the unschedule. One of the most important things you can do to kick the procrastination habit is to reward yourself when you write something, even if (especially if) that writing is only a little piece of the whole. Seeing your success on paper will help reinforce the productive behavior, and you will feel more motivated to write later in the day or week.

Set a time limit

Okay, so maybe one of the reasons you procrastinate on writing projects is that you just plain hate writing! You would rather be at the dentist than sitting in front of your computer with a blank Microsoft Word document staring you in the face. In that case, it may be helpful to set limits on how much time you will spend writing before you do something else. While the notation “Must work on Hemingway essay all weekend” may not inspire you to sit down and write, “Worked on Hemingway essay for ½ hour” just might. Or, if you tell yourself that you will write “all weekend,” for instance, the sheer agony of the thought may keep you from doing any writing at all. If, however, you say that you will write for two hours on Saturday afternoon, you may actually accomplish something. The important thing here is to keep your commitment to yourself. Even if, at the end of the two hours, you think you could keep going, stop. Go outside and enjoy the weather. Your procrastinating self needs to be able to trust your new non-procrastinating self the next time you say you will only write for a certain amount of time. If you go overboard this time, then the next time you say, “I’ll write for two hours and then stop,” the procrastinator within will respond, “Yeah, right! I’m going rollerblading!”

On the other hand, it may work better for you to trick yourself into working on your paper by telling yourself you’re only going to write for two hours, but then continuing to work if you’re feeling inspired. Experiment with both approaches and see which one seems to work best for you.

Be realistic about how long it takes you to write

Procrastinators tend to be heroic about time; they estimate that it will take them two hours to complete a task that would take most people four. Once you have determined that procrastination is hurting your writing, begin taking notice of how long it actually takes you to write. Many students have a “page an hour” rule. Perhaps you can write a page in an hour if you are totally rested, fed, and focused, your roommate isn’t home, and the wind is blowing just right. But what if the phone rings, what if you are tired, and what if you have to go to the bathroom? When you estimate how long it will take you to write something, expect that there will be interruptions along the way.

Parting thoughts

As you explore why you procrastinate and experiment with strategies for working differently, don’t expect overnight transformation. You developed the procrastination habit over a long period of time; you aren’t going to stop magically. But you can change the behavior, bit by bit. If you stop punishing yourself when you procrastinate and start rewarding yourself for your small successes, you will eventually develop new writing habits. And you will get a lot more sleep.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Burka, Jane M., and Lenora M. Yuen. 1983. Procrastination: Why You Do It, What to Do About It Now . Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

Ellis, Albert, and William J. Knaus. 1977. Overcoming Procrastination . New York: Signet.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Procrastination Essay

Essay on Procrastination

Have you ever postponed your homework until the last minute? Or maybe you studied for a test the day before? 

Maybe it's too late to write a story until the last hour? We are all guilty of delaying jobs and postponing important work until the latest date. This is actually procrastination. It is the act of deliberately delaying any task or activity. In this case, we will look at the causes and solutions to this problem.

About Procrastination

As we shall see in this article, this is not a coincidence. Almost everyone is guilty of it at some point in their lives. So we ask ourselves this question - why do people procrastinate or are so busy all the time? 

We live in the 21st century when time is of the essence. However, we are wasting our precious resources by wasting our time.

Saint Kabir had advised: what you have to do tomorrow, do today; what you have to do today, do it now. Procrastination is the habit of delaying a task or an activity until a later date. The habit of procrastinating the doing things is one of the worst habits of a person. People tend to be slothful to put off the finishing of a piece of work, implementation of a plan till another time. Life is not certain and it is possible that circumstances may change and one may not be able to do the work at all. It is good to procrastinate on things that are bad, but we are right and what we have decided to do, we must do in time.

Reasons for Procrastinating

One of the major reasons for procrastinating on a task is slothfulness. When a person is indulged in luxuries and slothfulness, it will blunt his edge of urge for action. When a person starts fearing the outcome of the task, he tends to procrastinate the task for a later date. Other factors for procrastinating work for a later date are low self-esteem, weak determination, less focus and distraction and also high impulsiveness. 

Procrastination is Harmful

Procrastination is harmful in various ways. It maintains tension in mind. It will relieve you of this tension if you do the work right now. Putting off work till another time more often may keep us deprived of the benefits, which might have accrued to us from its having been done. Opportunity knocks at the door once. Opportunity lost once is lost forever. There is no guarantee that the circumstances will remain the same. They may change and you may have to repent later on over the fact that you missed the opportunity. Sometimes it may prove tragic and change the good side of your career to a bad one. 

A successful man is one who strikes the iron while it is hot. When procrastination becomes a habit, all cheerfulness and carefree living go out of life and we live a life of perpetual tension, which indeed is not a life worth living at all. While procrastination is harmful to individuals, it may be more harmful to groups, communities and nations. 

We must ask ourselves whether we do actually realise the dangers emanating from procrastination and, therefore, shun it. We will perhaps find the answer in the affirmative as well as in the negative. We are still procrastinating steps for development in certain sectors of our life. For example, we have been sadly procrastinating in the educational sector. Even after more than five decades of economic planning, we find half of our population illiterate. We have taken steps to eradicate illiteracy, but our steps are not fast enough. 

We have been procrastinating developing certain geographical regions of the country with the result that there are evident regional imbalances in terms of development. We have not yet been able to connect every village of India with a link road. This was the task of utmost importance, a task that ought to have been given priority in any scheme of development. Our pace of development could have been faster if proper planning and implementation had been done at the right time. 

While procrastination is regarded as a bad habit, undue hurry or haste is equally a bad tendency. Promptness of action is advisable, but an impulsive decision is fraught with undesirable consequences. One must not delay or procrastinate in arriving at a decision in crucial matters, but unless a well-thought-out decision has been taken, it is more often than not risky to convert into action. Decisions taken in a hurry or haste without cool and calculated deliberation are likely to lead one into blind alleys or unfathomed troughs which it is difficult to get out from. The golden rule is first to get satisfied with the correct decision. Action should immediately follow the correct decision. Action should immediately follow the correct decision. Evil actions contemplated as a consequence of anger, revenge, greed, larceny, lust should be put off as indefinitely as possible till they die their natural death. 

How to Avoid Procrastinating?

There are a few tips to curb the habit of procrastination. 

Slothfulness: 

We must shake off slothfulness altogether. One must be up and doing. Avoid indulgence in luxuries because this makes one blunt. 

Value of Time: 

Understanding the value of time is very important. Nothing great can be expected from one who does not understand the value of a minute, for seconds and minutes make an hour, a day, a month, a year and the whole life itself. If the value of a minute is descended deep into our mind and heart, sloth will disappear. 

Idleness: 

Idleness is fatiguing. One must, therefore oneself engage in some useful work like some household chores other than one's main occupation. 

To ward off procrastination, one must plan one's work. Detailed planning is necessary. The entire gamut of work may be divided into fragments and time fixed for completing each fragment will facilitate satisfaction and invigorating. What we must have to do right from the time we get up from bed down to the time we go to bed must be clear to us and we must stick to it religiously.

Prioritization:

One may arrange the array of work in order of priorities. How many things are to be done and in what order of priority they must be taken — once this is planned in advance, then most of the battle is won and we can get out of the habit of procrastinating tasks.

Why Do We Procrastinate?

Reasons for postponing a person may vary. It depends on the individual and the situation-to-situation. However, there are international reasons why people delay their activities and actions. 

One of the most important things is the fear of failure. When a person is slow to perform an important task or is not interested in completing it, the cause may be a deep fear of failure. It is human nature to avoid and fear failure. So by choosing not to complete the task, we can also avoid the consequences.

Another reason is a lack of focus and determination. Feelings of indifference and insecurity can often cause people to lose their will to do their jobs. 

This leads to self-control. Sometimes a lack of goals and objectives is also a reason for a person to lose focus. With no goal in mind, they end up wasting energy on other useless activities.

There are other reasons a person may tolerate it. At times, a person may be a perfectionist. This distracts them from other activities. And then there are other reasons like laziness, low energy levels, easy distractions, etc.

How Can You Stop Procrastination?

Although procrastination is a normal part of life for us, it can be extremely difficult to do so. Procrastination can ruin your life and cause you to lose control of your schedules and deadlines. So when procrastination fades, you need to be in control and in control.

One way to stop procrastinating is to turn a dreadful task into smaller steps. If a task or task is too difficult, we often put it off. But if the work is depleted, then we can deal with it one step at a time without frustration. You can also create a detailed timetable or timeline of some sort to help you with the steps.

Sometimes a change in the work environment can be beneficial. It can give you the energy you need to stop procrastinating and complete the task. If possible, get a friend or parent to check your progress. It helps keep motivation levels up and encourages you to complete the task on time.

The key is not to become too preoccupied with the mundane things of life. We are all victims of procrastination. As long as it doesn't interfere with your entire system, take a break and go back to work!

Short Essay on Procrastination

Procrastination is not a rare thing; nine out of ten people, mostly students, nowadays procrastinate their work until the very last moment and it is also realised that they often feel guilty due to continuous postposing of their important work. The reasons for procrastination vary from person to person and situation to situation.

However, some causes are universal and some may have a particular reason to delay their important actions or tasks. The fear of failure stands on the top and another reason why most people procrastinate is lack of motivation. 

Everyone needs motivation while starting a new task or action, but due to lack of motivation most, people procrastinate due to the hesitation of performing a new activity plus lack of motivation, while some procrastinate due to laziness, lack of interest and unwillingness to perform any work. 

However, the end product of procrastination is always negative, like people start feeling much guilty, less focused, worried about upcoming projects or actions etc. 

In conclusion, it should be stated that procrastination is rooted in many causes, such as numerous distractions, lack of motivation, fear of uncertainty and failure, and perfectionism. At the same time, the result stands the same with infinite consequences such as concern for career, studies, health, and personal qualities. Thus, procrastination prevents a person from rising through the ranks, succeeding in training, and developing a personality.

The major difference between a successful person and an unsuccessful person is that while the former put his decisions promptly into action and reaps the fruits, the latter procrastinates, thereby depriving himself of the fruit.

FAQs on Procrastination Essay

1. What is Procrastination really about?

Postponing or procrastination is the act of delaying or postponing activities until the last minute or beyond the deadline. Some researchers describe procrastination as "a form of self-indulgence that is characterised by unreasonable delays in performance despite negative consequences.

2. Why Are We Here?

We postpone activities that we find "difficult, unpleasant, contradictory or just boring or oppressive." If a task seems overwhelming or raises serious concerns, it is usually very easy to avoid it. Another reason people put things off, says Sirois, is lack of confidence.

3. What Are The 4 Types of Retreat?

They say that there are four main types of archetypes to avoid or procrastinate: the perpetrator, the negligent, the excessive, and the person who seeks new things.

4. Is procrastination a mental illness?

Some people spend a lot of time in the monastery until they can finish important daily tasks. They may have a strong desire to stop procrastination but may feel that they will not be able to do so. Delaying yourself is not a diagnosis of mental health. But yes, less control over your mind is a sign of mental illness.

The Psychological Origins of Procrastination—and How We Can Stop Putting Things Off

The psychology behind procrastination involves how we perceive of value, 

“I love deadlines,” English author Douglas Adams once wrote. “I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by.”

We’ve all had the experience of wanting to get a project done but putting it off for later. Sometimes we wait because we just don’t care enough about the project, but other times we care a lot – and still end up doing something else. I, for one, end up cleaning my house when I have a lot of papers to grade, even though I know I need to grade them.

So why do we procrastinate? Are we built to operate this way at some times? Or is there something wrong with the way we’re approaching work?

These questions are central to my research on goal pursuit , which could offer some clues from neuroscience about why we procrastinate – and how to overcome this tendency.

To do, or not to do

It all starts with a simple choice between working now on a given project and doing anything else: working on a different project, doing something fun or doing nothing at all.

The decision to work on something is driven by how much we value accomplishing the project in that moment – what psychologists call its subjective value. And procrastination, in psychological terms, is what happens when the value of doing something else outweighs the value of working now.

This way of thinking suggests a simple trick to defeat procrastination: find a way to boost the subjective value of working now, relative to the value of other things. You could increase the value of the project, decrease the value of the distraction, or some combination of the two.

For example, instead of cleaning my house, I might try to focus on why grading is personally important to me. Or I could think about how unpleasant cleaning can actually be – especially when sharing a house with a toddler.

It’s simple advice, but adhering to this strategy can be quite difficult, mainly because there are so many forces that diminish the value of working in the present.

The distant deadline

People are not entirely rational in the way they value things. For example, a dollar bill is worth exactly the same today as it is a week from now, but its subjective value – roughly how good it would feel to own a dollar – depends on other factors besides its face value, such as when we receive it.

The tendency for people to devalue money and other goods based on time is called delay discounting . For example, one study showed that, on average, receiving $100 three months from now is worth the same to people as receiving $83 right now. People would rather lose $17 than wait a few months to get a larger reward.

Other factors also influence subjective value, such as how much money someone has recently gained or lost . The key point is that there is not a perfect match between objective value and subjective value.

Delay discounting is a factor in procrastination because the completion of the project happens in the future. Getting something done is a delayed reward, so its value in the present is reduced: the further away the deadline is, the less attractive it seems to work on the project right now.

Studies have repeatedly shown that the tendency to procrastinate closely follows economic models of delay discounting. Furthermore, people who characterize themselves as procrastinators show an exaggerated effect . They discount the value of getting something done ahead of time even more than other people.

One way to increase the value of completing a task is to make the finish line seem closer . For example, vividly imagining a future reward reduces delay discounting .

No work is ‘effortless’

Not only can completing a project be devalued because it happens in the future, but working on a project can also be unattractive due to the simple fact that work takes effort.

New research supports the idea that mental effort is intrinsically costly ; for this reason, people generally choose to work on an easier task rather than a harder task. Furthermore, there are greater subjective costs for work that feels harder (though these costs can be offset by experience with the task at hand).

This leads to the interesting prediction that people would procrastinate more the harder they expect the work to be. That’s because the more effort a task requires, the more someone stands to gain by putting the same amount of effort into something else (a phenomenon economists call opportunity costs ). Opportunity costs make working on something that seems hard feels like a loss.

Sure enough, a group of studies shows that people procrastinate more on unpleasant tasks. These results suggest that reducing the pain of working on a project, for example by breaking it down into more familiar and manageable pieces, would be an effective way to reduce procrastination.

Your work, your identity

When we write that procrastination is a side effect of the way we value things, it frames task completion as a product of motivation, rather than ability.

In other words, you can be really good at something, whether it’s cooking a gourmet meal or writing a story, but if you don’t possess the motivation, or sense of importance, to complete the task, it’ll likely be put off.

It was for this reason that the writer Robert Hanks, in a recent essay for the London Review of Books, described procrastination as “a failure of appetites.”

The source of this “appetite” can be a bit tricky. But one could argue that, like our (real) appetite for food, it’s something that’s closely intertwined with our daily lives, our culture and our sense of who we are.

So how does one increase the subjective value of a project? A powerful way – one that my graduate students and I have written about in detail – is to connect the project to your self-concept. Our hypothesis is that projects seen as important to a person’s self-concept will hold more subjective value for that person.

It’s for this reason that Hanks also wrote that procrastination seems to stem from a failure to “identify sufficiently with your future self” – in other words, the self for whom the goal is most relevant.

Because people are motivated to maintain a positive self-concept , goals connected closely to one’s sense of self or identity take on much more value.

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

Get Our Newsletter

Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

Privacy Policy   Contact Us You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

More Stories

Building Classroom Discussions around JSTOR Daily Syllabi

Scaffolding a Research Project with JSTOR

Making Implicit Racism

The Diverse Shamanisms of South America

Recent posts.

• The Long History of Live Animal Export
• Wasp Viruses, Athleisure, and Humans in Flight
• Haunted Soldiers in Mesopotamia
• Debt-Trap Diplomacy
• The Post Office and Privacy

Support JSTOR Daily

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Solving Procrastination

Academic Procrastination: Examples, Consequences, Causes, and Solutions

Academic procrastination is a phenomenon where students unnecessarily postpone academic assignments, like studying for a test or working on a school project. This is a common problem, which can lead to issues like worse academic outcomes and increased stress.

The following article contains a comprehensive overview of academic procrastination. Its goal is to help you understand what academic procrastination looks like, what issues it leads to, what causes it, and how it can be dealt with successfully, based on relevant research on the topic.

Examples of academic procrastination

An example of academic procrastination is a student who has a week to study for an exam, but ends up postponing their studying unnecessarily until the night before, even though they keep wanting to get started. Another example of academic procrastination is a student who delays working on an important project for an entire semester, until right before it’s due.

In addition, other examples of academic procrastination include the following:

• A high-school student who wastes hours browsing social media before they finally manage to get started on a homework assignment.
• An undergraduate student who puts off studying for a test by doing unimportant chores, such as cleaning their room or baking snacks.
• A graduate student who delays for several days each time they need to work on their thesis.

Furthermore, academic procrastination can involve various other dilatory behaviors, such as sleeping, watching TV , or playing video games, and students often report that procrastination occupies over a third of their daily activities.

Prevalence of academic procrastination

Academic procrastination is common  among students , as a large portion of them procrastinate often and to a significant degree. For example, when it comes to college students, studies show that approximately 80%–95% of college students engage in procrastination to some degree, approximately 75% consider themselves to be procrastinators, and approximately 50% say that they procrastinate in a consistent and problematic manner.

Furthermore, additional studies have found procrastination in various other student populations , including those in elementary school , middle school , high school , and graduate school . In fact, procrastination is so common among students that the tendency to procrastinate on tasks until right before they are due is sometimes referred to as the student syndrome .

Note that the prevalence of academic procrastination varies based on the task involved. For example, a study on students in an introductory psychology course indicated that ~46% of them always or nearly always procrastinate on writing term papers, ~30% procrastinate on reading weekly assignments, ~28% procrastinate on studying for exams, ~23% procrastinate on attendance tasks, ~11% procrastinate on administrative tasks, and ~10% procrastinate on school activities in general.

Dangers of academic procrastination

Academic procrastination is associated with various negative effects , such as worse academic performance, worse emotional wellbeing, and worse mental and physical health. Accordingly, academic procrastination is often detrimental to those who engage in it.

Specifically, the following are the key issues that are associated with academic procrastination:

• Worse academic performance. For example, procrastination is associated with a wide range of academic issues , like  lower quality work, worse exam scores, worse grades, increased academic misconduct and dishonesty , increased course failures, increased course withdrawals, and an increased likelihood of dropping out (rather than graduating).
• Worse emotional wellbeing. For example, procrastination can lead to various negative emotions , like guilt , shame, and sadness.
• Worse mental and physical health. For example, procrastination can lead to various mental health issues , like stress , as well as physical health issues , like lack of sleep and exhaustion.

Many of these issues are interrelated. For example, when academic procrastination leads to increased negative emotions, it can also lead to increased stress at the same time. Similarly, when academic procrastination leads to increased stress, this can, in turn, lead to issues such as exhaustion, which increases the likelihood that people will procrastinate on academic tasks, and consequently suffer from worse academic performance.

In addition, the tendency to engage in procrastination is associated with a variety of issues from a career perspective, including lower salaries, shorter periods of employment, and a higher likelihood of unemployment. This can affect students who are employed while engaging in academic studies, as well as students who enter the job market after graduation.

Procrastination by academic professionals

Procrastination is a common problem among academic professionals , like high-school teachers and university faculty , just as it is among adults in general . It can cause various issues  for these professionals , like worse job performance, increased stress, worse emotional wellbeing, and lower job satisfaction.

Examples of this procrastination are a lecturer who unnecessarily delays preparing lesson plans for an upcoming course, and a professor who unnecessarily postpones writing an important grant proposal.

This behavior is sometimes called “academic procrastination”. However, this term is mainly used to refer to student procrastination. Procrastination by teachers and other academics is usually more accurately categorized as a form workplace procrastination , or as a more specific form of it, like  teacher procrastination and professor procrastination .

Causes of academic procrastination

Academic procrastination occurs when issues like anxiety and perfectionism outweigh students’ self-control and motivation. That’s why students often postpone academic tasks even when they want to get them done, and why they often only manage to start shortly before the deadline , when the increasing pressure finally pushes them to do their work.

Accordingly, there are various common internal and external causes of academic procrastination .

I nternal causes of academic procrastination include the following :

• Anxiety , for example when it comes to being anxious about studying in general.
• Fear of failure , for example when it comes to worrying about failing an upcoming exam.
• Perfectionism , for example when it comes to wanting to write an essay draft without any flaws.
• Task aversion , for example when it comes to wanting to avoid dealing with a homework assignment that’s perceived as boring.
• Sensation seeking , for example when it comes to finding assignments more exciting to work on assignments when there’s intense time pressure.
• Feeling overwhelmed , for example when it comes to being unsure about how to handle a large research project.
• Physical or mental exhaustion , for example when it comes to being tired due to a demanding academic workload.
• Lack of study or organizational skills , for example when it comes to not knowing how to set an effective study schedule.

Many of these issues can be attributed to negative past experiences. For example, if someone does badly in a number of course assignments, they might feel anxious when it comes to future assignments or exams in that course, which can cause them to procrastinate. However, this isn’t always the case, and lack of experience can also cause procrastination, for instance when it leads to low self-confidence.

Various personality traits can also influence the likelihood that people will engage in academic procrastination, as well as the ways in which they do so. For example, increased conscientiousness is associated with reduced procrastination in general. On the other hand, extraversion can lead to academic procrastination when students prioritize spending time with their friends over doing schoolwork, while neuroticism can lead to academic procrastination when it causes students to stress over an upcoming project that will have a significant effect on their grades.

Finally, certain underlying issues can also lead to or exacerbate academic procrastination. For example, general anxiety and depression can make students more likely to engage in rumination , in the form of repetitive negative thoughts, which can in turn increase their tendency to engage in procrastination. Similarly, issues such as low self-esteem or low self-efficacy may also lead to increased academic procrastination in some cases.

In addition, external causes of academic procrastination include the following :

• Poor study environment , for example because this environment is overly loud or filled with distractions .
• Unpleasant assignments , for example because an assignment requires students to use only a limited range of skills , which makes students more likely to perceive it as boring, and consequently more likely to be averse to it.
• Lack of clear directions or expectations , for example because the explanation of how a paper will be graded is incomplete, vague, or ambiguous .
• Lack of clear due dates , for example in terms of when the first draft of an essay should be submitted.
• Lack of communication , for example in the case of an instructor not responding to a student’s requests for clarificati0n.
• The instructor being too lax , for example by never enforcing any deadlines in their course.
• The instructor being too harsh , for example by providing unnecessarily unpleasant feedback on assignments.

External issues can sometimes lead to or exacerbate internal ones. For example, an instructor being too harsh can lead to fear of failure in a student who wouldn’t have it otherwise, or it can increase anxiety in an already anxious student.

Solutions to academic procrastination

Academic procrastination can be reduced by analyzing the situation, in terms of factors such as the number of students involved and the causes of their procrastination, and then implementing an appropriate solution, which consists of interventions such as intermediate deadlines, automated reminders, and self-regulation training.

The sub-sections below contain more information on the topic. Specifically, they first outline the general types of approaches that can be used to deal with academic procrastination, and then provide examples of specific interventions and techniques that can be used as part of these approaches.

Note that the information here focuses on resolving academic procrastination in students. Some of this is also relevant when it comes to solving procrastination among academic professionals, such as teachers and professors, but in some cases, it will be more effective to view their behavior as workplace procrastination instead, and to deal with it accordingly.

General approaches

There are three main types of approaches for dealing with academic procrastination:

• Student-led approach. This involves students taking most of the responsibility for reducing their academic procrastination, with little to no external guidance. External guidance in this case might include something as minimal as a lecturer mentioning the problem of procrastination and giving students a link to a relevant guide on the topic.
• Externally led approach. This involves stakeholders, such as educators or administrators, using relevant anti-procrastination techniques to reduce students’ procrastination, without directly discussing the issue of procrastination with the students. For example, this can involve an instructor setting a series of intermediate deadlines for all students in their course.
• Joint approach. This involves using both external guidance and having students take an active role in their attempts to stop procrastinating. For example, this can involve going over relevant anti-procrastination techniques with students, and helping them choose and implement their preferred ones.

None of these approaches is inherently superior to the others. Accordingly, the optimal approach in a given situation should be selected based on relevant considerations, such as effectiveness, cost, and practicality. For example, it’s important to take into account the number of students that you’re trying to help, since an approach that’s practical when it comes to helping a single student might not be practical if you’re trying to help dozens of students.

In this regard, an important factor to consider is how independent the students in question are . The more autonomy they display, the more they should generally be involved in the process of overcoming their procrastination, since this can increase their motivation and make the process more effective, while also contributing to their long-term personal growth.

This also highlights the importance of giving students a sense of control , even if they’re not the ones guiding the process. You can do this, for example, by helping students set goals for themselves, in terms of when and where they plan to do their work. This can not only increase their engagement and commitment to the work, but also help avoid academic procrastination that is rooted in issues such as resentment, rebellion, or low self-confidence.

Finally, note that the approaches for handling academic procrastination can be categorized using additional criteria. For example, one review of the topic states the following:

“Approaches in decreasing academic procrastination found in the literature can essentially be categorized into three groups; 1. therapeutic treatment, 2. therapeutic prevention, and 3. instructor/teacher intervention. The first two approaches are similar in that they employ therapeutic interventions to decrease procrastination. They differ regarding when the intervention is administered. Therapeutic treatment methods seek to intervene after a student has demonstrated procrastinatory behavior, e.g., late submission of first course assignment, whereas therapeutic preventions aim to prevent the negative effects of procrastination from the outset, e.g., therapeutic courses offered to students at the start of the semester… The third approach attempts to recruit the instructor of the course to provide nontherapeutic methods of decreasing procrastination tendencies among student participants.” — From “Academic interventions for academic procrastination: A review of the literature” (Zacks & Hen, 2018 )

As such, from both a theoretical and practical perspective, if you find that you need to categorize the different types of approaches, you can do so based on the criteria that are most relevant and helpful in your particular circumstances.

Specific techniques

Various techniques and interventions have been shown to help reduce academic procrastination. This includes, for example, teaching students motivation-regulation strategies and time management skills, or having them undergo interventions rooted in acceptance-based behavioral therapy or cognitive behavioral therapy. This also includes various educational interventions , such as  regular quizzes that motivate students to study continuously rather than wait until right before final exams, automated reminders to complete assignments , and personal communication with the instructor to build a plan for avoiding late assignments.

In general, it is best if the chosen anti-procrastination techniques and interventions are tailored to the specific needs of the students. For example, if a certain student is procrastinating because the only deadline they have is far in the future, then it will be helpful to provide them with a series of intermediate deadlines in order to prompt them to work. However, this isn’t always possible in practice, for example if there are many students involved, all of whom have different needs.

Nevertheless, when deciding how to deal with academic procrastination, it is beneficial to understand its root causes among students, as listed in the previous section. This can also help you identify common issues that should be avoided, such as unclear deadlines or overly harsh feedback.

From a practical perspective, the following are general things that you can do to reduce academic procrastination:

• Explain to students what procrastination is and what it looks like , and help them identify when they engage in it themselves.
• Show students why procrastination can be dangerous , when it comes to factors such as their academic performance, their career prospects, and their health.
• Explain to students what causes procrastination , and help them identify the causes of their own procrastination.
• Tell students about relevant anti-procrastination techniques , some of which are listed below, and help them pick the ones that are likely to help them the most.
• Implement anti-procrastination techniques on behalf of the students , for example by breaking apart large tasks into small manageable steps.
• Point students in the direction of resources that can help them with their procrastination , such as this article.

In addition, the following are some specific anti-procrastination techniques that you can use to reduce academic procrastination:

• Give clear directions. For example, consider a situation where students are assigned a paper to write. In this case, the instructor can provide clear directions and expectations by explaining what style of paper students should write, and what criteria will be used to grade it. From the students’ perspective, they can set clear goals for themselves by doing things such as deciding where, when, and how long they plan to work on the paper.
• Set intermediate milestones and deadlines. For example, consider a situation where students are assigned a research project. Instead of having a single deadline at the end of the semester, at which point the students have to turn in the entire project, it can be beneficial to scaffold the project, by setting intermediate milestones and deadlines throughout the semester, such as a point by which they have to decide on their topic, a point by which they have to create a project outline, and so on.
• Incentivize and reward progress. For example, from the instructor’s perspective, this can involve saying encouraging things to a student who previously procrastinated, but who now managed to submit multiple assignments on time. Similarly, from the students’ perspective, this can involve gamifying the studying process, for example by marking down streaks of days on which they successfully managed to achieve their study goals.
• Find ways to make studying more enjoyable. For example, an instructor can pick humorous examples to use in their homework assignments. Similarly, a student can decide to go somewhere pleasant to study, such as the library, and listen to energizing music while doing so.
• Give permission to make mistakes. For example, an instructor can emphasize to students that it’s okay to make some mistakes, especially on initial attempts and early drafts. Similarly, students can emphasize the same to themselves.
• Identify and resolve fear and anxieties. Figure out what students are afraid of, and resolve those fears . For example, if students are anxious because the feedback they receive on assignments is too harsh, an instructor can give feedback that is less unpleasant, while a student can try to find ways to avoid taking this feedback personally.
• Promote self-compassion.   Self-compassion can help reduce procrastination, as well as various issues that are associated with it, such as stress. It consists of three components: self-kindness , which involves being nice to oneself, common humanity , which involves recognizing that everyone experiences challenges, and mindfulness , which involves accepting one’s emotions in a non-judgmental manner.
• Promote self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is the belief in your ability to perform the actions needed to achieve your goals, and it can help reduce procrastination. To develop self-efficacy, students can try to identify the various strategies that they can use to successfully study and complete their assignments, and think about their ability to execute those strategies successfully; instructors can promote self-efficacy by helping students do this.

Furthermore, keep in mind that if a student suffers from underlying issues that cause procrastination, such as lack of sleep , depression , or ADHD , they will likely need to resolve that issue first, using professional help if necessary, in order to successfully overcome their procrastination.

Finally, there are two other important things to keep in mind when it comes to handling academic procrastination. First, most procrastinators need more than one technique in order to overcome their procrastination. Second, different techniques work better for different students in different circumstances, so just because a certain technique works well for some students, doesn’t mean that it will work well for others.

Additional resources

In addition to the present article, there are several important resources that can help you learn how to deal with academic procrastination:

• Overview of procrastination
• Guide on why people procrastinate
• Guide on how to stop procrastinating
• List of anti-procrastination apps

Browser does not support script.

• Autumn Term events schedule
• Student Voice
• You've got this
• LSE Volunteer Centre
• Key information
• School Voice
• My Skills and Opportunities
• Student Wellbeing Service
• PhD Academy
• LSE Careers
• Student Services Centre
• Timetable publication information
• Students living in halls
• Faith Centre

Student Struggles: Battling with Procrastination

The word “procrastination” was derived from Latin's "procrastinare ", that translates into: the prefix pro-, 'forward', and the suffix - crastinus , meaning 'till next day'.

So, procrastination etymologically means putting off something until tomorrow, a tomorrow that is usually less defined. Every student one time or another has been a victim of procrastination, that urge to eschew studying and postpone writing those essays for another day.

An American study in 2004 claims that no less than 70% of college students are chronic procrastinators. At such times, I prefer to do the laundry, some cleaning or cooking, or any other thing apart from putting a pen on paper! This is called trivialisation: pretending that procrastinatory behaviour is not actually procrastinating, but rather a task which is more important than the avoided one.

Since procrastination has been denounced a student’s worst enemy, it is therefore important to know some of its causes and how to manage them:

Distractions Distractions have been identified as one of the major causes of procrastination among students. The internet which remains one of man’s greatest inventions has also become one of man’s biggest distractions. Social media pervades our daily lives and often robs us of that precious study time. Videos games, TV and even bantering with friends can lead to us postponing school work.

Draw up a study schedule and develop the will to stick to it. You can switch off your Wifi, television and other potential sources of distraction for some time with the strong resolve to get some academic work done. It's high time we left Facebook for a few hours and faced our books. Sorry Zuckerberg!

Perfectionism and Fear of Failure

The fear of failure and not doing well in an assignment can paralyse some students and can put them off their work. Having no clue how to start writing an essay is often a good excuse to put it off until some kind of inspiration comes or until “the time is right”.

Instead of just waiting for the Muses to inspire us, we can break down our assignments into smaller steps; for a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Take the first step - consult your professor and classmates about your difficulties. They can help you onto the right track. There is no such thing as a perfect essay, but beginning in time gives you the opportunity to revaluate your work and make it stronger. The last-minute rush won't help much.

Lack of motivation is among the greatest causes of procrastination. At times, the reason we choose to do something else or do nothing at all instead of studying is because we lack interest in it. It is therefore important to revive this interest.

It’s a good idea to listen to motivational talks and stories of great people throughout history, especially our personal heroes and mentors. It is also useful to recount those moments to overcome obstacles and challenges. Reflecting on our academic journey so far can fill us with a sense of achievement and the hunger to do more.

Remember the big things you plan to achieve with this degree and the sacrifices you have made so far. Emphasise your strengths and surround yourself with those who encourage you to work hard. Join study groups and discuss academic subjects with friends. Be your greatest fan and cheer yourself to victory. And remember that the best time to begin that assignment is now.

Photo and words by LSE Social Media Ambassador Victor Agboga.

Procrastination Essay

500+ words procrastination essay.

Procrastination is a tendency, attitude or behavioural trait of a person lacking willpower and vitality to do work. Most people have a tendency to not complete their work, and leave it for some other time. When people procrastinate, instead of working on important meaningful tasks, they find themselves performing trivial activities. They spend their time watching TV, playing video games, checking Facebook, obsessively cleaning, pacing back and forth through the office, or maybe just sitting and staring at a wall. Afterwards, they feel powerless and are overcome with feelings of guilt and frustration. They often end up doing nothing. So, the habit of procrastination is very harmful as it wastes so much time. This Procrastination Essay will help in understanding the meaning of procrastination, its effect on students’ lives and ways to overcome procrastination. So, students must go through it and take ideas which help them write an effective essay on this topic. Moreover, they can also get the list of CBSE Essays on different topics for their practice. It will help them to participate in various essay writing competitions.

What is Procrastination?

Procrastination is the tendency to delay an intended action or decision. It is defined as the act of needlessly delaying tasks to the point of experiencing subjective discomfort. The illusory idea underlying procrastination is a feeling that ‘later is better. This is also the common reason behind the ‘tomorrow’ outlook on life, which forces people to postpone everything for a ‘tomorrow’ that never comes. When the next day dawns, the pattern resurfaces, and procrastinators excuse themselves by promising again that ‘I will do it tomorrow. Hence, procrastination is seen as a ‘tomorrow syndrome’.

Effect of Procrastination on Students’ Life

Since the dawn of time, people have suffered from procrastination. It is a serious problem, especially among students. Most of the students put off their homework and studies for later, thinking that they have plenty of time to get it done. However, the work gets delayed and results in compromising the quality of education. Research has shown that it takes more time to complete a task when a student allows his focus to drift and the task becomes more difficult for him.

Some students waste up to one-third of their time procrastinating. Procrastination can take many forms. For example, a student has a paper due on Monday morning, but he went skiing with friends all weekend instead of studying. When students procrastinate, then they always have the excuse of “not having enough” time. The reasons for delaying and avoiding tasks for students are rooted in fear and anxiety. This fear is about doing poor, losing control, looking stupid, and having one’s sense of self or self-concept challenged. They avoid doing work to avoid their abilities being judged. So, what can students do to overcome their tendencies to procrastinate? Below are a few tips and methods that can help them.

Tips and Methods to Overcome Procrastination

There are many ways to break the vicious circle of procrastination. A good first step to overcoming procrastination is to identify distractions and their possible solutions. Another is to finish the work in the allocated time. If a task seems too big or overwhelming, break it down into a series of smaller, more achievable tasks or steps that will add up to completing the job. Concentrate on taking the first step, then the next, until you complete the full journey. Whenever students find themselves procrastinating, they should think about the good things that will happen when they stop procrastinating. Set specific dates and times to begin or continue the work. Put up notes or reminders in prominent places like the fridge or a mirror, to remind them that work needs to be done.

It is difficult to leave a bad habit. It also takes time and can’t be done overnight. So, don’t expect from yourself that you will suddenly break up with your procrastinating behaviour. Be realistic and figure out the strategies that work best for you. Practise them, notice small improvements in procrastinating behaviour and reward yourself. There is no quick fix for procrastination – it takes time and effort, and surely, no one else can fix it for you.

Students must have found “Procrastination Essay” useful for improving their essay writing skills. Visit BYJU’S website to get the latest updates and study material on CBSE/ICSE/State Board/Competitive Exams, at BYJU’S.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Counselling

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

What Research Has Been Conducted on Procrastination? Evidence From a Systematical Bibliometric Analysis

Associated data.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Procrastination is generally perceived as a common behavioral tendency, and there are a growing number of literatures to discuss this complex phenomenon. To elucidate the overall perspective and keep abreast of emerging trends in procrastination research, this article presents a bibliometric analysis that investigates the panorama of overviews and intellectual structures of related research on procrastination. Using the Web of Science Database, we collected 1,635 articles published between 1990 and 2020 with a topic search on “procrastination” and created diverse research maps using CiteSpace and VOS viewer. Bibliometric analysis in our research consists of category distribution, keyword co-occurrence networks, main cluster analysis, betweenness centrality analysis, burst detection analysis, and structure variation analysis. We find that most research has focused on students' samples and has discussed the definition, classification, antecedents, consequences and interventions to procrastination, whereas procrastination in diverse contexts and groups remains to be investigated. Regarding the antecedents and consequences, research has mainly been about the relationship between procrastination and personality differences, such as the five-factor model, temperament, character, emotional intelligence, and impulsivity, but functions of external factors such as task characteristics and environmental conditions to procrastination have drawn scant attention. To identify the nature and characteristics of this behavior, randomized controlled trials are usually adopted in designing empirical research. However, the predominant use of self-reported data collection and for a certain point in time rather than longitudinal designs has limited the validation of some conclusions. Notably, there have been novel findings through burst detection analysis and structure variation analysis. Certain research themes have gained extraordinary attention in a short time period, have evolved progressively during the time span from 1990 to 2020, and involve the antecedents of procrastination in a temporal context, theoretical perspectives, research methods, and typical images of procrastinators. And emerging research themes that have been investigated include bedtime procrastination, failure of social media self-control, and clinical interventions. To our knowledge, this is almost the first time to conduct systematically bibliometric analysis on the topic of procrastination and findings can provide an in-depth view of the patterns and trends in procrastination research.

Introduction

Procrastination is commonly conceptualized as an irrational tendency to delay required tasks or assignments despite the negative effects of this postponement on the individuals and organizations (Lay, 1986 ; Steel, 2007 ; Klingsieck, 2013 ). Poets have even written figuratively about procrastination, with such phrases as “ Procrastination is the Thief of Time ,” and “ Procrastination is the Art of Keeping Up with Yesterday ” (Ferrari et al., 1995 ). Literal meanings are retained today in terms of time management. The conceptualizations of procrastination imply inaction, or postponing, delaying, or putting off a decision, in keeping with the Latin origins of the term “pro-,” meaning “forward, forth, or in favor of,” and “-crastinus,” meaning “tomorrow” (Klein, 1971 ). Time delay is just the behavioral reflection, while personality traits, cognitive and motivational process, as well as contextual conditions are in-depth inducements to procrastination. Procrastination can be viewed as purposive and irrational delay so as to miss the deadlines (Akerlof, 1991 ; Schraw et al., 2007 ).

Procrastination is believed to be a self-regulation failure that is associated with a variety of personal and situational determinants (Hen and Goroshit, 2018 ). Specifically, research suggests that task characteristics (e.g., unclear instructions, the timing of rewards and punishment, as well as task aversiveness), personality facets (e.g., the five-factor model, motivation, and cognition), and environmental factors (e.g., temptation, incentives, and accountability) are the main determinants of procrastination (Harris and Sutton, 1983 ; Johnson and Bloom, 1995 ; Green et al., 2000 ; Wypych et al., 2018 ). Procrastination can be an impediment to success, and may influence the individual's mood, and increase the person's anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem (Ferrari, 1991 ; Duru and Balkis, 2017 ). Furthermore, a person with procrastination is prone to poor performance, with lower exam scores, slower job promotions, and poorer health (Sirois, 2004 ; Legood et al., 2018 ; Bolden and Fillauer, 2020 ). Importantly, if policymakers postpone conducting their decision-making until after the proper timing, that procrastination can cause a significant and negative impact on the whole society, such as the cases with the COVID-19 pandemic management in some countries (Miraj, 2020 ).

In practice, procrastination is stable and complex across situations, ranging from students' academic procrastination, to staffs' work procrastination, to individuals' bedtime procrastination, to administrative behavior procrastination when government organizations face multiple tasks in national governance, and even to delayed leadership decision-making in crisis situations in global governance (Nevill, 2009 ; Hubner, 2012 ; Broadbent and Poon, 2015 ; Legood et al., 2018 ). As for science research, procrastination has attracted more and more attention and been studied extensively. Personally, possible explanations for emerging research focuses mainly consist of two aspects. On one hand, procrastination with high prevalence and obvious consequences highlights the importance to explore the complex phenomenon deeply, especially the meteoric rise in availability of information and communications technologies (ICTs) amplifies chronic procrastination, such as problematic social media use, smartphone addictions as well as mobile checking habit intrusion (Ferrari et al., 2007 ; Przepiorka et al., 2021 ; Aalbers et al., 2022 ). On the other hand, more and more basic and milestone research emerges in large numbers, which set the foundation for latecomer' further exploration toward procrastination. In particular, it can't be ignored the efforts of those productive authors in different periods to drive the knowledge development of procrastination.

Procrastination research has experienced tremendous expansion and diversification, but systematic and overview discussion is lacking. Several meta-analyses about procrastination have emerged, but they emphasize more on specific topics (Steel, 2007 ; Sirois et al., 2017 ; Malouff and Schutte, 2019 ). Furthermore, the number of newly published articles is increasing, so it becomes difficult to fully track the relevant domain literature. In order to grasp knowledge development about the fast-moving and complex research field, bibliometric analysis is necessary to construct diagram-based science mapping, so as to provide a comprehensive and intuitive reference for subsequent researchers. Thus, this article emphasizes on the following major research question: what is the intellectual base and structure of procrastination research? How does the emerging direction of procrastination develop? In our research, bibliometric analysis included the annual distribution of literature, distribution of categories, keyword co-occurrence networks, main research clusters, high citation betweenness centrality, and the strongest citation bursts, as well as the recent publications with transformative potential, in order to look back on the early development of procrastination research and look forward to the future transformation of that research. For both scholars and members of the public, this study can comprehensively enhance their understanding of procrastination and can provide overall perspectives for future research.

Data and Methodology

Bibliometric analysis is a quantitative method to investigate intellectual structures of topical field. On the basis of co-citation assumption that if two articles are usually cited together, then there are high associations between those articles, bibliometric analysis can reflect the scientific communicational structures holistically (Garfield, 1979 ; Chen et al., 2012 ). Bibliometric techniques, such as CiteSpace, VOSviewer, HistCite, can generate the science maps based on plenty of literature concerning certain domain. Through the process of charting, mining, analyzing, sorting, and displaying knowledge, science mapping can extract pivotal information from huge complex literature, present knowledge base and intellectual structure of a given field visually, then researchers even general individual can quickly grasp one subject's core structure, development process, frontier field and the whole knowledge framework (Chen, 2017 ; Widziewicz-Rzonca and Tytla, 2020 ). Bibliometric analysis is commonly regarded as a complementary method to traditional structured literature reviews such as narrative analysis and meta-analysis (Fang et al., 2018 ; Jiang et al., 2019 ). Traditional literature analysis tends to labor intensive with subjective preferences, and faces difficulties in analyzing larger body of literature, whereas bibliometric analysis provides a more objective approach for investigating considerable literature's intellectual structure through statistical analysis and interactive visual exploration.

In order to master the characteristics of procrastination research, the study adopted the bibliometric software of CiteSpace and VOSviewer to analyze the literature on procrastination during the time period 1990–2020. The software tool VOSviewer is designed for creating maps of authors, journals, and keyword co-occurrences based on network data (van Eck and Waltman, 2010 ), whereas CiteSpace is applied to conduct co-citation analysis, including centrality betweenness analysis, burst detection, and the emerging trends of research (Chen, 2006 , 2017 ). In our study, we adopted the CiteSpace (5.7.R1) and VOSviewer (1.6.15) software together. Specifically, co-citation analysis mainly depends on CiteSpace software, and co-occurrence analysis is conducted through VOS viewer (Markscheffel and Schroeter, 2021 ).

Though there is one similar bibliometrics analysis toward this topic (Tao et al., 2021 ), related research just focuses on academic procrastination, and mainly conducts co-occurrence analysis using VOSviewer, so as to there is a lack of analysis to core co-citation structures including high betweenness centrality articles, citation burst research and structure variation analysis. To offer insight into the intellectual structure of procrastination research, we further employ CiteSpace — a java application including bibliometric analysis, data mining algorithms and visualization methods developed by Chen — to visualize and elucidate vital trends and pivotal points about knowledge development.

To conduct our bibliometric analysis of procrastination research, we collected bibliographic records from the Web of Science Core Collection as of December 31, 2020. Web of Science is currently the most relevant scientific platform regarding systematic review needs, allowing for a “Topic” query, including searching a topic in the documents' “title”, “abstract”, “author keywords” and “keywords plus” of the documents being reviewed (Yi et al., 2020 ). A topic search strategy is broad enough to be used in science mapping (Olmeda-Gomez et al., 2019 ). Given the aim of the study, records were downloaded if they had the term “procrastination” in the “Topic” field. After restricting the type of publication to “Article” for the years 1900–2020, we had searched 2105 papers about procrastination research.

Figure 1 shows the yearly distribution of 2105 literature during 1900–2020, and it can be classified into three phases. In phase I (1900–1989), the annual number of publications never exceeded 10. In phase II (1990–2010), the annual quantity gradually increased from 11 papers in 1991 to 48 in 2010. The annual number of publications had begun to grow in this period, but remained below 50 papers yearly. In phase III (2011–2020), however, the procrastination research experienced a dramatic growth, with 255 literature in the year 2020. Although procrastination research appeared as early as 1900s, it had a stable total volume until the 1990s, when it developed sustained growth, and that growth became extraordinary during the 2010s. Therefore, this research emphasized centered on 1,635 literature that were published during the time span 1990–2020.

Distribution of publications on the topic of procrastination, 1900-2020.

Panoramic Overview of Procrastination Research

Category distribution.

Procrastination research has been attracting increasing attention from scholars, and it has been successfully integrated into various scientific fields. With the help of CiteSpace software, we present in Figure 2 the timelines of the various disciplines that are involved in procrastination research, and the cumulative numbers of literature that have been published.

Distribution of categories involved in procrastination research.

As Figure 2 shows, the size of node on the horizontal lines represents the quantity of literature published. Node colors denote the range of years of occurrence, and purple outlining is an indication of those articles with prominent betweenness centrality, and red nodes present references with high citation burst (Chen, 2017 ). Besides, the uppermost line shows the timeline of different disciplines, and the numbers on the longitudinal lines describe the distinct categories of procrastination research, of which are arranged vertically in the descending order of cluster's size. Clusters are numbered from 0, i.e Cluster #0 is the largest cluster and Cluster #1 is the second largest one. Specifically, the earlier research about procrastination occurs in the Psychology and Social Science disciplines. Subsequently, research has expanded into Computer Science and Information Systems, Economics, the Neurosciences, the Environmental Sciences, Ethics, Surgery, and general Medicine. As the connections arc in the Figure 2 presents, those categories #0 Psychology and Social Sciences, #1 Computer Science, and #2 Economics interact actively, but the interdisciplinary research about the remaining categories, such as #9 Medicine, #5 Ethics, and #4 Environmental Science, is not active.

Our analysis of the category distribution reveals two aspects of the characteristics about procrastination research. One, related research mostly has its roots in the Psychology and Social Science disciplines, and interdisciplinary research needs to be improved. And Two, the foundational literature dates back to the 1990s, and transformational exploration is currently needed in order to further develop the research on procrastination.

Keyword Co-occurrence Network: Core Contents

Analysis of co-occurring keywords is often used to obtain the content of research fields. Using the VOS viewer, we obtained a total of 5,203 keywords and created a co-occurrence network. As mentioned above, the size of a node represents the number of times that a specific keyword occurs. Several keywords turn up frequently, such as Procrastination, Performance, Academic Procrastination, Motivation, Personality, Self-regulation, Self-control, and Behavior. To create a readable map, the “minimum number of occurrences” is set to 20, and the final network includes 90 high-frequency keywords and five clusters with 2,650 links, as is shown in Figure 3 .

Keywords co-occurrence network for procrastination research.

Among the five clusters depicted in Figure 3 , the blue cluster is mainly related to the definition of procrastination, with keywords such as Procrastination, Delay, Deadlines, Choice, Self-Control, and Implementation Intentions. Procrastination is a complex phenomenon, and previous research has elaborated on the core traits about procrastination from various dimensions. Mainstream views hold that procrastination can be defined as the intentional delay of work because of a self-regulation failure, time-management inefficiency, short-term benefits, a gap between intention and action (Tice and Baumeister, 1997 ; Steel, 2007 ; Pychyl and Flett, 2012 ; Klingsieck, 2013 ), or missing a deadline and causing negative outcomes (Johnson and Bloom, 1995 ; Howell and Watson, 2007 ; Sirois, 2021 ).

The cluster in red in Figure 3 involves procrastination performance in relation to different life-domains, including Academic Achievement, Life Satisfaction, Online Learning, and Technology Uses. Previous research has elaborated on procrastination as being negatively correlated with performance. However, intrinsic motivation, self-regulated learning, and time-management have been shown to relieve the procrastination behavior (Wolters, 2003 ; Howell and Watson, 2007 ; Baker et al., 2019 ).

The green cluster highlights traits associated with procrastination. Related research in that cluster mostly discusses the correlation between the five-factor model (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness) and procrastination (Schouwenburg and Lay, 1995 ). In addition, personality traits including indecisiveness, indecision, and perfectionism have been elaborated upon (Klingsieck, 2013 ; Tibbett and Ferrari, 2019 ). Furthermore, to measure the trait of procrastination itself, various scales have been developed, such as the General Procrastination Scale, Decisional Procrastination Questionnaire, Procrastination at Work Scale, Irrational Procrastination Scale, Adult Inventory of Procrastination Scale and so on (Lay, 1986 ; Ferrari et al., 1995 ; Steel, 2010 ; Metin et al., 2016 ). The validity and reliability of those scales have also been investigated fully.

The cluster presented in yellow depicts studies that focuses on academic procrastination, and especially those that discuss the antecedents of the prevalent behavior, such as Anxiety, Perfectionism, Self-efficacy, Depression, and Stress (Schraw et al., 2007 ; Goroshit, 2018 ). Owing to their accessibility for use as a research sample, a large body of procrastination research has chosen students in an academic setting as the research objects. Researchers have found that academic procrastination is an impediment to academic performance, especially for very young students. Notably, too, female students may perform lower levels of academic procrastination than males do.

The last cluster, presented in purple, relates to chronic procrastination's involvement in health and addiction, for either adults or adolescents. Discussion about chronic procrastination is growing, and interventions can be effective in relieving this behavior.

From the analysis of co-occurrence keywords, we can infer that procrastination research has been developing steadily. The fundamental discussion has become more adequate and persuasive in regard to the definition, the individual differences, and the antecedents of procrastination, and a discussion of how to relieve the behavior has begun.

Main Research Cluster: Core Theme and Hot Topics

Comparing to keyword co-occurrence network analyses, cluster analysis can help us grasp the primary themes in procrastination research. Clusters are based on the assumption that if two references are often cited together, they may be associated in some way (Chen et al., 2012 ; Pan et al., 2019 ). Eventually, related references shape diverse co-citation networks. Clustering is a procedure to classify co-cited references into groups, with references in the same clusters being tightly connected with each other but loosely associated with other clusters (Chen et al., 2010 ).

Based on the references of the top 50 articles with the most citations every year (if the number was less than 50 in a certain year, then all of the articles were combined), the final network contained 982 references and we were able to develop the final cluster landscape. Two procedures are used to label each cluster: (1) retrieval of keywords from the citing articles using the log likelihood ratio, and (2) retrieval of terms contained in the cited articles with latent semantic indexing (Olmeda-Gomez et al., 2019 ). In our research, we adopted the log-likelihood ratio (LLR) method to label the clusters automatically. Given the related structural and time-based values, articles in the co-citation network are assigned to each cluster. Eventually, the network was divided into 23 co-citation clusters.

In addition, two critical parameters, silhouette and modularity, are used to measure whether clusters are available and whether they are well-constructed. Silhouette indicates the homogeneity of clusters, whereas modularity measures whether the network is reasonably divided into independent clusters. The silhouette value ranges from −1 to 1, and the modularity score ranges from 0 to 1. When values of the two metrics are high, the co-citation network is well-constructed (Chen et al., 2010 ; Widziewicz-Rzonca and Tytla, 2020 ). As is shown in Figure 4 , the mean silhouette score of 0.9223 suggested that the homogeneity of these clusters was acceptable, and the modularity score of 0.7822 indicated that the network was reasonably divided.

Landscape view of co-citation network of procrastination research.

In our research, we summed the largest nine clusters. As is shown in Table 1 , the silhouette value for all clusters was higher than 0.8, suggesting the references in each cluster were highly homogeneous. The labels of these clusters were controlled trial, avoidant procrastination, conscientiousness procrastination, smoking cessation, explaining lack, academic achievement, procrastinatory media use, career indecision, and goal orientation.

Summary of the nine largest clusters in procrastination research.

In Table 1 , the year in the far-right column indicated the average year when the reference was cited. Ranking the clusters by the mean cited year, we can follow the development of research themes. During the 1990s, research themes focused on discussions about the antecedents of procrastination. For example, Lay ( 1988 ) discussed that the self-regulation model cannot explain procrastination fully, and errors in estimations of the time taken to complete a task may be attributed to procrastination. Procrastinators were thought to tend to lack conscientiousness and goal orientation as well as to be motivated by neurotic avoidance (Ferrari et al., 1995 ; Elliot and Harackiewicz, 1996 ). Besides, procrastination was prevalent throughout our lifespan, and empirical research on procrastination conducted through controlled trials had considered various settings or scenarios, such as academic procrastination, smoking cessation, career indecision, and in the most recent years, media use (Klassen et al., 2008 ; Germeijs and Verschueren, 2011 ; Du et al., 2019 ). Because procrastination was negatively associated with performance, life satisfaction, health and well-being, research on procrastination avoidance and intervention, including strengths-based training and cognitive behavioral therapy had attracted the most attention from scholars (van Eerde, 2003 ; Balkis and Duru, 2016 ; Visser et al., 2017 ).

Intellectual Structure of Procrastination Research

Co-citation analysis and clustering analysis form the cornerstone for bibliometric investigation (Olmeda-Gomez et al., 2019 ), especially for the microscopic intellectual structures of the science, such as betweenness centrality, burst detection, and structural variation analysis (Pan et al., 2019 ). Based on the cited references network during the period of 1990–2020, we generated a landscape visualization of intellectual structures about procrastination research. The section consists of three parts: (1) Betweenness Centrality Analysis captures the bridge nodes, which represents the landmark and pivotal literature of a scientific field (Freeman, 1978 ). (2) Burst Detection Analysis is used to detect the emergent and sharp increases of interest in a research field (Kleinberg, 2003 ), which is a useful method for easily tracing the development of research focus and research fronts. (3) Structural Variation Analysis (SVA) is an optional measurement to identify whether newly published articles have the potential to transform the citation network in the latest years. Newly published articles initially have fewer citations and may be overlooked. To overcome the limitation, structural variation analysis often employs zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) and negative binomial (NB) models to detect these transformative and potential literature (Chen, 2013 ).

Betweenness Centrality Analysis

Literature with high betweenness centrality tends to represent groundbreaking and landmark research. On the basis of our co-citation network on procrastination research for the period 1990–2020, we chose the top 10 articles to explore (see Supplementary Material for details). Related research mainly focuses on three areas.

Definition and Classification of Procrastination

Procrastination is described as the postponement of completion of a task or the failure to meet deadlines, even though the individual would meet adverse outcomes and feel uncomfortable as a result (Johnson and Bloom, 1995 ). Extracting from authoritative procrastination scales, Diaz-Morales et al. ( 2006 ) proposed a four-factor model of procrastination: dilatory behaviors, indecision, lack of punctuality, and lack of planning. Procrastination is commonly considered to be a pattern of self-regulation failure or self-defeating behavior (Tice and Baumeister, 1997 ; Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ).

The most popular classification is the trinity of procrastination: decisional, arousal, and avoidant procrastination (Ferrari, 1992 ). Using the General Behavioral Procrastination Scale and Adult Inventory of Procrastination Scale, Ferrari et al. ( 2007 ) measured the difference between arousal and avoidant procrastination, and they elaborated that those two patterns of procrastination showed similarity and commonality across cultural values and norms. However, by conducting a meta-analytic review and factor analyses, Steel ( 2010 ) found that evidence for supporting the tripartite model of procrastination may not be sufficient. Research has reached a consensus about the basic definition of procrastination, but how to classify procrastination needs further discussion.

Procrastination Behavior in a Temporal Context

Procrastination is related to time management in its influence on one's behavior. Non-procrastinators or active procrastinators have better time control and purposive use of time (Corkin et al., 2011 ). However, time management is an obstacle to procrastinators. From the temporal disjunction between present and future selves, Sirois and Pychyl ( 2013 ) pointed out that procrastinators tended to give priority to short-term mood repair in the present, even though their future self would pay for the inaction. Similarly, in a longitudinal study Tice and Baumeister ( 1997 ) pointed out that maladjustment about benefits-costs in participants' timeframe shaped their procrastination. When a deadline is far off, procrastination can bring short-term benefits, such as less stress suffering and better health, whereas early benefits are often outweighed by possible long-term costs, including poor performance, low self-esteem, and anxiety. These viewpoints confirm that procrastination is a form of self-regulation failure, and that it involves the regulation of mood and emotion, as well as benefit-cost tradeoffs.

Causes of and Interventions for Procrastination

Procrastination shows significant stability among persons across time and situations. Predictors of procrastination include personality traits, task characteristics, external environments, and demographics (Steel, 2007 ). However, typically, empirical research has mostly focused on the relationship between the five-factor model and procrastination behavior. Johnson and Bloom ( 1995 ) systematically discussed five factors of personality to variance in academic procrastination. Research also had found that facets of conscientiousness and neuroticism were factors that explained most procrastination. In alignment with these findings above, Schouwenburg and Lay ( 1995 ) elaborated that procrastination was largely related to a lack of conscientiousness, which was associated with six facets: competence, order, dutifulness, achievement-striving, self-discipline, and deliberation. Meanwhile, impulsiveness (a facet of neuroticism) has some association with procrastination, owing to genetic influences (Gustavson et al., 2014 ). These discussions have established a basis for research about personality traits and procrastination (Flett et al., 2012 ; Kim et al., 2017 ).

To relieve procrastination, time management (TM) strategies and clinical methods are applied in practice. Glick and Orsillo ( 2015 ) compared the effectiveness of those interventions and found that acceptance-based behavior therapies (ABBTs) were more effective for chronic procrastinators. Regarding academic procrastination, Balkis ( 2013 ) discussed the role of rational beliefs in mediating procrastination, life satisfaction, and performance. However, there is no “Gold Standard” intervention for procrastination. How to manage this complex behavior needs further investigation.

Burst Detection Analysis

A citation burst indicates that one reference has gained extraordinary attention from the scientific community in a short period of time, and thus it can help us to detect and identify emergent research in a specialty (Kleinberg, 2003 ). A citation burst contains two dimensions: the burst strength and the burst status duration. Articles with high strength values can be considered to be especially relevant to the research theme (Widziewicz-Rzonca and Tytla, 2020 ). Burst status duration is labeled by the red segment lines in Figure 5 , which presents active citations' beginning year and ending year during the period 1990-2020. As can be seen in Figure 5 , we ranked the top 20 references (see Supplementary Material for details) with the strongest citation bursts, from the oldest to the most recent.

Top 20 references with the strongest citation bursts.

To systematically investigate the active areas of procrastination research in different time periods, we divided the study's overall timespan into three time periods. During the period 1990 through 1999, there were six references with high citation bursts, with two of them by Ferrari and a third by Ferrari, Johnson, and McCown. Subsequently, in 2000 through 2009, there were eight reference bursts, and the meta-analysis and theoretical review by Steel ( 2007 ) had the highest citation burst among those 20 references. From the period 2010 through 2020, six references showed high citation bursts.

Period I (1990–1999): Preliminary Understanding of Procrastination's Antecedents

How one defines procrastination is important to interventions. During the early period of procrastination research, scholars paid significant attention to define procrastination and discuss its antecedents. Time delay in completing tasks constitutes the vital dimension that distinguishes procrastination behavior, and that distinction has set the foundation for future exploration of the behavior. Lay ( 1988 ) found that errors in estimations of time led to procrastination, then identified two types of procrastinators: pessimistic procrastinators and optimistic ones, according to whether one is optimistic or pessimistic about judgments of time. In addition, the timeframe or constraint scenario influences one's behavioral choices. Procrastinators tend to weigh short-term benefits over long-term costs (Tice and Baumeister, 1997 ).

However, time delay is just a behavioral representation, and personality traits may be in-depth inducements to procrastination behavior (Ferrari, 1991 ; Ferrari et al., 1995 ). Schouwenburg and Lay ( 1995 ) empirically studied and elaborated upon the relationship between the five-factor model and procrastination facing a sample of students, and their findings showed consistency with research by Ferrari ( 1991 ) which demonstrated that the trait facets of lacking conscientiousness and of neurotic avoidance were associated with procrastination. In addition, Ferrari ( 1992 ) evaluated two popular scales to measure procrastination: the General Procrastination (GP) scale and the Adult Inventory for Procrastination (AIP) scale. Regarding the measurement of procrastination, a variety of scales have been constructed to further enhance the development of procrastination research.

Period II (2000–2009): Investigation of Cognitive and Motivational Facets and Emergence of Various Research Methods

During period II, procrastination research with high citation bursts focused largely on two dimensions: behavioral antecedences and empirical methods. On one hand, discussions about cognitive and motivational antecedents spring up. A series of studies find that cognitive and motivational beliefs, including goal orientation, perceived self-efficacy, self-handicapping, and self-regulated learning strategies, are strongly related to procrastination (Wolters, 2003 ; Howell and Watson, 2007 ; Klassen et al., 2008 ). Specifically, Howell and Watson ( 2007 ) examined the achievement goal framework with two variables, achievement goal orientation and learning strategies usage, in which four types of goal orientation can be derived by the performance vs. mastery dimension and the approach vs. avoidance dimension. Their research found that procrastination was attributed to a mastery-avoidance orientation, whereas it was adversely related to a mastery-approach orientation. Moreover, Chu and Choi ( 2005 ) identified two types of procrastinators, active procrastinators versus passive procrastinators, in terms of the individual's time usage and perception, self-efficacy beliefs, motivational orientation, stress-coping strategies, and final outcomes. This classification of procrastinators has aroused a hot discussion about procrastination research (Zohar et al., 2019 ; Perdomo and Feliciano-Garcia, 2020 ). Cognitive and motivational antecedents are complementary to personality traits, and the antecedents and traits together reveal the complex phenomenon.

In addition, there are various research methods being applied in the research, such as meta-analyses and grounded theory. Having the strongest citation burst in period II, research that was based on a meta-analysis of procrastination by Steel ( 2007 ) elaborated on temporal motivation theory (TMT). Temporal motivational theory provides an innovative foothold for understanding self-regulation failure, using four critical indicators: expectancy, value, sensitivity to delay, and delay itself. Similarly, van Eerde ( 2003 ) conducted a meta-analysis to examine the relationship between procrastination and personality traits, and proposed that procrastination was negatively related to conscientiousness and self-efficacy, but was also actively associated with self-handicapping. Procrastinators commonly set deadlines, but research has found that external deadlines may be more effective than self-imposed ones (Ariely and Wertenbroch, 2002 ). Furthermore, Schraw et al. ( 2007 ) constructed a paradigm model through grounded theory to analyze the phenomenon of academic procrastination, looking at context and situational conditions, antecedents, phenomena, coping strategies, and consequences. These diverse research methods are enhancing our comprehensive and systematical understanding of procrastination.

Period III (2010–2020): Diverse Focuses on Procrastination Research

After nearly two decades of progressive developments, procrastination research has entered a steady track with diverse current bursts, on topics such as type distinction, theoretical perspective, temporal context, and the typical image of procrastinators. Steel ( 2010 ) revisited the trinity of procrastination — arousal procrastinators, avoidant procrastinators, and decisional procrastinators — and using the Pure Procrastination Scale (PPS) and the Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS), he found that there was no distinct difference among the three types. Regarding research settings, a body of literature has focused on academic procrastination in-depth, and that literature has experienced a significant citation burst (Kim and Seo, 2015 ; Steel and Klingsieck, 2016 ). For example, academic procrastination is associated more highly with performance for secondary school students than for other age groups.

Notably, theoretical discussions and empirical research have been advancing synchronously. Klingsieck ( 2013 ) investigated systematic characteristics of procrastination research and concluded that theoretical perspectives to explain the phenomenon, whereas Steel and Ferrari ( 2013 ) portrayed the “typical procrastinator” using the variables of sex, age, marital status, education, community location, and nationality. Looking beyond the use of time control or time perception to define procrastination, Sirois and Pychyl ( 2013 ) compared the current self and the future self, then proposed that procrastination results from short-term mood repair and emotion regulation with the consequences being borne by the future self. In line with the part of introduction, in the last 10 years, research on procrastination has flourished and knowledge about this complex phenomenon has been emerging and expanding.

Structure Variation Analysis

Structure variation analysis (SVA) can predict the literature that will have potential transformative power in the future. Proposed by Chen ( 2012 ), structure variation analysis includes three primary metrics — the modularity change rate, cluster linkage, and centrality divergence — to monitor and discern the potential of newly published articles in specific domains. The modularity change rate measures the changes in and interconnectivity of the overall structure when newly published articles are introduced into the intellectual network. Cluster linkage focuses on these differences in linkages before and after a new between-cluster link is added by an article, whereas centrality divergence measures the structural variations in the divergence of betweenness centrality that a newly published article causes (Chen, 2012 ; Hou et al., 2020 ). The values of these metrics are higher, and the newly published articles are expected to have more potential to transform the intellectual base (Hou et al., 2020 ). Specifically, cluster linkage is a direct measure of intellectual potential and structural change (Chen, 2012 ). Therefore, we adopted cluster linkage as an indicator by which to recognize and predict the valuable ideas in newly published procrastination research. These top 20 articles with high transformative potential that were published during the period 2016-2020 were listed (see Supplementary Material for details). Research contents primarily consist of four dimensions.

Further Investigations Into Academic Procrastination

Although procrastination research has drawn mostly on samples of students, innovative research contents and methods have been emerging that enhance our understanding of academic procrastination. In the past five years, different language versions of scales have been measured and validated (Garzon Umerenkova and Gil-Flores, 2017a , b ; Svartdal, 2017 ; Guilera et al., 2018 ), and novel research areas and contents have arisen, such as how gender difference influences academic procrastination, what are the effective means of intervention, and what are the associations among academic procrastination, person-environment fit, and academic achievement (Balkis and Duru, 2016 ; Garzon Umerenkova and Gil-Flores, 2017a , b ; Goroshit, 2018 ). Interestingly, research has found that females perform academic procrastination less often and gain better academic achievements than males do (Balkis and Duru, 2017 ; Perdomo and Feliciano-Garcia, 2020 ).

In addition, academic procrastination is viewed as a fluid process. Considering the behavior holistically, three different aspects of task engagement have been discussed: initiation, completion, and pursuit. Vangsness and Young ( 2020 ) proposed the metaphors of “turtles” (steady workers), “task ninjas” (precrastinators), and “time wasters” (procrastinators) to elaborate vividly on task completion strategies when working toward deadlines. Individual differences and task characteristics can influence one's choices of a task-completion strategy. To understand the fluid and multifaceted phenomenon of procrastination, longitudinal research has been appearing. Wessel et al. ( 2019 ) observed behavioral delay longitudinally through tracking an undergraduate assignment over two weeks to reveal how passive and active procrastination each affected assignment completion.

Relationships Between Procrastination and Diverse Personality Traits

In addition to the relationship between procrastination and the five-factor model, other personality traits, such as temperament, character, emotional intelligence, impulsivity, and motivation, have been investigated in connection with procrastination. Because the five-factor model is not effective for distinguishing the earlier developing temperamental tendencies and the later developing character traits, Zohar et al. ( 2019 ) discussed how temperament and character influence procrastination in terms of active and passive procrastinators, and revealed that a dependable temperament profile and well-developed character predicted active procrastination.

Procrastination is commonly defined as a self-regulation failure that includes emotion and behavior. Emotional intelligence (EI) is an indicator with which to monitor one's feelings, thinking, and actions, and hot discussions about its relationship with procrastination have sprung up recently. Sheybani et al. ( 2017 ) elaborated on how the relationship between emotional intelligence and the five-factor model influence decisional procrastination on the basis of a students' sample. As a complement to the research above, Wypych et al. ( 2018 ) explored the roles of impulsivity, motivation, and emotion regulation in procrastination through path analysis. Motivation and impulsivity reflecting a lack of value, along with delay discounting and lack of perseverance, are predicators of procrastination, whereas emotion regulation, especially for suppression of procrastination, has only appeared to be significant in student and other low-age groups. How personality traits influence procrastination remains controversial, and further research is expected.

Procrastination in Different Life-Domains and Settings

Newly published research is paying more attention to procrastination in different sample groups across the entire life span. Not being limited to student samples, discussions about procrastination in groups such as teachers, educated adults, and workers have been emerging. With regard to different life domains, the self-oriented domains including health and leisure time, tend to procrastinate, whereas parenting is low in procrastination among highly educated adults. Although the achievement-oriented life domains of career, education, and finances are found with moderate frequency in conjunction with procrastination, these three domains together with health affect life the most (Hen and Goroshit, 2018 ). Similarly, Tibbett and Ferrari ( 2019 ) investigated the main regret domains facing cross-cultural samples, so as to determine which factors increased the likelihood of identifying oneself as a procrastinator. Their research found that forms of earning potential, such as education, finances, and career, led participants to more easily label themselves as procrastinators. Procrastination can lead to regret, and this research adopted reverse thinking to discuss the antecedents of procrastination.

In addition to academic procrastination, research about the behavior in diverse-context settings has begun to draw scholars' attention. Nauts et al. ( 2019 ) used a qualitative study to investigate why people delay their bedtime, and the study identified three forms of bedtime procrastination: deliberate procrastination, mindless procrastination, and strategic delay. Then, those researchers proposed coached interventions involving time management, priority-setting skills, and reminders according to the characteristics of the bedtime procrastination. Interestingly, novel forms of procrastination have been arising in the attention-shortage situations of the age of the internet, such as social media self-control failure (SMSCF). Du et al. ( 2019 ) found that habitual checking, ubiquity, and notifications were determinants for self-control failures due to social media use, and that finding provided insight into how to better use ICTs in a media-pervasive environment. Moreover, even beyond those life-related-context settings, procrastination in the workplace has been further explored. Hen ( 2018 ) emphasized the factor of professional role ambiguity underlying procrastination. Classification of procrastination context is important for the effectiveness of intervention and provides us with a better understanding of this multifaceted behavior.

Interventions to Procrastination

Overcoming procrastination is a necessary topic for discussion. Procrastination is prevalent and stable across situations, and it is commonly averse to one's performance and general well-being. Various types of interventions are used, such as time management, self-management, and cognitive behavioral therapy. To examine the effectiveness of those interventions, scholars have used longitudinal studies or field experimental designs to investigate these methods of intervention for procrastination. Rozental et al. ( 2017 ) examined the efficacy of internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) to relieve procrastination, from the perspective of clinical trials. Through a one-year follow-up in a randomized controlled trial, researchers found that ICBT could be beneficial to relieve severe, chronic procrastination. Taking the temporal context into consideration, Visser et al. ( 2017 ) discussed a strengths-based approach — one element of the cognitive behavioral approach — that showed greater usefulness for students at an early stage of their studies than it did at later ages. Overall, research on the effectiveness of intervention for procrastination is relatively scarce.

Discussion and Conclusion

Discussion on procrastination research.

This article provides a systematic bibliometric analysis of procrastination research over the past 30 years. The study identifies the category distribution, co-occurrence keywords, main research clusters, and intellectual structures, with the help of CiteSpace and VOS viewer. As is shown in Figure 6 , the primary focuses for research themes have been on the definition and classification of procrastination, the relationships between procrastination and personality traits, the influences brought by procrastination, and how to better intervene in this complex phenomenon.

Bibliometric analysis and science map of the literature on procrastination.

Those contents have built the bases for procrastination research, but determining how those bases are constructed is important to the development of future research. Therefore, this article primarily discusses three aspects of intellectual structure of procrastination research: betweenness centrality, burst detection, and structural variation analysis. From the betweenness centrality analysis, three research themes are identifiable and can be generally summarized as: definition and classification of procrastination, procrastination behavior in a temporal context, and causes and interventions for procrastination.

However, procrastination research themes have evolved significantly across the time period from 1990–2020. Through burst detection analysis, we are able to infer that research has paid extraordinary attention to diverse themes at different times. In the initial stage, research is mainly about the antecedents of procrastination from the perspectives of time-management, self-regulation failure, and the five-factor model, which pays more attention to the behavior itself, such as delays in time. Subsequently, further discussions have focused on how cognitive and motivational facets such as goal orientation, perceived self-efficacy, self-handicapping, as well as self-regulated learning strategies influence procrastination. In the most recent 10 years, research has paid significant attention to expanding diverse themes, such as theoretical perspectives, typical images of procrastinators, and procrastination behavior in diverse temporal contexts. Research about procrastination has been gaining more and more attention from scholars and practitioners.

To explore newly published articles and their transformative potential, we conduct structural variation analysis. Beyond traditional research involving academic procrastination, emerging research themes consist of diverse research settings across life-domains, such as bedtime procrastination, social media self-control failure, procrastination in the workplace, and procrastination comparisons between self-oriented and achievement-oriented domains. Furthermore, novel interventions from the perspective of clinical and cognitive orientations to procrastination have been emerging in response to further investigation of procrastination's antecedents, such as internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) and the strengths-based approach.

Conclusions and Limitations

In summary, research on procrastination has gained increasing attention during 1990 to 2020. Specifically in Figure 7 , research themes have involved in the definition, classification, antecedents, consequences, interventions, and diverse forms of procrastination across different life-domains and contexts. Furthermore, empirical research has been conducted to understand this complex and multifaceted behavior, including how best to design controlled trial experiments, how to collect and analyze the data, and so on.

Brief conclusions on procrastination research.

From the perspective of knowledge development, related research about procrastination has experienced tremendous expansion in the last 30 years. There are three notable features to describe the evolutionary process.

First, research focuses are moving from broader topics to more specific issues. Prior research mostly explored the definition and antecedents of procrastination, as well as the relationship between personality traits and procrastination. Besides, earlier procrastination research almost drew on students' setting. Based on previous research above, innovative research starts to shed light on procrastination in situation-specific domains, such as work procrastination, bedtime procrastination, as well as the interaction between problematic new media use and procrastination (Hen, 2018 ; Nauts et al., 2019 ; Przepiorka et al., 2021 ). With the evolvement of research aimed at distinct contexts, more details and core contents about procrastination have been elaborated. For example, procrastination in workplace may have association with professional role ambiguity, abusive supervision, workplace ostracism and task characteristics (Hen, 2018 ; He et al., 2021 ; Levin and Lipshits-Braziler, 2021 ). In particular, owing to the use of information and communication technology (ICTs), there currently are ample temptations to distract our attention, and those distractions can exacerbate the severity of procrastination (Du et al., 2019 ; Hong et al., 2021 ). Therefore, how to identify those different forms of procrastination, and then to reduce their adverse outcomes, will be important to discuss.

Second, antecedents and consequences of procrastination are further explored over time. On one hand, how procrastination occurs arises hot discussions from diverse dimensions including time management, personality traits, contextual characteristics, motivational and cognitive factors successively. Interestingly, investigations about neural evidences under procrastination have been emerging, such as the underlying mechanism of hippocampal-striatal and amygdala-insula to procrastination (Zhang et al., 2021 ). Those antecedents can be divided into internal factors and external factors. Internal factors including character traits and cognitive maladjustments have been elucidated fully, but scant discussion has occurred about how external factors, such as task characteristics, peers' situations, and environmental conditions, influence procrastination (Harris and Sutton, 1983 ; He et al., 2021 ). On the other hand, high prevalence of procrastination necessitates the importance to identify the negative consequences including direct and indirect. Prior research paid more attention to direct consequences, such as low performance, poor productivity, stress and illness, but the indirect consequences that can be brought about by procrastination remain to be unclear. For example, “second-hand” procrastination vividly describes the “spillover effect” of procrastination, which is exemplified by another employee often working harder in order to compensate for the lost productivity of a procrastinating coworker (Pychyl and Flett, 2012 ). Although such phenomena are common, adverse outcomes are less well investigated. Combining the contexts and groups involved, targeted discussions about the external antecedents and indirect consequences of procrastination are expected.

Third, empirical research toward procrastination emphasizes more on validity. When it comes to previous research, longitudinal studies are often of small numbers. However, procrastination is dynamic, so when most studies focus on procrastination of students' sample during just one semester or several weeks, can limit the overall viewpoints about procrastination and the effectiveness of conclusions. With the development of research, more and more longitudinal explorations are springing up to discuss long-term effects of procrastination through behavioral observation studies and so on. Besides, how to design the research and collect data evolves gradually. Self-reported was the dominant method to collect data in prior research, and measurements of procrastination usually depended on different scales. However, self-reported data are often distorted by personal processes and may not reflect the actual situation, even to overestimate the level of procrastination (Kim and Seo, 2015 ; Goroshit, 2018 ). Hence, innovative studies start to conduct field experimental designs to get observed information through randomized controlled trials. For the following research, how to combine self-reported data and observed data organically should be investigated and refined.

This bibliometric analysis to procrastination is expected to provide overall perspective for future research. However, certain limitations merit mentioning here. Owing to the limited number of pages allowed, it is difficult to clarify the related articles in detail, so discussion tends to be heuristic. Furthermore, the data for this research comes from the Web of Science database, and applying the same strategy to a different database might have yielded different results. In the future, we will conduct a systematic analysis using diverse databases to detect pivotal articles on procrastination research.

Data Availability Statement

Author contributions.

BY proposed the research question and conducted the research design. XZ analyzed the data and wrote primary manuscript. On the base of that work mentioned above, two authors discussed and adjusted the final manuscript together.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.809044/full#supplementary-material

• Aalbers G., vanden Abeele M. M., Hendrickson A. T., de Marez L., Keijsers L. (2022). Caught in the moment: are there person-specific associations between momentary procrastination and passively measured smartphone use? Mobile Media Commun . 10 , 115–135. 10.1177/2050157921993896 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Akerlof G. A.. (1991). Procrastination and obedience . Am. Econ. Rev. 81 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ariely D., Wertenbroch K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: self-control by precommitment . Psychol. Sci . 13 , 219–224. 10.1111/1467-9280.00441 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baker R., Evans B., Li Q., Cung B. (2019). Does inducing students to schedule lecture watching in online classes improve their academic performance? An experimental analysis of a time management intervention . Res. Higher Educ. 60 , 521–552. 10.1007/s11162-018-9521-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balkis M.. (2013). Academic procrastination, academic life satisfaction and academic achievement: the mediation role of rational beliefs about studying . J. Cogn. Behav. Psychother. 13 , 57–74. [ Google Scholar ]
• Balkis M., Duru E. (2017). Gender differences in the relationship between academic procrastination, satisfaction with academic life and academic performance . Electr. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 15 , 105–125. 10.25115/ejrep.41.16042 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balkis M., Duru E. (2016). The analysis of relationships among person-environment fit, academic satisfaction, procrastination and academic achievement . Univ. J. Educ. 39 , 119–129. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolden J., Fillauer J. P. (2020). “Tomorrow is the busiest day of the week”: executive functions mediate the relation between procrastination and attention problems . J. Am.College Health . 68 , 854–863. 10.1080/07448481.2019.1626399 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Broadbent J., Poon W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: a systematic review . Inter Higher Educ. 27 , 1–13. 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.. (2006). CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature . J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 57 , 359–377. 10.1002/asi.20317 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.. (2012). Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts . J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol . 63 , 431–449. 10.1002/asi.21694 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.. (2013). Hindsight, insight, and foresight: a multi-level structural variation approach to the study of a scientific field . Technol. Analy. Strat. Manage . 25 , 619–640. 10.1080/09537325.2013.801949 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.. (2017). Science mapping: a systematic review of the literature . J. Data Inf. Sci. 2 , 1–40. 10.1515/jdis-2017-0006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C. M., Hu Z. G., Liu S. B., Tseng H. (2012). Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: a scientometric analysis in CiteSpace . Expert Opin. Biol. Therapy. 12 , 593–608. 10.1517/14712598.2012.674507 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C. M., Ibekwe-SanJuan F., Hou J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of co-citation clusters: a multiple-perspective co-citation analysis . J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol . 61 , 1386–1409. 10.1002/asi.21309 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu A. H. C., Choi J. N. (2005). Rethinking procrastination: positive effects of “active” procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance . J. Soc. Psychol . 145 , 245–264. 10.3200/SOCP.145.3.245-264 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corkin D. M., Yu S. L., Lindt S. F. (2011). Comparing active delay and procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective . Learn. Indiv. Differ. 21 , 602–606. 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diaz-Morales J. F., Ferrari J. R., Diaz K., Argumedo D. (2006). Factorial structure of three procrastination scales with a Spanish adult population . Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 22 , 132–137. 10.1027/1015-5759.22.2.132 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Du J., Kerkhof P., van Koningsbruggen G. M. (2019). Predictors of social media self-control failure: immediate gratifications, habitual checking, ubiquity, and notifications . Cyber Psychol. Behav. Soc. Network. 22 , 477–485. 10.1089/cyber.2018.0730 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duru E., Balkis M. (2017). Procrastination, self-esteem, academic performance, and well-being: a moderated mediation model . International J. Educ. Psychol . 6 , 97–119. 10.17583/ijep.2017.2584 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Harackiewicz J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: a mediational analysis . J. Personal. Soc. Psychol . 70 , 461–475. 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.461 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fang Y., Yin J., Wu B. (2018). Climate change and tourism: a scientometric analysis using CiteSpace . J. Sustain. Tour . 26 , 108–126. 10.1080/09669582.2017.1329310 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari J. R.. (1991). Compulsive procrastination: some self-reported characteristics . Psychol. Reports. 68 , 455–458. 10.2466/pr0.1991.68.2.455 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari J. R.. (1992). Psychometric validation of two Procrastination inventories for adults: arousal and avoidance measures . J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 14 , 97–110. 10.1007/BF00965170 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari J. R., Diaz-Morales J. F., O'Callaghan J., Diaz K., Argumedo D. (2007). Frequent behavioral delay tendencies by adults - International prevalence rates of chronic procrastination . J. Cross-Cultural Psychol . 38 , 458–464. 10.1177/0022022107302314 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari J. R., Johnson J. L., McCown W. G. (1995). Procrastination and Task Avoidance: Theory, Research, and Treatment . US: Springer US. 10.1007/978-1-4899-0227-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flett G. L., Stainton M., Hewitt P. L., Sherry S. B., Lay C. (2012). Procrastination automatic thoughts as a personality construct: an analysis of the procrastinatory cognitions inventory . J. Rational-Emot. Cogn. Behav. Therapy. 30 , 223–236. 10.1007/s10942-012-0150-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freeman L.. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification . Soc. Netw. 1 , 215–239. 10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garfield E.. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool . Scientometrics . 1 , 359–375. 10.1007/BF02019306 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzon Umerenkova A., Gil-Flores J. (2017a). Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the test procrastination assessment scale-students (PASS) . Rev. Iberoamericana De Diagnostico Y Evaluacion-E Avaliacao Psicol. 1 , 149–163. 10.21865/RIDEP43_149 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzon Umerenkova A., Gil-Flores J. (2017b). Academic procrastination in non-traditional college students . Electronic J. Res. Educ. Psychol . 15 , 510–531. 10.14204/ejrep.43.16134 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Germeijs V., Verschueren K. (2011). Indecisiveness and big five personality factors: relationship and specificity . Person. Indiv. Differ. 50 , 1023–1028. 10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glick D. M., Orsillo S. M. (2015). An investigation of the efficacy of acceptance-based behavioral therapy for academic procrastination . J. Experim. Psychol. General. 144 , 400–409. 10.1037/xge0000050 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goroshit M.. (2018). Academic procrastination and academic performance: an initial basis for intervention . J. Prevent Intervent. Commun. 46 , 131–142. 10.1080/10852352.2016.1198157 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Green M. C., Visser P. S., Tetlock P. E. (2000). Coping with accountability cross-pressures: low-effort evasive tactics and high-effort quests for complex compromises . Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26 , 1380–1391. 10.1177/0146167200263006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guilera G., Barrios M., Penelo E., Morin C., Steel P., Gomez-Benito J. (2018). Validation of the Spanish version of the irrational procrastination scale (IPS) . PLoS ONE. 13 , 1–11. 10.1371/journal.pone.0190806 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gustavson D. E., Miyake A., Hewitt J. K., Friedman N. P. (2014). Genetic relations among procrastination, impulsivity, and goal-management ability: implications for the evolutionary origin of procrastination . Psychol. Sci. 25 , 1178–1188. 10.1177/0956797614526260 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris N. N., Sutton R. I. (1983). Task procrastination in organizations: a framework for research . Human Relat. 36 , 987–995. 10.1177/001872678303601102 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• He Q., Wu M., Wu W., Fu J. (2021). The effect of abusive supervision on employees' work procrastination behavior . Frontiers in Psychol . 12 , 596704. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.596704 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hen M.. (2018). Causes for procrastination in a unique educational workplace . J. Prevent. Inter. Commun. 46 , 215–227. 10.1080/10852352.2018.1470144 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hen M., Goroshit M. (2018). General and life-domain procrastination in highly educated adults in Israel . Front. Psychol . 9 , 1173. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01173 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hong W., Liu R. D., Ding Y., Jiang S. Y., Yang X. T., Sheng X. T. (2021). Academic procrastination precedes problematic mobile phone use in Chinese adolescents: a longitudinal mediation model of distraction cognitions . Addic. Behav. 121 , 106993. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106993 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hou J. H., Yang X. C., Chen C. M. (2020). Measuring researchers' potential scholarly impact with structural variations: four types of researchers in information science (1979-2018) . PLoS ONE. 15 , e0234347. 10.1371/journal.pone.0234347 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Howell A. J., Watson D. C. (2007). Procrastination: associations with achievement goal orientation and learning strategies . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 43 , 167–178. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hubner K.. (2012). German crisis management and leadership-from ignorance to procrastination to action . Asia Eur. J. 9 , 159–177. 10.1007/s10308-012-0313-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang Y., Ritchie B. W., Benckendorff P. (2019). Bibliometric visualization: an application in tourism crisis and disaster management research . Curr. Issues Tour . 22 , 1925–1957. 10.1080/13683500.2017.1408574 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson J. L., Bloom A. M. (1995). An analysis of the contribution of the five factors of personality to variance in academic procrastination . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 18 , 127–133. 10.1016/0191-8869(94)00109-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim K. R., Seo E. H. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: a meta-analysis . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 82 , 26–33. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim S., Fernandez S., Terrier L. (2017). Procrastination, personality traits, and academic performance: when active and passive procrastination tell a different story . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 108 , 154–157. 10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.021 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klassen R. M., Krawchuk L. L., Rajani S. (2008). Academic procrastination of undergraduates: low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination . Contemp. Educ.Psychol . 33 , 915–931. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.07.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klein E.. (1971). A comprehensive etymological dictionary of the Hebrew language for readers of English . Tyndale House Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kleinberg J.. (2003). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams . Data Mining Knowl. Disc. 7 , 373–397. 10.1023/A:1024940629314 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klingsieck K. B.. (2013). Procrastination: when good things don't come to those who wait . Eur. Psychol . 18 , 24–34. 10.1027/1016-9040/a000138 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lay C.. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination . J. Res. Personal . 20 , 474–495. 10.1016/0092-6566(86)90127-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lay C.. (1988). The relation of procrastination and optimism to judgments of time to complete an essay and anticipation of setbacks . J. Soc. Behav. Personal. 3 , 201–214. [ Google Scholar ]
• Legood A., Lee A., Schwarz G., Newman A. (2018). From self-defeating to other defeating: examining the effects of leader procrastination on follower work outcomes . J. Occup. Organiz. Psychol . 91 , 430–439. 10.1111/joop.12205 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levin N., Lipshits-Braziler Y. (2021). Facets of adaptability in career decision-making . Int. J. Educ. Vocat. Guidance . 6 , 1–12. 10.1007/s10775-021-09489-w [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Malouff J. M., Schutte N. S. (2019). The efficacy of interventions aimed at reducing procrastination: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials . J. Counsel. Develop. 97 , 117–127. 10.1002/jcad.12243 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Markscheffel B., Schroeter F. (2021). Comparison of two science mapping tools based on software technical evaluation and bibliometric case studies . Collnet J. Scientometr. Inf. Manage . 15 , 365–396. 10.1080/09737766.2021.1960220 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Metin U. B., Tanis T. W., Peeters M. C. W. (2016). Measuring procrastination at work and its associated workplace aspects . Personal. Indiv. Differ . 101 , 254–263. 10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miraj S. A.. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019: the public health challenge and our preparedness . Biosci. Biotechnol. Res. Commun. 13 , 361–364. 10.21786/bbrc/13.2/1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nauts S., Kamphorst B. A., Stut W., De Ridder D. T. D., Anderson J. H. (2019). The explanations people give for going to bed late: a qualitative study of the varieties of bedtime procrastination . Behav. Sleep Med. 17 , 753–762. 10.1080/15402002.2018.1491850 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nevill C. J.. (2009). Managing cumulative impacts: groundwater reform in the Murray-Darling basin, Australia . Water Res. Manage. 23 , 2605–2631. 10.1007/s11269-009-9399-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Olmeda-Gomez C., Roma-Mateo C., Ovalle-Perandones M. A. (2019). Overview of trends in global epigenetic research (2009-2017) . Scientometrics. 119 , 1545–1574. 10.1007/s11192-019-03095-y [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pan W. W., Jian L. R., Liu T. (2019). Grey system theory trends from 1991 to 2018: a bibliometric analysis and visualization . Scientometrics. 121 , 1407–1434. 10.1007/s11192-019-03256-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Perdomo A. S., Feliciano-Garcia L. (2020). The influence of active procrastination: a profile on educational sciences students' academic achievement . Bordon-Rev. De Pedagogia. 72 , 157–170. 10.13042/Bordon.2020.73642 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Przepiorka A., Blachnio A., Cudo A. (2021). Procrastination and problematic new media use: the mediating role of future anxiety . Current Psychol . 5 , 1–10. 10.1007/s12144-021-01773-w [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pychyl T. A., Flett G. L. (2012). Procrastination and self-regulatory failure: an introduction to the special issue . J. Rational-Emotive Cogn. Behav. Therapy. 30 , 203–212. 10.1007/s10942-012-0149-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rozental A., Forsell E., Svensson A., Andersson G., Carlbring P. (2017). Overcoming procrastination: one-year follow-up and predictors of change in a randomized controlled trial of Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy . Cogn. Behav.Therapy. 46 , 177–195. 10.1080/16506073.2016.1236287 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schouwenburg H. C., Lay C. H. (1995). Trait procrastination and the Big-five factors of personality . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 18 , 481–490. 10.1016/0191-8869(94)00176-S [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schraw G., Wadkins T., Olafson L. (2007). Doing the things we do: a grounded theory of academic procrastination . J. Educ.Psychol . 99 , 12–25. 10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.12 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheybani F., Gharraee B., Bakhshizadeh M., Tamanaeefar S. (2017). Decisional procrastination: prevalence among students and relationship with emotional intelligence and big five-factor model of personality . Int. J. Life Sci. Pharma Res. 7 , 26–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sirois F., Pychyl T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation: consequences for future self . Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass. 7 , 115–127. 10.1111/spc3.12011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sirois F. M.. (2004). Procrastination and intentions to perform health behaviors: the role of self-efficacy and the consideration of future consequences . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 37 , 115–128. 10.1016/j.paid.2003.08.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sirois F. M.. (2021). Trait procrastination undermines outcome and efficacy expectancies for achieving health-related possible selves . Curr. Psychol . 40 , 3840–3847. 10.1007/s12144-019-00338-2 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sirois F. M., Molnar D. S., Hirsch J. K. (2017). A meta-analytic and conceptual update on the associations between procrastination and multidimensional perfectionism . Eur. J. Personal. 31 , 137–159. 10.1002/per.2098 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steel P.. (2007). The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure . Psychol.Bull. 133 , 65–94. 10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steel P.. (2010). Arousal, avoidant and decisional procrastinators: do they exist? Personal. Indiv. Differ. 48 , 926–934. 10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.025 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steel P., Ferrari J. (2013). Sex, education and procrastination: an epidemiological study of procrastinators' characteristics from a global sample . Eur. J. Personal. 27 , 51–58. 10.1002/per.1851 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steel P., Klingsieck K. B. (2016). Academic procrastination: psychological antecedents revisited . Austral. Psychol . 51 , 36–46. 10.1111/ap.12173 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Svartdal F.. (2017). Measuring procrastination: psychometric properties of the Norwegian versions of the irrational procrastination scale (IPS) and the pure procrastination scale (PPS) . Scand. J. Educ. Res . 61 , 18–30. 10.1080/00313831.2015.1066439 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tao X., Hanif H., Ahmed H. H., Ebrahim N. A. (2021). Bibliometric analysis and visualization of academic procrastination . Front. Psychol . 12 , 722332. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.722332 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tibbett T., Ferrari J. (2019). Return to the origin: what creates a procrastination identity? Curr. Issues Personal. Psychol . 7 , 1–7. 10.5114/cipp.2018.75648 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tice D. M., Baumeister R. F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and health: the costs and benefits of dawdling . Psychol. Sci. 8 , 454–458. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00460.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Eck N. J., Waltman L. (2010). Software survey: VOS viewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping . Scientometrics. 84 , 523–538. 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Eerde W.. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 35 , 1401–1418. 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00358-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vangsness L., Young M. E. (2020). Turtle, task ninja, or time waster? Who cares? traditional task-completion strategies are overrated . Psychol. Sci. 31 , 306–315. 10.1177/0956797619901267 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Visser L., Schoonenboom J., Korthagen F. A. J. (2017). A field experimental design of a strengths-based training to overcome academic procrastination: short- and long-term effect . Front. Psychol . 8 , 1949. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01949 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wessel J., Bradley G. L., Hood M. (2019). Comparing effects of active and passive procrastination: a field study of behavioral delay . Personal. Indiv. Differ. 139 , 152–157. 10.1016/j.paid.2018.11.020 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Widziewicz-Rzonca K., Tytla M. (2020). First systematic review on PM-bound water: exploring the existing knowledge domain using the CiteSpace software . Scientometrics. 124 , 1945–2008. 10.1007/s11192-020-03547-w [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wolters C. A.. (2003). Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective . J. Educ.Psychol . 95 , 179–187. 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.179 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wypych M., Matuszewski J., Dragan W. Ł. (2018). Roles of impulsivity, motivation, and emotion regulation in procrastination – path analysis and comparison between students and non-students . Front. Psychol . 9 , 891. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00891 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yi Y. T., Luo J. S., Wubbenhorst M. (2020). Research on political instability, uncertainty and risk during 1953-2019: a scientometric review . Scientometrics. 123 , 1051–1076. 10.1007/s11192-020-03416-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang S. M., Verguts T., Zhang C. Y., Feng P., Chen Q., Feng T. Y. (2021). Outcome value and task aversiveness impact task procrastination through separate neural pathways . Cerebral Cortex . 31 , 3846–3855. 10.1093/cercor/bhab053 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zohar A. H., Shimone L. P., Hen M. (2019). Active and passive procrastination in terms of temperament and character . Peerj. 7 , e6988. 10.7717/peerj.6988 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Teacher procrastination, emotions, and stress: a qualitative study.

• 1 Department of Psychology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany
• 2 Psychology School, Faculty of Economics and Media, Fresenius University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany

Stress and negative emotions in teachers can lead to occupational burnout, poor performance in the classroom, and decreased job-satisfaction. Apart from having negative personal and physical effects for the individual teacher, teacher stress and burnout are also thought to have negative effects on the respective students and student achievement. As one potential source of teacher stress, procrastination has been speculated about. However, research on the phenomenology and prevalence of procrastination among teachers, as well as its relevance for their emotional and stress experiences, is very scarce. Further, most of the existing research on teacher procrastination used general self-report scales to obtain results. The present study therefore investigated the phenomenology of teacher procrastination as well as its links with emotional experiences and stress, using a qualitative approach. Twenty-seven male and female teachers from Germany were interviewed personally (Mean age = 35.7, SD = 9.64, Min = 25 years, Max = 67 years). Nine of those teachers reported to never needlessly delay an action concerning their profession or not to perceive their dilatory behavior as negative and stressful. Data from the remaining 16 teachers (Mean age = 35.06, SD = 7.01, Min = 26 years, Max = 48 years) were analyzed on the basis of qualitative content analysis by using deductive as well as inductive category application. Results revealed that these teachers procrastinate on an array of professional tasks, such as administrative and organizational tasks and correcting students’ work. The results showed that teachers delayed these tasks for different reasons but mainly due to task aversiveness. Further, teachers reported experiencing mainly negative emotions when procrastinating and perceiving their procrastination behavior as moderately stressful, indicating that procrastination is a potential stressor in the teacher profession. Limitations of the study are discussed and directions for future research are proposed.

Introduction

Even though it is generally known that teachers need to abide by tight schedules and dense curricula and sometimes deal with highly challenging classroom and students’ home environment situations, there seems to be an implicit assumption in society that teachers have an easy job ( Labaree, 2000 ; Moulthrop et al., 2006 ). This assumption may be due to the fact that teachers often have longer holidays than most other professions and – at least in Germany where half-day school is the norm – “free afternoons,” and because they are hardly ever monitored regarding their work. As such, the teaching profession is characterized by high degrees of self-determination; for large parts of their working days and years, they can work autonomously and at their own pace. Indeed, a large majority of teachers have been shown to choose teaching for intrinsic motives (e.g., Richardson and Watt, 2006 , 2014 ) and thus teachers can be expected to be highly intrinsically motivated in their jobs. However, it may be that these working conditions in fact are problematic for some teachers, as for instance the high autonomy of the teaching profession also requires excellent self-regulation competencies ( Kunter et al., 2013 ). Some teachers may have difficulties here, which, besides others, may result in a certain unwanted behavior often observed in student populations, namely procrastination. Contemporary definitions propose that procrastination entails a self-regulatory failure ( Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ; Anderson, 2016 ) in terms of voluntarily and needlessly delaying an intended action ( Wohl et al., 2010 ) despite knowing or expecting to be worse off for the delay ( Steel, 2007 ).

The overwhelming majority of past empirical research on procrastination has been accumulated based on student samples. There is only scattered initial empirical evidence suggesting that teachers are also at risk of procrastinating in their profession and that this leads to negative effects for the teacher, such as higher perceived stress ( Verešová, 2013 ) and decreased job-satisfaction ( Mohsin and Ayub, 2014 ). Decreased job-satisfaction in teachers and teacher stress have in turn been linked to occupational burnout ( Montgomery and Rupp, 2005 ; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009 ). Apart from having negative personal and physical effects for the individual teacher, teacher stress and burnout are also thought to have negative effects on the respective students and student achievement ( Roeser et al., 2013 ). As such, scientific inquiry into teacher procrastination seems warranted.

The Nature of Procrastination and Its Correlates

Procrastination is a complex phenomenon, making it somewhat difficult to distinguish from other similar concepts and often easy to mistake for something it is not, such as poor time management ability or laziness ( Lay and Schouwenburg, 1993 ; Steel et al., 2001 ). The complexity of this phenomenon, which includes personal and situational factors as well as an interplay between the two, may also be the reason for the array of different approaches to and definitions of procrastination in the past ( Klingsieck, 2013 ). For instance, some researchers have argued that delaying one’s intended actions has no further consequences or may even be beneficial for some individuals (e.g., Chu and Choi, 2005 ; Burka and Yuen, 2008 ; Abramowski, 2018 ). However, most researchers in the field today agree that there is no such thing as “functional” or “strategic” procrastination (see e.g., Anderson, 2016 ) because voluntarily, consciously, and needlessly delaying one’s intended actions while knowing one will be worse off due to the delay, implies a failure in self-regulation ( Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ; Anderson, 2016 ). This lack of self-regulation has been found to be predominantly maladaptive, as this behavior typically results in negative consequences for the individual. The consequences include increased perceived stress and poorer health ( Tice and Baumeister, 1997 ; Sirois et al., 2003 ), depression ( Lay and Schouwenburg, 1993 ), and experiencing negative emotions such as anxiety and shame ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ; Ferrari, 1991 ; Fee and Tangney, 2000 ; van Eerde, 2003 ).

While procrastination has been reported to be a dynamic behavior in certain situations ( Moon and Illingworth, 2005 ) and to decrease slightly with age, it is generally thought to be stable over time and across contexts, indicating it to be a facet of a personality trait ( Kim and Seo, 2015 ). But procrastination can also occur due to the task and situation at hand ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ). One reason for procrastination is thought to be the nature of the task. In an early study, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) conducted a factor analysis on the self-report and behavioral data of 342 university students to identify specific causes of procrastination. They found that task aversiveness, which means disliking the task at hand or finding it unpleasant, was an important factor leading to procrastination. Expanding those findings, Blunt and Pychyl (2000) differentiated various facets of task aversiveness (e.g., affect, personal meaning, autonomy), which can occur in different stages of a project. They found that each main component of task aversiveness and procrastination correlated positively in nearly all project stages. A meta-analytical review by Steel (2007) also revealed that task aversiveness played an important role in triggering procrastination. He found that the more individuals disliked a task because the task was perceived as unpleasant, boring, uninteresting, effortful, or anxiety arousing, the more they procrastinated. These results were also supported in a recent qualitative study by Grunschel et al. (2013) who asked 36 students in an open-ended format what they deemed as main reasons for their academic procrastination: most students ( n = 30) named perceived task aversiveness.

It is important to note that task aversiveness does not stem solely from a task itself. It also depends on the person, whether they perceive a task as aversive or not and whether this then leads to procrastination behavior. In this study, we therefore refer to the term perceived task aversiveness to stress the complex interplay between a person and the environment in which the task at hand occurs ( Moon and Illingworth, 2005 ).

In addition to task aversiveness, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) further showed that fear of failing at a task accounted for 49.4% of the variance in procrastination. In other words, people procrastinated on tasks that aroused their anxiety regarding not meeting their own or others’ expectations when working on them. Haghbin et al. (2012) also found fear of failure to be related to procrastination. More specifically, the authors found that this relation was moderated by self-perceived competence and mediated by need for autonomy.

Similarly, there is further empirical evidence suggesting that procrastination behavior is linked to poor competence beliefs or lack of self-efficacy. For instance, Ferrari et al. (1992) found a significant negative relationship between general self-efficacy and reasons for procrastination, as well as general self-efficacy and procrastination frequency among 319 college students. Meta-analyses also revealed moderate significant negative correlations between self-efficacy and procrastination ( van Eerde, 2003 ; Steel, 2007 ). In the qualitative study by Grunschel et al. (2013) mentioned above, many ( n = 20) of the students also reported poor competence beliefs, such as the perceived lack of study skills, to be a reason for their academic procrastination.

Furthermore, procrastination has also been explored from a motivational perspective, specifically through the lens of Self-Determination Theory ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ). For example, Senécal et al. (1995) analyzed the self-report data collected from 498 junior college students regarding their procrastination behavior, self-regulation abilities, and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation related to school activities. They found that procrastination was significantly negatively related to intrinsic motivation and correlated significantly positively with external regulation and amotivation. These findings are in line with Haghbin et al. (2012) , who report that a lower sense of autonomy, leading to external regulation and amotivation, is negatively related to procrastination behavior. Similarly, Visser et al. (2018) concluded from their interview-study with 22 students that a lack of (intrinsic) motivation is especially problematic for high-level procrastinators, who found it difficult to regulate their dilatory behavior.

Finally, as mentioned earlier, procrastination can also be considered the consequence of (unsuccessful) self- and emotion regulation, as recently proposed by Sirois and Pychyl (2013) (also see Pychyl and Sirois, 2016 ). They argue that procrastination results from people’s impulse-driven attempts to up-regulate their immediate mood, which however in fact implies self-regulatory failure. For instance, having to perform an aversive task may lead to negative emotions, such as anxiety or frustration. For short-term hedonistic reasons, people strive to avoid the aversive task in order to feel better ( Tice and Bratslavsky, 2000 ). Therefore, in order to repair their mood, they fail in persisting in doing the aversive task at hand and procrastinate. Sirois and Pychyl (2013) base their reasoning on studies conducted by Tice and Bratslavsky (2000) as well as Tice et al. (2001) , where participants favored emotion regulation over behavioral self-regulation, which resulted in procrastination. Recent studies confirmed that self-regulation and emotion regulation indeed play a specific role in procrastination. In their qualitative study, Lindblom-Ylänne et al. (2015) found that procrastinators, as opposed to strategic delayers for instance, showed a specific profile where they lacked self-regulatory skills. Eckert et al. (2016) found that when students learned to regulate emotions in an adaptive way (e.g., tolerating and modifying negative affect), this resulted in reduced procrastination behavior. Related to this idea of procrastination resulting from short-term hedonistic strivings is Steel’s (2007) proposed concept of timing of rewards and punishments. This concept states that even though individuals might have serious intentions of doing a specific task at a certain time, they delay the intended task in preference of another activity. Evidence suggests procrastinators prefer short-term benefits, i.e., doing something immediately gratifying instead of the actual task at hand, to greater long-term gains and gratification ( Steel, 2007 , 2010 ).

Existing Findings on Teacher Procrastination

As teachers do not have a regular nine-to-five profession with a fixed working place, need to work autonomously for the most part of their job, and receive little to no supervision, the probability of displaying dilatory behavior is high in the teaching profession. There is scattered empirical evidence suggesting procrastination is an issue for some teachers. Nguyen et al. (2013) found that educators belonged to a group of professions categorized by the authors as moderate procrastination jobs. Their subsample of 63 educators averagely scored M = 3.53 (SD = 0.73) on the Irrational Procrastination Scale ( Steel, 2010 ; measures were scored on a 5-point scale). They concluded that teachers have a moderate risk of procrastinating in their profession, as compared to food servers ( N = 22; M = 4.39; SD = 0.64) who were classified as “high,” and military officer leaders ( N = 26; M = 3.16; SD = 0.85) who were classified as “low risk” professionals.

In regard to effects of procrastination on teachers, there are some initial findings suggesting that these are negative. Verešová (2013) explored 194 elementary school teachers’ procrastination (assessed by using the General Procrastination Scale by Lay, 1986 ) and their stress. She found that procrastination correlated significantly positively with stress and burnout. Specifically, when differentiating stress into cognitive, emotional, and social stress, procrastination correlated significantly with all three (cognitive stress and procrastination at r = 0.51; emotional stress and procrastination at r = 0.23; social stress and procrastination at r = 0.33). Findings obtained by Mohsin and Ayub (2014) support Verešová’s results. The authors examined the data obtained by self-report scales from 150 high school teachers and found procrastination to be significantly positively related to work-related stress. Further, they found a significant and strong negative relationship between procrastination and job-satisfaction ( r = −0.63). Stress and lack of job-satisfaction in teachers, in turn, have been shown to be associated with health issues, such as burnout and poor teaching performance ( Montgomery and Rupp, 2005 ; Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009 ; Klassen and Chiu, 2010 ; Hanif et al., 2011 ).

These few findings indicate that some teachers are at risk of procrastinating in their profession. But these results reveal little about what exactly may be triggering procrastination among teachers, and what effects it may have on them. The present study aims to take a first step toward filling in this knowledge gap.

The Present Study

Generally, the teaching profession can be considered a psychologically and emotionally demanding profession, which is often associated with health risks due to stress and negative affect (e.g. Guglielmi and Tatrow, 1998 ). The peculiar situational context of the teaching profession seems to provide a potential arena for the phenomenon of teacher procrastination. The findings presented above suggest that if teachers display procrastination behavior, they may well become at risk of suffering negative consequences, such as increased perceived stress. This reasoning is well founded in previous research on procrastination; however, empirical evidence regarding causes and effects of procrastination predominantly stems from student samples. Due to the parallelism between the work environment of teachers and the study environment of students – in the sense of self-regulation affordances – it might be possible that teacher procrastination is similar to academic procrastination. However, even though students and teachers share the same academic setting, findings from student samples cannot be simply generalized to the teacher population. Teachers clearly have greater autonomy and opportunities for self-determination than students, while at the same time compared to students they are far less formally evaluated and thus get considerably less feedback. This implies less pressure in the sense of potential failure – yet also deprives teachers of the opportunities to obtain positive reinforcement if they invested effort.

While there is a rich literature body on student procrastination where both qualitative and quantitative methodologies have been employed, research on teacher procrastination is scarce and, so far, seems to exclusively rely on quantitative approaches, using general, context-unspecific self-report instruments. In the present study, we therefore chose a qualitative approach to explore teachers’ self-reported experiences regarding the phenomenon of procrastination, investigating the following research questions: Are teachers familiar with the phenomenon and do they report to engage in procrastinating behaviors? What are the reasons behind this dilatory behavior? How does it affect teachers emotionally? What consequences does it have for teachers? And finally, is procrastination experienced as stressful for teachers?

Materials and Methods

Sample and participant selection.

As this study is exploratory, convenience sampling was used to recruit participants. Participation was voluntary and oral informed consent was obtained from all participants at the beginning of the interview. Interviews were conducted at the respective schools or at teachers’ homes.

Overall, 27 German primary and secondary school teachers (from Grund-, Haupt-, Mittel-, and Realschule, a well as Gymnasium ) were interviewed. Sixteen participants were female. On average, participants were 35.7 years old (SD = 9.64, Min = 25 years, Max = 67 years) and had on average 8.7 years of teaching experiences (SD = 9.32, Min = 1 year, Max = 42 years).

The first question in the interview procedure (see in more detail below) involved confronting the participants with the term “procrastination” as well as the definition thereof as adopted in this study. Participants were asked to indicate if this phenomenon was familiar to them and if they ever engaged in such behavior. Eleven teachers reported to not ever engage in such dilatory behavior according to this definition.

The sample of the remaining 16 teachers who reported to display dilatory behavior consisted of 11 female and five male participants with age ranging from 26 to 48 years ( M = 35.06, SD = 7.01). Years of teaching experience ranged from one to 20 years ( M = 7.56, SD = 5.94). The large distribution of age and years of teaching is beneficial for the present study’s qualitative approach, as this may lead to a broad and diverse source of personal information and experiences. Problem-centered interviews were continued only with this subsample.

Interviews and Procedure

The research reported herein was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki and has received a formal waiver of ethical approval by the ethics committee of the Department of Psychology, LMU Munich.

In order to investigate teacher procrastination on a phenomenological level, this study used a qualitative approach by conducting individual interviews. Guideline-based interviews were developed according to the stepwise method outlined by Helfferich (2010) . Hence, all teachers received the same questions whereby the actual wording and order of these questions varied slightly across interviews. The interview guide was piloted on two teachers, who were also recruited by convenience sampling, and revised before actual data collection commenced. The full interview guide can be found in the Supplemental Material to this paper. All interviews were carried out in German, personally, and by the same interviewer.

The interviews lasted between 8 and 23 min and were recorded by the voice recording application on a smart phone. All interviews were transcribed verbatim. Any names or specific locations mentioned during the interviews were replaced by the letters XY. Each transcript received a number to guarantee anonymity.

After the participants’ consent to conduct and to record the interview was given, they were encouraged to talk as freely and openly as possible. At the beginning of each interview, demographic information was obtained. Participants were then asked if they knew the meaning of the term procrastination and if they displayed this behavior. To ensure all participants were referring to the same meaning of procrastination, the term was defined by the interviewer at the beginning of the interview, who stated, “In this interview, we will be talking about procrastination behavior in teachers. Have you heard this term before? As there are many different definitions of procrastination, I will define the one we will be referring to during the interview: Procrastination is the voluntary, needless delay of an intended action despite knowing or expecting to be worse off for the delay, which occurs in a professional academic setting. Is this behavior familiar to you?” Next, participants were asked to name all the tasks within their profession they could think of on which they procrastinated and the subjective reasons for this behavior. Participants were then asked how they generally felt when they were procrastinating. Further, participants were required to recall a specific situation where they had procrastinated on a certain task and to recall what discrete emotions they experienced in the moment of actually procrastinating. They were then asked if they thought that their procrastination behavior had a negative, positive, or no consequence for them personally or for their career. Finally, a single quantitative item was included where participants had to rate whether they experienced their procrastination behavior as stressful on a rating scale ranging from 1 ( not stressful ) to 7 ( extremely stressful ).

Analysis Strategy

Data analysis was carried out on the basis of qualitative content analysis proposed by Mayring (2014) using the open access web-application QCAmap ( Mayring and Fenzl, 2014 ). The majority of the textual material was analyzed by using a deductive coding guideline. This technique, also referred to as deductive category assignment, requires the theory-driven construction of a coding guideline, consisting of category definitions, anchor examples, and coding rules ( Mayring and Fenzl, 2014 ). Based on previous findings in the procrastination literature outlined in section “Introduction” of this article, deductive coding frames were developed for each main question of the interview. In addition to exact definitions and coding rules for all categories, anchor examples for each category were extracted from the pilot interviews as well as from the actual interviews and included in the coding frame (see Table 1 for an extract of the coding guideline). For each interview, every single text passage referring to one of the categories in the coding guidelines was assigned to the corresponding category.

Table 1 . Extract of the coding guideline for reasons for teacher procrastination.

The responses to the interview questions “Do teachers know the term procrastination?” (yes vs. no), “How do teachers generally feel when procrastinating?” (positive vs. negative vs. neutral), and “What consequences do teachers think their procrastination behavior has for them personally and professionally?” (positive vs. negative vs. none) were categorized using a deductive approach where categories were mutually exclusive. The textual material referring to the following questions was categorized using a deductive coding frame where multiple categorization was allowed: “What reasons do teachers state for procrastinating on certain professional tasks?” [categories were (1) perceived task aversiveness ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ; Blunt and Pychyl, 2000 ; Steel, 2007 ), (2) fear of failure ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ; Haghbin et al., 2012 ), (3) extrinsic motivation ( Senécal et al., 1995 ), (4) hedonistic reasons ( Steel, 2007 ; Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ), and (5) low competence beliefs ( Ferrari et al., 1992 ; van Eerde, 2003 ; Steel, 2007 )] and “What discrete emotions do teachers feel in the moment of procrastination behavior?” [categories were anxiety, guilt, depression, anger, joy, happiness, unhappiness, contentment, and shame; taken from emotion scales used for example by Pychyl et al. (2000) to describe negative or positive emotional states]. During the procedure of categorizing the interviews, additional categories were added inductively for example when a participant stated a new reason for their procrastination behavior not mentioned in the previously discussed literature. According to Mayring (2014) , this mixed procedure is suitable in case the coding guideline, which has been developed based on theoretical considerations and findings from previous research, does not fully cover the contents of the entire textual material.

The data regarding the interview question “On which professional tasks do teachers procrastinate?” were analyzed using an inductive procedure ( Mayring, 2014 ). As to the authors’ knowledge, there are no prior findings regarding the specific tasks on which teachers procrastinate, categories needed to be extracted from the textual material itself in a first step, using the content analytical technique of inductive category formation. In this procedure, we categorized all text passages in which “interviewees reported any possible task which they voluntarily and needlessly delayed” (selection criterion). In addition to such a selection criterion, the specification of a level of abstraction, on which categories are phrased, is required for the inductive procedure ( Haberfellner and Fenzl, 2017 ). In this study, categories were formulated as “specific tasks where procrastination behavior occurred” (level of abstraction). In a second step, a deductive coding guideline including anchor examples and coding rules was developed based on the inductive categories found in the first step, thus achieving a more transparent coding approach.

For all text analytical steps, the coding unit, which is the smallest component of the material that can be coded (sensibility), was set to a clear meaning component in the text. The context unit, which serves as the background for the coding decision, was the respective interview. By definition, the recording unit is set to all documents for inductive category formation and to the single document in deductive category assignment ( Mayring, 2014 ). According to the step-by-step models for the various techniques of qualitative content analysis, all coding guidelines were revised if necessary during categorization of the textual material ( Mayring, 2014 ; see Supplementary Material for full coding guideline).

Quantitative data were analyzed applying descriptive statistical procedures using IBM SPSS Statistics 24 for Windows . Coding reliability was determined and frequencies were calculated for all answers and categories.

Coding Reliability

In order to establish the degree of reliability for the category systems and reproducibility of the categorizations, a second researcher (intercoder) categorized a subsample of two randomly chosen interviews independently from the primary coder. The intercoder received the uncategorized text material, the coding guideline, and the content analytical rules. In the conclusive coding conference, the coded text material of the primary coder and the intercoder was used to compare each marked text passage and its assigned category for consensus.

Two different strategies of analysis were applied to obtain reliability. Two questions of the interview guide met the assumptions for Cohen’s Kappa (e.g., responses are measured on a nominal scale and categories are mutually exclusive). The intercoder agreement in terms of the percentage of agreed and non-agreed text passages was obtained separately for all remaining interview questions ( Haberfellner and Fenzl, 2017 ). All items reached full or high agreement ( K = 1.0; 91.7–100.0%) between the raters. Overall, we concluded that our category systems were highly reliable and our categorizations of the textual material highly reproducible.

Teacher Procrastination in the Present Sample

Out of the 27 teachers initially recruited for the study, 11 reported not to procrastinate according to the study’s definition based on Steel (2007) , Wohl et al. (2010) , Sirois and Pychyl (2013) , and Anderson (2016) .

Among those 11 teachers, four simply stated never to delay work-related tasks. Two teachers reported to completely avoid delaying work-related tasks, as they perceived this as extremely unpleasant.

Four teachers reported to display some dilatory behavior but not to perceive it as stressful or not to expect to be worse off for the delay. Finally, one teacher explained that even though they might be initially angry with themselves for not starting work-related tasks earlier, they did not perceive their dilatory behavior as stressful as they needed some degree of pressure in order to work faster and efficiently. Specifically, that teacher stated:

I need that ( the pressure ). I’ve noticed that I can work very well shortly before a deadline; I do all the corrections then. I even have the feeling that I work more consistently and faster and that I can shut out everything else (Teacher 3, para. 58).

The remaining 16 teachers reported to procrastinate according to the present study’s definition of teacher procrastination. Interviews with them were continued to further explore which tasks they reported to procrastinate, what the reasons were, and which consequences procrastination had for them, particularly with respect to their emotional and stress experiences.

Professional Tasks Regarding Teacher Procrastination

Professional tasks on which 16 teachers reported to procrastinate were summarized into four main categories: correcting students’ work, administration and organization, preparing lessons, and evaluating students on their general work and performance.

Delaying working on administrative and organizational tasks was mentioned most frequently (11 teachers). This included organizing field trips, structuring one’s paper work and lessons, and organizing parent-teacher conferences.

Correcting and evaluating students’ work was mentioned by 10 teachers in our sample. For the majority of teachers, this entailed evaluating and correcting students’ written exams. For elementary school teachers, correcting students’ work also involved evaluating students’ homework.

A further task mentioned by seven participants was evaluating students on their general work and test performance. Here, secondary school teachers reported procrastinating on grading tests as well as writing up report cards at mid-term and at the end of the year. Elementary school teachers also mentioned procrastinating the required daily or weekly evaluations of students’ behaviors and writing up narrative evaluations, which replace letter grades at the early elementary years.

Further, six teachers also reported to procrastinate on preparing and structuring their lessons. Others, however, reported to never procrastinate on tasks directly related to or involving the students, such as lessons. For example, one teacher said:

Everything I do personally for the children and for lessons I just do it because I know that I have to do it and I know that the children need it (Teacher 4, para. 19).

Reasons for Teacher Procrastination

Teachers’ answers regarding the reasons for their procrastination were grouped into six main categories. The main reason for procrastinating on these tasks was perceived task aversiveness (stated by 13 teachers), that is finding the task uninteresting, boring, or effortful. This is illustrated by the following two examples:

Because I just don’t like doing it. Because it is a lot of work and yes…. Because when you have about 29 exercise books lying there in front of you and well yes… it is just very cumbersome (Teacher 13, para. 66).

Another reason for teacher procrastination was related to extrinsic motivation (stated by six teachers). The teachers reported procrastinating on tasks that lacked personal meaning but were often expected from them either by their principal or the ministry of education. For example, one teacher described this aspect in the following way:

Well, you really have to do so many things because it is just expected from you. And of course this somehow adds to the fact that you delay things, because you then think I am not doing this because I think that it makes sense, I am doing this because someone up there thinks we teachers have to do this on top of everything else (Teacher 1, para. 46).

Working conditions at the respective schools were also reported as one reason for procrastinating on school-related tasks (stated by six teachers). This category emerged inductively from the interview data and was added to the respective coding guideline during revision. It appears that teachers do not always have fixed working places at their schools where they can store and leave material needed for lessons, such as books, or where they can work quietly for a longer period of time. Further, teachers reported not having access to a computer at work where they can do research or design exercise sheets. Moreover, elementary school teachers expressed that they were missing some kind of technical support in writing and organizing daily or weekly student evaluations. The respective teachers stated that these circumstances led them to doing the required work for their profession at home, where they are more likely to engage in procrastination behavior. As an example, one teacher reported the following:

On the other hand I always say to myself that I am only being provided with the means that are there at the moment. So, if someone wants me to prepare my lessons in a way that they will work, so that then… well maybe not necessarily on the level of a lesson demonstration but that they are prepared in such a way which it is supposed to be nowadays,… then the infrastructure, that’s what I’m going to call it, would need to be different (Teacher 16, para. 33).

Four of the 16 interviewees reported to procrastinate also due to what we label “hedonistic reasons” here (referring to reasoning proposed by Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ; and Steel, 2007 ). Teachers reported intending to start and finalize work-related tasks a lot sooner but then deviated from their initial intentions and giving in to more immediate pleasant tasks, as the due date was still further in the future. However, as the due date came closer, teachers reported to feel uncomfortable for initially delaying the task. Two teachers also reported often doing pleasant activities first before preparing the lessons for the next day, even though they intended otherwise and their dilatory behavior meant working late.

Three teachers indicated that their procrastination behavior was due to their poor competence beliefs. One teacher reported frequently delaying writing letters to parents, as they did not feel competent enough to write them adequately. Further, teachers reported to procrastinate on preparing for a certain lesson, as they did not feel competent enough to teach that subject. For example:

I think there is this feeling involved… such as yes, I cannot do that anyway. So like… what is that? Not believing in oneself or something like that? (-) Yeah, because you simply don’t trust yourself to do the task at hand (Teacher 1, para. 43).

Two teachers reported procrastinating on professional tasks also due to fear of failure. Here, fear of failure touched on the concern not to meet one’s own or others standards: “But maybe you put yourself under pressure then because you want to do it especially well…” (Teacher 11, para. 40).

Emotional Experience Regarding Teacher Procrastination

Fifteen teachers reported feeling overall negatively when procrastinating. When asked to state discrete emotions they felt at the moment of procrastination, teachers reported a variety of negative emotions such as feeling angry (stated by nine teachers), guilty (four teachers), or unhappy (two teachers) but also disappointed (two teachers). The latter emotion emerged during the interview process and was inductively added to the respective coding guideline during revision. Five participants were not able to name a specific emotion but described feeling overall negatively. Therefore, the category undefined negative affect was added to the coding scheme. The following example illustrates this category:

But when I think about it or when the pressure starts to get stronger then it just blocks the happiness, the high spirits or the spontaneity or so. All of that is restricted. Then I think I should really be doing this. I have a feeling as if the spiral is turning further and further downwards and always… the noose tightens more and more (Teacher 11, para. 49).

One teacher reported feeling mixed emotions when procrastinating: joy for delaying and therefore not having to do the task at that moment, but at the same time a little dissatisfaction, as the task was still pending.

Consequences of Teacher Procrastination

Regarding the question, whether procrastination had any consequences for the teachers personally or professionally, one teacher could not provide an answer. Seven of the remaining 15 teachers reported their procrastination behavior had negative consequences for themselves. The consequences were reported to be losing confidence in one’s abilities, having to forego doing other more pleasant things due to the previous procrastination behavior, and experiencing negative emotions, as illustrated in the following example:

One possible consequence is that on some days or even weeks I have to neglect everything else… Like not having time for my spouse or having to postpone personal activities. That is a pity then (Teacher 14, para. 50).

Two teachers reported that their procrastination behavior had positive consequences for them personally. One teacher saw suffering from dilatory behavior as a chance to better oneself and stop delaying work. The other teacher said they had learned from their procrastination that even though work was frequently delayed, in the end they always managed to complete it. This teacher reported to regard the behavior as a part of the teacher profession, which needed to be accepted as such.

The remaining six teachers reported not having any consequence from their procrastination behavior, neither for them personally or for their careers.

Stressfulness of Teacher Procrastination

Overall, teachers in this sample perceived their procrastination behavior as moderately stressful [ N = 15; M = 4.63; SD = 1.06; Range: 2–6 on a rating scale ranging from 1 ( not stressful ) to 7 ( extremely stressful )]. Six teachers reported that their perception of their procrastination behavior (and with that the degree of perceived stressfulness) often changed depending on what stage of working on a task they were in. Two teachers reported that even though they felt negatively and stressed when procrastinating, overall they perceived the stressfulness of their dilatory behavior as low (level 2 of rating scale). One teacher could not provide any single score on overall stressfulness. This teacher stated:

That depends on the phase. Of course it’s not stressful at all at the time when I say okay, I am not doing that now. Then it’s great, of course, and it lets me have a lot of freedom in the teaching profession. Knowing that sometime along the way I will experience a level 7 of stress (Teacher 19, para. 26).

The aim of the present study was to gain deeper qualitative insight into procrastination among teachers. Overall, 27 teachers were interviewed. Of those, 11 participants reported to never procrastinate according to the study’s definition based on Steel (2007) , Wohl et al. (2010) , Sirois and Pychyl (2013) , and Anderson (2016) . Due to the focus of the study, these teachers’ responses were not analyzed further and any statements regarding why these teachers do not engage in dysfunctional dilatory behavior or in what way they differ from our definition of teacher procrastination are purely speculative. However, during the interviews it was apparent that these teachers did not (or thought they did not) engage in procrastination for different reasons, such as not wanting to feel stressed or to avoid experiencing negative emotions. Some of these teachers seemed to display dilatory behavior in their profession but reported not to be stressed or negatively emotionally aroused by this. One teacher claimed they needed the pressure to complete their tasks. It is not clear whether this teacher really does work better under pressure or whether they are deceiving themselves in thinking this is the case. Objectively, they actually could be procrastinating ( Anderson, 2016 ). Future research may want to investigate possible differences between teacher procrastination and other dilatory behavior as well as the respective underlying reasons and objective consequences.

However, 16 out of the 27 teachers in our sample did report to regularly engage in procrastination behavior, which overall made them feel negatively and moderately stressed. In the following, we discuss our findings from the continuing interviews with those teachers.

When and Why Teachers Procrastinate

The teachers in this study reported a variety of professional tasks on which they procrastinated. The most frequently reported tasks were working on administrative and organizational tasks, correcting students’ exams, and evaluating students’ overall performance.

With respect to our second research question, the reasons given by the teachers for procrastinating on these tasks corresponded with those discussed in the procrastination literature, namely (in decreasing order based on our sample findings) perceived task aversiveness, extrinsic motivation, adverse situational conditions, hedonistic reasons, poor competence beliefs, and fear of failure.

Regarding task aversiveness as a driver of procrastination, prior research ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ; Blunt and Pychyl, 2000 ; Steel, 2007 ) has reported significant yet moderately sized relationships between task aversiveness and procrastination behavior. When asked directly in interviews however, most students reported that task characteristics played a major role in their academic procrastination, especially when the task was perceived as aversive, complex, or stressful ( Grunschel et al., 2013 ). The findings by Grunschel et al. (2013) are in line with our results. Perceived task aversiveness was clearly the most frequently reported reason for procrastination by the teachers in our study. The discrepancy between quantitative and qualitative results regarding the role of task aversiveness in procrastination may be due to the complexity of the task aversiveness construct. In quantitative research, task aversiveness can be measured specifically in all its dimensions (e.g., Blunt and Pychyl, 2000 ) by using adequate scales. By doing so, task aversiveness can be teased apart from other constructs. In qualitative studies, participants may use the term task aversiveness more broadly and, in some cases, potentially inappropriately. For example, if teachers are fearful of holding a lesson in a subject they are not comfortable with because they may seem incompetent in front of the class (i.e., fear of failure, poor competence beliefs), they may attribute the irrational delay to disliking the task instead of recognizing that they are afraid of failing. As such, our participating teachers may have been overreporting task aversiveness due to self-deceptive reasons. They may have not wanted to admit to the interviewer or themselves that they actually doubted their competencies and so reported to procrastinate because of disliking the task. Indeed, in our study, only two teachers explicitly mentioned fear of failure as reasons for their own procrastination behavior, and only four mentioned aspects of lack of competence as reasons. Further, we propose that task aversiveness is necessary, yet not sufficient for procrastination to occur. In other words, aversive tasks are not always procrastinated, but if tasks are procrastinated, they tend to be considered aversive by the actor. Future research may want to examine the nature and role of task aversiveness in teacher procrastination in more detail.

Nevertheless, the comparably low frequencies of fear of failure and lack of competence beliefs in our study also seem reasonable given that teachers are evaluated only very rarely. Much of the existing literature on procrastination focused on students who almost constantly write tests and are being graded, with potentially severe consequences on their future education and also careers ( Kuncel et al., 2004 ). Therefore, students are under a great amount of pressure to do well during their education, which seems to render fear of failing at tasks, such as exams, an important reason to procrastinate. In contrast, in Germany, where the current study was conducted, teachers are evaluated much less frequently, their competence is rarely formally questioned, and harsh consequences of poor performance barely exist. Therefore, it is highly reasonable that competence doubts and fearing failure on professional tasks are less of an issue for them.

A further reason for procrastination reported by the teachers in this study was related to extrinsic motivation due to feeling externally regulated ( Ryan and Deci, 2000 ). At the beginning of the interviews, many teachers mentioned that one major advantage of their profession was that they could choose when to work on certain tasks and to be free in making many decisions, for instance how to structure their lessons. However, as the interviews persisted, it became clear (also to the teachers themselves) that teachers felt somewhat restricted in what they could and could not do, as they have to follow strict curricula and perform a range of administrative tasks. As such, some teachers felt they had to complete certain tasks imposed on them by the ministry of education or their principals. Teachers reported to procrastinate on these tasks, specifically as they were perceived as being meaningless. These findings are in line with previous evidence indicating that procrastination is related to less autonomous forms of motivation ( Senécal et al., 1995 ) and the need for autonomy ( Haghbin et al., 2012 ).

Furthermore, one specific reason for teacher procrastination, which we had not anticipated from the existing literature and therefore emerged from the interview material, was adverse situational conditions. Six teachers in our sample reported to procrastinate due to adverse working conditions at their respective schools. On the one hand, they felt that if they had appropriate and individual working places equipped with storage places and computers or other technical support to organize for example student evaluations, they would procrastinate less. Due to the situational circumstances however, teachers reported to accomplish most of their school-related work at home, where they perceived the chances of procrastinating as higher. On the other hand, some teachers also stated that they procrastinated due to having too many duties in their profession. According to Dorsemagen et al. (2013) , actual school lessons only account for 40% of teachers’ working hours. Therefore, more than half of teachers’ working hours are spent on other tasks such as preparation, corrections, evaluations, and administrative or organizational tasks. These tasks were mostly named by the participants of this study when asked on what professional tasks they procrastinated. Moreover, the circumstances in which teachers need to work and perform as well as their workload are likely to have an influence on teacher motivation, which in turn may again lead to procrastination behavior. These adverse working conditions thus seem to play a major role in teacher procrastination. At this point, our contextualized, qualitative, and open-ended methodology thus revealed important new insights.

Finally, four teachers reported to regularly give in to doing more pleasant tasks or activities and avoid doing unpleasant work-related tasks, even though they initially intended to do differently. These findings are in line with the idea that procrastination is a form of self-regulatory failure as proposed by Sirois and Pychyl (2013) in their mood repair model of procrastination, as well as the concept of timing of rewards and punishments as proposed by Steel (2007) . In this respect, the teachers in our study reported very similar behaviors as has been shown for students in earlier research, namely putting their present self’s needs (i.e., avoiding the aversive task in order to feel better) above the future self’s needs ( Sirois and Pychyl, 2013 ), especially when the anticipated consequences (i.e., punishments, such as feeling stressed) of not doing the work-related task were far into the future ( Steel, 2007 ).

Emotions and Perceived Stressfulness

To answer the research questions on how procrastination behavior affects teachers emotionally and to what extent dilatory behavior is perceived as stressful, the present study investigated teachers’ reported emotions experienced at the moment of procrastination through a qualitative approach and gathered a quantitative rating on how stressful teachers experienced their dilatory behavior. Past research has shown that habitual procrastination correlates positively with negative emotions. When explored through experience, sampling dilatory behavior was not found to correlate with either negative or positive emotions at the actual moment of procrastination ( Pychyl et al., 2000 ). Therefore, we had explicitly asked our participants to report about the emotions experienced at the moment of procrastination . In total, 15 out of 16 teachers stated that their dilatory behavior made them feel negatively. Specifically, teachers reported experiencing a range of unpleasant emotions, such as guilt or unhappiness, in the moment of procrastination. Only one of our teachers reported a positive feeling at the moment of procrastination (though mixed with dissatisfaction). So overall, at least in retrospect, the emotional experiences that go along with procrastination are clearly predominantly negative.

Another interesting finding was that more than half of the participants in our study reported feeling angry when procrastinating. The feeling of anger was either directed at themselves for procrastinating in the first place, or because of the situation or task at hand. There is evidence that experiencing anger influences the vulnerability to illness ( Suinn, 2001 ) and is related to higher stress and lower psychological well-being ( Maan Diong et al., 2005 ). To the authors’ knowledge, anger has not been concentrated on distinctly in procrastination research. As stress and poorer health in teachers have been linked to procrastination, which in turn leads to absence and drop-out, future research should turn its attention to the role of anger in procrastination in general, but also specifically among teachers.

Finally, as judged from our single quantitative item incorporated toward the end of our interview guide, teachers on average reported feeling moderately and not highly stressed by their behavior, with mean ratings of below 5 on the 7-point scale ranging from not stressful to extremely stressful . At first glance, this may seem somewhat surprising, as the majority reported experiencing strong negative emotions when procrastinating. Then again, as participants also reported to not have suffered any major consequences due to their dilatory behavior (see in more detail below), on the whole, procrastination seems to be only moderately stressful for teachers. Yet overall, the results obtained in this study support previous findings that procrastination should be viewed as a potential source of stress in teachers’ lives ( Verešová, 2013 ; Mohsin and Ayub, 2014 ). As stated before, teachers’ stress can lead to an array of negative personal, physical, and psychological consequences for the individual teacher, such as poor health and poor teaching performance (e.g., Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2009 ). This in turn can influence students’ education and academic performance and their future careers ( Roeser et al., 2013 ). We conclude that teacher procrastination as a potential stressor in teachers’ lives deserves further research attention.

Consequences of Procrastination

With respect to our research question regarding consequences for the individual, all teachers agreed that their procrastination behavior had no severe consequences for their careers or for them personally as they either managed to finish their tasks on time or were able to hide the fact that they had procrastinated, through improvisation for example. Seven teachers reported that the consequences of their dilatory behavior had negative effects for themselves, such as experiencing negative affect or stress. Two teachers reported having positive consequences from procrastination, as they either saw it as a chance to better themselves or to accept it as part of the teaching profession. This is an interesting finding, as both teachers reported their procrastination behavior as being moderately stressful, and leading to experiencing negative emotions, such as depression and unhappiness. Viewing the consequences as positive and therefore distracting oneself from the possible issue at hand may be a coping strategy regarding their procrastination tendencies. Chu and Choi (2005) found evidence that procrastinators engaged in more avoidance-coping strategies than non-procrastinators. Therefore, procrastinators are more likely to ignore or distract themselves from the consequences of their procrastination behavior.

Seven teachers reported not having any consequences from their procrastination behavior, as they reported always finishing everything on time. This finding reflects the circumstances that teachers are not evaluated or directly monitored. Even if their procrastination leads to poorer performance, nobody apart from maybe the students will notice it. This may be another explanation why the participants in this study perceived their procrastination as only moderately stressful: Even though they procrastinate and it affects them negatively, there are no further objectively adverse consequences.

Limitations and Implications for Future Research

The present study provided qualitative evidence of the construct of teacher procrastination on a phenomenological level. Nevertheless, the current findings should be interpreted with caution due to some limitations.

Findings in this study were obtained by conducting qualitative interviews and allocating teachers’ responses to categories derived by the authors from the procrastination literature as well as from the interview material itself. Even though the authors chose a rule-guided and systematic approach to textual analysis using Qualitative Content Analysis ( Mayring, 2014 ) and took caution to be objective and transparent, categorization of textual material remains a subjective procedure due to the interpretative paradigm of qualitative research. Further, the findings in this study were exclusively obtained through self-report. Although this method allows detailed descriptions of teachers’ procrastination behavior and respective emotions, a disadvantage of this method is that the researcher is dependent on the participants’ ability and willingness to explain their experiences and feelings. Further, some of our questions required the participants to retrospectively report their experiences and feelings, which can be affected by memory biases. Moreover, the results obtained by the personal interviews may have been subject to self-deception and social desirability and therefore distorted, as the teachers may not have wanted to seem unprofessional by reporting a lot of procrastination behavior. Future research on teacher procrastination may use alternative methodological approaches such as state-based measures (experience sampling, see e.g., Pychyl et al., 2000 ), or behavioral trace data, to avoid this issue. In addition, we had included one single quantitative item in our study in order to explore the degree to which the teachers experienced their procrastination behavior as stressful. Single items clearly suffer from limited validity and reliability, yet research has shown that they can be highly effective for the assessment of affective content ( Gogol et al., 2014 ), and the one-on-one interview context likely improved the conscientiousness with which teachers responded to this single item (as compared to a long questionnaire that is filled in individually). Nevertheless, future research should replicate and extend our findings based on this single item that teacher procrastination implies moderate levels of stress for teachers.

Due to the qualitative nature of the study, the sample was small and therefore the obtained results cannot be generalized across a larger teacher population. However, our qualitative approach allowed for an initial insight into the relatively unknown construct of teacher procrastination as defined in this study and provides the basis for further qualitative and quantitative research on teacher procrastination. For instance, working conditions were often reported as being one main reason for procrastination by the sample. Future research is needed to investigate how large the impact of working conditions is on teacher procrastination. As teacher procrastination has been linked to stress, optimizing teachers’ working places may be an affordable and effective way of reducing teacher procrastination and thus their stress experiences. As such, this finding may be interesting not only for future research but also schools and governmental bodies regarding how to structure the teaching profession in order to eliminate potential stressors.

A further implication for future research would be beneficial for understanding teacher procrastination as well as any other type of procrastination: past research has mainly comprised positive and negative emotion scores when investigating affect in regard to procrastination. The present study, however, found evidence that individuals experience an array of negative emotions when procrastinating. Especially, anger was mentioned most frequently. Exploring in more detail which discrete emotions individuals go through in regard to their procrastination behavior may prove fruitful for gaining deeper insight into this complex construct.

Previous research has found that procrastination is relatively stable over time and correlates inversely with conscientiousness (e.g., Steel, 2007 ; Kim and Seo, 2015 ), indicating it to be a facet of personality. However, situational-context factors can also lead to this behavior ( Solomon and Rothblum, 1984 ). Our study design largely focused on the trait aspect of procrastination as we asked participants to report about their “general experiences” with respect to procrastinating. As such, our study does not provide insights into teacher procrastination as viewed from a state perspective. Future research could focus on this aspect as well.

Lastly, as students are regarded as a population high at risk for engaging in procrastination ( Milgram et al., 1992 ), the question arises if teacher procrastination may influence student procrastination regarding their academic tasks. Procrastination research traditionally concentrates on researching the differences between individuals regarding their procrastination behavior. To the authors’ knowledge, there is no research on whether and how individuals affect one another regarding their procrastination behavior. There is substantial evidence that teachers have a great effect on their students, as they spend a lot of time together and are part of students’ social and cognitive development ( Davis, 2003 ). Therefore, teachers’ procrastination behavior may influence their students’ procrastination behavior in either a positive or a negative way. Future research should investigate this possibility.

Summary and Conclusion

With this study, we had set out to explore the phenomenon of procrastination especially for the population of teachers, which so far seemed largely underexplored. Given that the scarce existing literature that did address teacher procrastination in the past exclusively used quantitative approaches and general closed-ended, non-context-specific self-report instruments, we deemed a qualitative approach as valid and promising here, to take an open-ended perspective and regard the phenomenon directly from the teachers’ point of view. Our results showed that while the existing overarching conceptual frameworks proved basically applicable for teachers, past empirical findings – derived predominantly from student populations – proved not to be fully equivalent with our findings. Specifically, our study revealed that in comparison to students, lack of competence and fear of failure seem to play a less important role for procrastination among teachers. Instead, lack of meaning and corresponding extrinsic motivation for certain tasks required from the teachers seem to play a more important role than anticipated, as the teaching profession is known to be characterized by a high degree of self-determination and the majority of teachers have been reported to be basically highly intrinsically motivated for their job. Finally, while procrastination did bring about a range of negative emotions for teachers, specifically anger, and also guilt and disappointment, overall they reported that their procrastination behavior was only moderately stressful for them, which likely was due to the fact that they also experienced no major negative consequences of their dilatory behavior.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Ethics committee of the Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author Contributions

SL and AF contributed to conception of the study. SL, AF, and TF contributed to designing the methodology of the study. TF contributed to designing the relevant software. Data curation, formal analysis, and investigation were performed by SL. Project administration and writing the original draft were carried out by SL. All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02325/full#supplementary-material

Abramowski, A. (2018). Is procrastination all that “bad”? A qualitative study of academic procrastination and self-worth in postgraduate university students. J. Prev. Interv. Community 46, 158–170. doi: 10.1080/10852352.2016.1198168

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anderson, J. H. (2016). “Structured nonprocrastination: scaffolding efforts to resist the temptation to reconstrue unwarranted delay” in Procrastination, health, and well-being . eds. F. M. Sirois and T. A. Pychyl (London: Academic Press), 43–63. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-802862-9.00008-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Blunt, A. K., and Pychyl, T. A. (2000). Task aversiveness and procrastination: a multi-dimensional approach to task aversiveness across stages of personal projects. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 28, 153–167. doi: 10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00091-4

Burka, J. B., and Yuen, L. M. (2008). Procrastination: Why you do it, what to do about it now. 2nd Edn. Cambridge: Da Capo Lifelong Books.

Google Scholar

Chu, A. H. C., and Choi, J. N. (2005). Rethinking procrastination: positive effects of ‘active’ procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance. J. Soc. Psychol. 145, 245–264. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.145.3.245-264

Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher relationships on children’s social and cognitive development. Educ. Psychol. 38, 207–234. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3804_2

Dorsemagen, C., Lacroix, P., and Krause, A. (2013). “Arbeitszeit an Schulen: Welches Modell Passt in Unsere Zeit? Kriterien Zur Gestaltung Schulischer Arbeitsbedingungen” in Belastungen Und Beanspruchung Im Lehrerberuf . ed. M. Rothland (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien), 213–230.

Eckert, M., Ebert, D. D., Lehr, D., Sieland, B., and Berking, M. (2016). Overcome procrastination: enhancing emotion regulation skills reduce procrastination. Learn. Individ. Differ. 52, 10–18. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.10.001

Fee, R. L., and Tangney, J. P. (2000). Procrastination: a means of avoiding shame or guilt? J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 15, 167–184.

Ferrari, J. R. (1991). Compulsive procrastination: some self-reported characteristics. Psychol. Rep. 68, 455–458.

Ferrari, J. R., Parker, J. T., and Ware, C. B. (1992). Academic procrastination: personality correlates with Myers-Briggs types, self-efficacy, and academic locus of control. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 7, 495–502.

Gogol, K., Brunner, M., Goetz, T., Martin, R., Ugen, S., Keller, U., et al. (2014). ‘My questionnaire is too long!’ The assessments of motivational-affective constructs with three-item and single-item measures. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 39, 188–205. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.04.002

Grunschel, C., Patrzek, J., and Fries, S. (2013). Exploring reasons and consequences of academic procrastination: an interview study. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 28, 841–861. doi: 10.1007/s10212-012-0143-4

Guglielmi, R. S., and Tatrow, K. (1998). Occupational stress, burnout, and health in teachers: a methodological and theoretical analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 68, 61–99.

Haberfellner, C., and Fenzl, T. (2017). The utility value of research evidence for educational practice from the perspective of preservice student teachers in Austria – a qualitative exploratory study. J. Educ. Res. Online 9, 69–87. http://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-148972

Haghbin, M., McCaffrey, A., and Pychyl, T. A. (2012). The complexity of the relation between fear of failure and procrastination. J. Ration. Emot. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 30, 249–263. doi: 10.1007/s10942-012-0153-9

Hanif, R., Tariq, S., and Nadeem, M. (2011). Personal and job related predictors of teacher stress and job performance among school teachers. Pak. J. Commer. Soc. Sci. 5, 319–329. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/188034

Helfferich, C. (2010). Die Qualität Qualitativer Daten. 4th Edn. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH.

Kim, K. R., and Seo, E. H. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: a meta-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 82, 26–33. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038

Klassen, R. M., and Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. J. Educ. Psychol. 102, 741–756. doi: 10.1037/a0019237

Klingsieck, K. B. (2013). Procrastination: when good things don’t come to those who wait. Eur. Psychol. 18, 24–34. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000138

Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., Ones, D., and Ones, S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: can one construct predict them all? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 86, 148–161. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148

Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., and Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: effects on instructional quality and student development. J. Educ. Psychol. 105, 805–820. doi: 10.1037/a0032583

Labaree, D. F. (2000). On the nature of teaching and teacher education: difficult practices that look easy. J. Teach. Educ. 51, 228–233. doi: 10.1177/0022487100051003011

Lay, C. H. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. J. Res. Pers. 20, 474–495. doi: 10.1016/0092-6566(86)90127-3

Lay, C. H., and Schouwenburg, H. C. (1993). Trait procrastination, time management, and academic behavior. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 8, 647–662.

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Saariaho, E., Inkinen, M., Haarala-Muhonen, A., and Hailikari, T. (2015). Academic procrastinators, strategic delayers and something betwixt and between: an interview study. Frontline Learn. Res. 3, 47–62. doi: 10.14786/flr.v3i2.154

Maan Diong, S., Bishop, G. D., Enkelmann, H. C., Tong, E. M. W., Why, Y. P., Ang, J. C. H., et al. (2005). Anger, stress, coping, social support and health: modelling the relationships. Psychol. Health 20, 467–495. doi: 10.1080/0887044040512331333960

Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Available at: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173 (Accessed October 3, 2019).

Mayring, P., and Fenzl, T. (2014). QCAmap. A software for qualitative content analysis. Available at: https://www.qcamap.org (Accessed October 3, 2019).

Milgram, N. A., Gehrman, T., and Keinan, G. (1992). Procrastination and emotional upset: A typological model. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 13, 1307–1313. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90173-M

Mohsin, F. Z., and Ayub, N. (2014). The relationship between procrastination, delay of gratification, and job satisfaction among high school teachers: procrastination, delay of gratification, and job satisfaction. Jpn. Psychol. Res. 56, 224–234. doi: 10.1111/jpr.12046

Montgomery, C., and Rupp, A. A. (2005). Meta-analysis for exploring the diverse causes and effects of stress in teachers. Can. J. Educ. 28, 458–486. doi: 10.2307/4126479

Moon, S. M., and Illingworth, A. J. (2005). Exploring the dynamic nature of procrastination: a latent growth curve analysis of academic procrastination. Personal. Individ. Differ. 38, 297–309. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.04.009

Moulthrop, D., Calegari, N. C., and Eggers, D. (2006). Teachers have it easy: The big sacrifices and small salaries of America’s teachers . New York: The New Press.

Nguyen, B., Steel, P., and Ferrari, J. R. (2013). Procrastination’s impact in the workplace and the workplace’s impact on procrastination: procrastination’s impact. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 21, 388–399. doi: 10.1111/ijsa.12048

Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., and Blunt, A. (2000). Five days of emotion: an experience sampling study of undergraduate student procrastination. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 15, 239–254.

Pychyl, T. A., and Sirois, F. M. (2016). “Procrastination, emotion regulation and well-being” in Procrastination, health, and well-being . eds. F. M. Sirois and T. A. Pychyl (London: Academic Press), 163–188. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-802862-9.00008-6

Richardson, P. W., and Watt, H. M. G. (2006). Who chooses teaching and why? profiling characteristics and motivations across three Australian universities. Asia Pac. J. Teach. Educ. 34, 27–56. doi: 10.1080/13598660500480290

Richardson, P. W., and Watt, H. M. G. (2014). “Why people choose teaching as a career: an expectancy-value approach to understanding teacher motivation” in Teacher motivation . eds. P. W. Richardson, S. A. Karabenick, and H. M. G. Watt (New York: Routledge), 25–41.

Roeser, R. W., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Jha, A., Cullen, M., Wallace, L., Wilensky, R., et al. (2013). Mindfulness training and reductions in teacher stress and burnout: results from two randomized, waitlist-control field trials. J. Educ. Psychol. 105, 787–804. doi: 10.1037/a0032093

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 54–67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

Senécal, C., Koestner, R., and Vallerand, R. J. (1995). Self-regulation and academic procrastination. J. Soc. Psychol. 135, 607–619. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1995.9712234

Sirois, F. M., Melia-Gordon, M. L., and Pychyl, T. A. (2003). ‘I’ll look after my health, later’: an investigation of procrastination and health. Personal. Individ. Differ. 35, 1167–1184. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00326-4

Sirois, F. M., and Pychyl, T. A. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation: consequences for future self: procrastination, mood regulation and future self. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 7, 115–127. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12011

Skaalvik, E. M., and Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teach. Teach. Educ. 25, 518–524. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.12.006

Solomon, L. J., and Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: frequency and cognitive behavioral correlates. J. Couns. Psychol. 31, 503–509. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.31.4.503

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychol. Bull. 133, 65–94. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65

Steel, P. (2010). Arousal, avoidant and decisional procrastinators: do they exist? Personal. Individ. Differ. 48, 926–934. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.025

Steel, P., Brothen, T., and Wambach, C. (2001). Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood. Personal. Individ. Differ. 30, 95–106. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00013-1

Suinn, R. M. (2001). The terrible twos—anger and anxiety. Am. Psychol. 56, 27–36. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.1.27

Tice, D. M., and Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and health: the costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychol. Sci. 8, 454–458.

Tice, D. M., and Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving in to feel good: the place of emotion regulation in the context of general self-control. Psychol. Inq. 11, 149–159. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1103_03

Tice, D. M., Bratslavsky, E., and Baumeister, R. F. (2001). Emotional distress regulation takes precedence over impulse control: if you feel bad, do it! J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80, 53–67. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.53

van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination. Personal. Individ. Differ. 35, 1401–1418. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00358-6

Verešová, M. (2013). Procrastination, stress and coping among primary school teachers. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 106, 2131–2138. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.243

Visser, L., Korthagen, F. A. J., and Schoonenboom, J. (2018). Differences in learning characteristics between students with high, average, and low levels of academic procrastination: students’ views on factors influencing their learning. Front. Psychol. 9, 1–15. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00808

Wohl, M. J. A., Pychyl, T. A., and Bennett, S. H. (2010). I forgive myself, now I can study: how self-forgiveness for procrastinating can reduce future procrastination. Personal. Individ. Differ. 48, 803–808. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.029

Keywords: procrastination, teacher procrastination, teacher emotion, teacher stress, qualitative analysis (QA)

Citation: Laybourn S, Frenzel AC and Fenzl T (2019) Teacher Procrastination, Emotions, and Stress: A Qualitative Study. Front. Psychol . 10:2325. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02325

Received: 16 May 2019; Accepted: 30 September 2019; Published: 11 October 2019.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2019 Laybourn, Frenzel and Fenzl. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sara Laybourn, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Open access
• Published: 16 May 2024

Procrastination, depression and anxiety symptoms in university students: a three-wave longitudinal study on the mediating role of perceived stress

• Anna Jochmann 1 ,
• Burkhard Gusy 1 ,
• Tino Lesener 1 &
• Christine Wolter 1  

BMC Psychology volume  12 , Article number:  276 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

148 Accesses

Metrics details

It is generally assumed that procrastination leads to negative consequences. However, evidence for negative consequences of procrastination is still limited and it is also unclear by which mechanisms they are mediated. Therefore, the aim of our study was to examine the harmful consequences of procrastination on students’ stress and mental health. We selected the procrastination-health model as our theoretical foundation and tried to evaluate the model’s assumption that trait procrastination leads to (chronic) disease via (chronic) stress in a temporal perspective. We chose depression and anxiety symptoms as indicators for (chronic) disease and hypothesized that procrastination leads to perceived stress over time, that perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time, and that procrastination leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time, mediated by perceived stress.

To examine these relationships properly, we collected longitudinal data from 392 university students at three occasions over a one-year period and analyzed the data using autoregressive time-lagged panel models.

Procrastination did lead to depression and anxiety symptoms over time. However, perceived stress was not a mediator of this effect. Procrastination did not lead to perceived stress over time, nor did perceived stress lead to depression and anxiety symptoms over time.

Conclusions

We could not confirm that trait procrastination leads to (chronic) disease via (chronic) stress, as assumed in the procrastination-health model. Nonetheless, our study demonstrated that procrastination can have a detrimental effect on mental health. Further health outcomes and possible mediators should be explored in future studies.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

“Due tomorrow? Do tomorrow.”, might be said by someone who has a tendency to postpone tasks until the last minute. But can we enjoy today knowing about the unfinished task and tomorrow’s deadline? Or do we feel guilty for postponing a task yet again? Do we get stressed out because we have little time left to complete it? Almost everyone has procrastinated at some point when it came to completing unpleasant tasks, such as mowing the lawn, doing the taxes, or preparing for exams. Some tend to procrastinate more frequently and in all areas of life, while others are less inclined to do so. Procrastination is common across a wide range of nationalities, as well as socioeconomic and educational backgrounds [ 1 ]. Over the last fifteen years, there has been a massive increase in research on procrastination [ 2 ]. Oftentimes, research focuses on better understanding the phenomenon of procrastination and finding out why someone procrastinates in order to be able to intervene. Similarly, the internet is filled with self-help guides that promise a way to overcome procrastination. But why do people seek help for their procrastination? Until now, not much research has been conducted on the negative consequences procrastination could have on health and well-being. Therefore, in the following article we examine the effect of procrastination on mental health over time and stress as a possible facilitator of this relationship on the basis of the procrastination-health model by Sirois et al. [ 3 ].

Procrastination and its negative consequences

Procrastination can be defined as the tendency to voluntarily and irrationally delay intended activities despite expecting negative consequences as a result of the delay [ 4 , 5 ]. It has been observed in a variety of groups across the lifespan, such as students, teachers, and workers [ 1 ]. For example, some students tend to regularly delay preparing for exams and writing essays until the last minute, even if this results in time pressure or lower grades. Procrastination must be distinguished from strategic delay [ 4 , 6 ]. Delaying a task is considered strategic when other tasks are more important or when more resources are needed before the task can be completed. While strategic delay is viewed as functional and adaptive, procrastination is classified as dysfunctional. Procrastination is predominantly viewed as the result of a self-regulatory failure [ 7 ]. It can be understood as a trait, that is, as a cross-situational and time-stable behavioral disposition [ 8 ]. Thus, it is assumed that procrastinators chronically delay tasks that they experience as unpleasant or difficult [ 9 ]. Approximately 20 to 30% of adults have been found to procrastinate chronically [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Prevalence estimates for students are similar [ 13 ]. It is believed that students do not procrastinate more often than other groups. However, it is easy to examine procrastination in students because working on study tasks requires a high degree of self-organization and time management [ 14 ].

It is generally assumed that procrastination leads to negative consequences [ 4 ]. Negative consequences are even part of the definition of procrastination. Research indicates that procrastination is linked to lower academic performance [ 15 ], health impairment (e.g., stress [ 16 ], physical symptoms [ 17 ], depression and anxiety symptoms [ 18 ]), and poor health-related behavior (e.g., heavier alcohol consumption [ 19 ]). However, most studies targeting consequences of procrastination are cross-sectional [ 4 ]. For that reason, it often remains unclear whether an examined outcome is a consequence or an antecedent of procrastination, or whether a reciprocal relationship between procrastination and the examined outcome can be assumed. Additionally, regarding negative consequences of procrastination on health, it is still largely unknown by which mechanisms they are mediated. Uncovering such mediators would be helpful in developing interventions that can prevent negative health consequences of procrastination.

The procrastination-health model

The first and only model that exclusively focuses on the effect of procrastination on health and the mediators of this effect is the procrastination-health model [ 3 , 9 , 17 ]. Sirois [ 9 ] postulates three pathways: An immediate effect of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease and two mediated pathways (see Fig.  1 ).

Adopted from the procrastination-health model by Sirois [ 9 ]

The immediate effect is not further explained. Research suggests that procrastination creates negative feelings, such as shame, guilt, regret, and anger [ 20 , 21 , 22 ]. The described feelings could have a detrimental effect on mental health [ 23 , 24 , 25 ].

The first mediated pathway leads from trait procrastination to (chronic) disease via (chronic) stress. Sirois [ 9 ] assumes that procrastination creates stress because procrastinators are constantly aware of the fact that they still have many tasks to complete. Stress activates the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) system, increases autonomic nervous system arousal, and weakens the immune system, which in turn contributes to the development of diseases. Sirois [ 9 ] distinguishes between short-term and long-term effects of procrastination on health mediated by stress. She believes that, in the short term, single incidents of procrastination cause acute stress, which leads to acute health problems, such as infections or headaches. In the long term, chronic procrastination, as you would expect with trait procrastination, causes chronic stress, which leads to chronic diseases over time. There is some evidence in support of the stress-related pathway, particularly regarding short-term effects [ 3 , 17 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. However, as we mentioned above, most of these studies are cross-sectional. Therefore, the causal direction of these effects remains unclear. To our knowledge, long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by (chronic) stress have not yet been investigated.

The second mediated pathway leads from trait procrastination to (chronic) disease via poor health-related behavior. According to Sirois [ 9 ], procrastinators form lower intentions to carry out health-promoting behavior or to refrain from health-damaging behavior because they have a low self-efficacy of being able to care for their own health. In addition, they lack the far-sighted view that the effects of health-related behavior only become apparent in the long term. For the same reason, Sirois [ 9 ] believes that there are no short-term, but only long-term effects of procrastination on health mediated by poor health-related behavior. For example, an unhealthy diet leads to diabetes over time. The findings of studies examining the behavioral pathway are inconclusive [ 3 , 17 , 26 , 28 ]. Furthermore, since most of these studies are cross-sectional, they are not suitable for uncovering long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by poor health-related behavior.

In summary, previous research on the two mediated pathways of the procrastination-health model mainly found support for the role of (chronic) stress in the relationship between trait procrastination and (chronic) disease. However, only short-term effects have been investigated so far. Moreover, longitudinal studies are needed to be able to assess the causal direction of the relationship between trait procrastination, (chronic) stress, and (chronic) disease. Consequently, our study is the first to examine long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by (chronic) stress, using a longitudinal design. (Chronic) disease could be measured by a variety of different indicators (e.g., physical symptoms, diabetes, or coronary heart disease). We choose depression and anxiety symptoms as indicators for (chronic) disease because they signal mental health complaints before they manifest as (chronic) diseases. Additionally, depression and anxiety symptoms are two of the most common mental health complaints among students [ 29 , 30 ] and procrastination has been shown to be a significant predictor of depression and anxiety symptoms [ 18 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. Until now, the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model with depression and anxiety symptoms as the health outcome has only been analyzed in one cross-sectional study that confirmed the predictions of the model [ 35 ].

The aim of our study is to evaluate some of the key assumptions of the procrastination-health model, particularly the relationships between trait procrastination, (chronic) stress, and (chronic) disease over time, surveyed in the following analysis using depression and anxiety symptoms.

In line with the key assumptions of the procrastination-health model, we postulate (see Fig.  2 ):

Procrastination leads to perceived stress over time.

Perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time.

Procrastination leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time, mediated by perceived stress.

The section of the procrastination-health model we examined

Materials and methods

Our study was part of a health monitoring at a large German university Footnote 1 . Ethical approval for our study was granted by the Ethics Committee of the university’s Department of Education and Psychology. We collected the initial data in 2019. Two occasions followed, each at an interval of six months. In January 2019, we sent out 33,267 invitations to student e-mail addresses. Before beginning the survey, students provided their written informed consent to participate in our study. 3,420 students took part at the first occasion (T1; 10% response rate). Of these, 862 participated at the second (T2) and 392 at the third occasion (T3). In order to test whether dropout was selective, we compared sociodemographic and study specific characteristics (age, gender, academic semester, number of assessments/exams) as well as behavior and health-related variables (procrastination, perceived stress, depression and anxiety symptoms) between the participants of the first wave ( n  = 3,420) and those who participated three times ( n  = 392). Results from independent-samples t-tests and chi-square analysis showed no significant differences regarding sociodemographic and study specific characteristics (see Additional file 1: Table S1 and S2 ). Regarding behavior and health-related variables, independent-samples t-tests revealed a significant difference in procrastination between the two groups ( t (3,409) = 2.08, p  < .05). The mean score of procrastination was lower in the group that participated in all three waves.

The mean age of the longitudinal respondents was 24.1 years ( SD  = 5.5 years), the youngest participants were 17 years old, the oldest one was 59 years old. The majority of participants was female (74.0%), 7 participants identified neither as male nor as female (1.8%). The respondents were on average enrolled in the third year of studying ( M  = 3.9; SD  = 2.3). On average, the students worked about 31.2 h ( SD  = 14.1) per week for their studies, and an additional 8.5 h ( SD  = 8.5) for their (part-time) jobs. The average income was €851 ( SD  = 406), and 4.9% of the students had at least one child. The students were mostly enrolled in philosophy and humanities (16.5%), education and psychology (15.8%), biology, chemistry, and pharmacy (12.5%), political and social sciences (10.6%), veterinary medicine (8.9%), and mathematics and computer science (7.7%).

We only used established and well evaluated instruments for our analyses.

• Procrastination

We adopted the short form of the Procrastination Questionnaire for Students (PFS-4) [ 36 ] to measure procrastination. The PFS-4 assesses procrastination at university as a largely stable behavioral disposition across situations, that is, as a trait. The questionnaire consists of four items (e.g., I put off starting tasks until the last moment.). Each item was rated on a 5-point scale ((almost) never = 1 to (almost) always = 5) for the last two weeks. All items were averaged, with higher scores indicating a greater tendency to procrastinate. The PFS-4 has been proven to be reliable and valid, showing very high correlations with other established trait procrastination scales, for example, with the German short form of the General Procrastination Scale [ 37 , 38 ]. We also proved the scale to be one-dimensional in a factor analysis, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90.

Perceived stress

The Heidelberger Stress Index (HEI-STRESS) [ 39 ] is a three-item measure of current perceived stress due to studying as well as in life in general. For the first item, respondents enter a number between 0 (not stressed at all) and 100 (completely stressed) to indicate how stressed their studies have made them feel over the last four weeks. For the second and third item, respondents rate on a 5-point scale how often they feel “stressed and tense” and as how stressful they would describe their life at the moment. We transformed the second and third item to match the range of the first item before we averaged all items into a single score with higher values indicating greater perceived stress. We proved the scale to be one-dimensional and Cronbach’s alpha for our study was 0.86.

Depression and anxiety symptoms

We used the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) [ 40 ], a short form of the Patient Health Questionnaire [ 41 ] with four items, to measure depression and anxiety symptoms. The PHQ-4 contains two items from the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) [ 42 ] and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2 (GAD-2) [ 43 ], respectively. It is a well-established screening scale designed to assess the core criteria of major depressive disorder (PHQ-2) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-2) according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). However, it was shown that the GAD-2 is also appropriate for screening other anxiety disorders. According to Kroenke et al. [ 40 ], the PHQ-4 can be used to assess a person’s symptom burden and impairment. We asked the participants to rate how often they have been bothered over the last two weeks by problems, such as “Little interest or pleasure in doing things”. Response options were 0 = not at all, 1 = several days, 2 = more than half the days, and 3 = nearly every day. Calculated as the sum of the four items, the total scores range from 0 to 12 with higher scores indicating more frequent depression and anxiety symptoms. The total scores can be categorized as none-to-minimal (0–2), mild (3–5), moderate (6–8), and severe (9–12) depression and anxiety symptoms. The PHQ-4 was shown to be reliable and valid [ 40 , 44 , 45 ]. We also proved the scale to be one-dimensional in a factor analysis, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.86.

Data analysis

To test our hypotheses, we performed structural equation modelling (SEM) using R (Version 4.1.1) with the package lavaan. All items were standardized ( M  = 0, SD  = 1). Due to the non-normality of some study variables and a sufficiently large sample size of N near to 400 [ 46 ], we used robust maximum likelihood estimation (MLR) for all model estimations. As recommended by Hu and Bentler [ 47 ], we assessed the models’ goodness of fit by chi-square test statistic, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and comparative fit index (CFI). A non-significant chi-square indicates good model fit. Since chi-square is sensitive to sample size, we also evaluated fit indices less sensitive to the number of observations. RMSEA and SRMR values of 0.05 or lower as well as TLI and CFI values of 0.97 or higher indicate good model fit. RMSEA values of 0.08 or lower, SRMR values of 0.10 or lower, as well as TLI and CFI values of 0.95 or higher indicate acceptable model fit [ 48 , 49 ]. First, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis for the first occasion, defining three factors that correspond to the measures of procrastination, perceived stress, and depression and anxiety symptoms. Next, we tested for measurements invariance over time and specified the measurement model, before testing our hypotheses.

Measurement invariance over time

To test for measurement invariance over time, we defined one latent variable for each of the three occasions, corresponding to the measures of procrastination, perceived stress, and depression and anxiety symptoms, respectively. As recommended by Geiser and colleagues [ 50 ], the links between indicators and factors (i.e., factor loadings and intercepts) should be equal over measurement occasions; therefore, we added indicator specific factors. A first and least stringent step of testing measurement invariance is configural invariance (M CI ). It was examined whether the included constructs (procrastination, perceived stress, depression and anxiety symptoms) have the same pattern of free and fixed loadings over time. This means that the assignment of the indicators to the three latent factors over time is supported by the underlying data. If configural invariance was supported, restrictions for the next step of testing measurement invariance (metric or weak invariance; M MI ) were added. This means that each item contributes to the latent construct to a similar degree over time. Metric invariance was tested by constraining the factor loadings of the constructs over time. The next step of testing measurement invariance (scalar or strong invariance; M SI ) consisted of checking whether mean differences in the latent construct capture all mean differences in the shared variance of the items. Scalar invariance was tested by constraining the item intercepts over time. The constraints applied in the metric invariance model were retained [ 51 ]. For the last step of testing measurement invariance (residual or strict invariance; M RI ), the residual variables were also set equal over time. If residual invariance is supported, differences in the observed variables can exclusively be attributed to differences in the variances of the latent variables.

We used the Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference test to evaluate the superiority of a more stringent model [ 52 ]. We assumed the model with the largest number of invariance restrictions – which still has an acceptable fit and no substantial deterioration of the chi-square value – to be the final model [ 53 ]. Following previous recommendations, we considered a decrease in CFI of 0.01 and an increase in RMSEA of 0.015 as unacceptable to establish measurement invariance [ 54 ]. If a more stringent model had a significant worse chi-square value, but the model fit was still acceptable and the deterioration in model fit fell within the change criteria recommended for CFI and RMSEA values, we still considered the more stringent model to be superior.

Hypotheses testing

As recommended by Dormann et al. [ 55 ], we applied autoregressive time-lagged panel models to test our hypotheses. In the first step, we specified a model (M 0 ) that only included the stabilities of the three variables (procrastination, perceived stress, depression and anxiety symptoms) over time. In the next step (M 1 ), we added the time-lagged effects from procrastination (T1) to perceived stress (T2) and from procrastination (T2) to perceived stress (T3) as well as from perceived stress (T1) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T2) and from perceived stress (T2) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T3). Additionally, we included a direct path from procrastination (T1) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T3). If this path becomes significant, we can assume a partial mediation [ 55 ]. Otherwise, we can assume a full mediation. We compared these nested models using the Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference test and the Akaike information criterion (AIC). The chi-square difference value should either be non-significant, indicating that the proposed model including our hypotheses (M 1 ) does not have a significant worse model fit than the model including only stabilities (M 0 ), or, if significant, it should be in the direction that M 1 fits the data better than M 0 . Regarding the AIC, M 1 should have a lower value than M 0 .

Table  1 displays the means, standard deviations, internal consistencies (Cronbach’s alpha), and stabilities (correlations) of all study variables. The alpha values of procrastination, perceived stress, and depression and anxiety symptoms are classified as good (> 0.80) [ 56 ]. The correlation matrix of the manifest variables used for the analyses can be found in the Additional file 1: Table  S3 .

We observed the highest test-retest reliabilities for procrastination ( r  ≥ .74). The test-retest reliabilities for depression and anxiety symptoms ( r  ≥ .64) and for perceived stress ( r  ≥ .54) were a bit lower (see Table  1 ). The pattern of correlations shows a medium to large but positive relationship between procrastination and depression and anxiety symptoms [ 57 , 58 ]. The association between procrastination and perceived stress was small, the one between perceived stress and depression and anxiety symptoms very large (see Table  1 ).

Confirmatory factor analysis showed an acceptable to good fit (x 2 (41) = 118.618, p  < .001; SRMR = 0.042; RMSEA = 0.071; TLI = 0.95; CFI = 0.97). When testing for measurement invariance over time for each construct, the residual invariance models with indicator specific factors provided good fit to the data (M RI ; see Table  2 ), suggesting that differences in the observed variables can exclusively be attributed to differences of the latent variables. We then specified and tested the measurement model of the latent constructs prior to model testing based on the items of procrastination, perceived stress, and depression and anxiety symptoms. The measurement model fitted the data well (M M ; see Table  3 ). All items loaded solidly on their respective factors (0.791 ≤ β ≤ 0.987; p  < .001).

To test our hypotheses, we analyzed the two models described in the methods section.

The fit of the stability model (M 0 ) was acceptable (see Table  3 ). Procrastination was stable over time, with stabilities above 0.82. The stabilities of perceived stress as well as depression and anxiety symptoms were somewhat lower, ranging from 0.559 (T1 -> T2) to 0.696 (T2 -> T3) for perceived stress and from 0.713 (T2 -> T3) to 0.770 (T1 -> T2) for depression and anxiety symptoms, respectively.

The autoregressive mediation model (M 1 ) fitted the data significantly better than M 0 . The direct path from procrastination (T1) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T3) was significant (β = 0.16; p  < .001), however, none of the mediated paths (from procrastination (T1) to perceived stress (T2) and from perceived stress (T2) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T3)) proved to be substantial. Also, the time-lagged paths from perceived stress (T1) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T2) and from procrastination (T2) to perceived stress (T3) were not substantial either (see Fig.  3 ).

To examine whether the hypothesized effects would occur over a one-year period rather than a six-months period, we specified an additional model with paths from procrastination (T1) to perceived stress (T3) and from perceived stress (T1) to depression and anxiety symptoms (T3), also including the stabilities of the three constructs as in the stability model M 0 . The model showed an acceptable fit (χ 2 (486) = 831.281, p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.048; SRMR = 0.091; TLI = 0.95; CFI = 0.95), but neither of the two paths were significant.

Therefore, our hypotheses, that procrastination leads to perceived stress over time (H1) and that perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time (H2) must be rejected. We could only partially confirm our third hypothesis, that procrastination leads to depression and anxiety over time, mediated by perceived stress (H3), since procrastination did lead to depression and anxiety symptoms over time. However, this effect was not mediated by perceived stress.

Results of the estimated model including all hypotheses (M 1 ). Note Non-significant paths are dotted. T1 = time 1; T2 = time 2; T3 = time 3. *** p  < .001

To sum up, we tried to examine the harmful consequences of procrastination on students’ stress and mental health. Hence, we selected the procrastination-health model by Sirois [ 9 ] as a theoretical foundation and tried to evaluate some of its key assumptions in a temporal perspective. The author assumes that trait procrastination leads to (chronic) disease via (chronic) stress. We chose depression and anxiety symptoms as indicators for (chronic) disease and postulated, in line with the key assumptions of the procrastination-health model, that procrastination leads to perceived stress over time (H1), that perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time (H2), and that procrastination leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time, mediated by perceived stress (H3). To examine these relationships properly, we collected longitudinal data from students at three occasions over a one-year period and analyzed the data using autoregressive time-lagged panel models. Our first and second hypotheses had to be rejected: Procrastination did not lead to perceived stress over time, and perceived stress did not lead to depression and anxiety symptoms over time. However, procrastination did lead to depression and anxiety symptoms over time – which is in line with our third hypothesis – but perceived stress was not a mediator of this effect. Therefore, we could only partially confirm our third hypothesis.

Our results contradict previous studies on the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model, which consistently found support for the role of (chronic) stress in the relationship between trait procrastination and (chronic) disease. Since most of these studies were cross-sectional, though, the causal direction of these effects remained uncertain. There are two longitudinal studies that confirm the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model [ 27 , 28 ], but both studies examined short-term effects (≤ 3 months), whereas we focused on more long-term effects. Therefore, the divergent findings may indicate that there are short-term, but no long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by (chronic) stress.

Our results especially raise the question whether trait procrastination leads to (chronic) stress in the long term. Looking at previous longitudinal studies on the effect of procrastination on stress, the following stands out: At shorter study periods of two weeks [ 27 ] and four weeks [ 28 ], the effect of procrastination on stress appears to be present. At longer study periods of seven weeks [ 59 ], three months [ 28 ], six months, and twelve months, as in our study, the effect of procrastination on stress does not appear to be present. There is one longitudinal study in which procrastination was a significant predictor of stress symptoms nine months later [ 34 ]. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution, though, because the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic fell within the study period, which could have contributed to increased stress symptoms [ 60 ]. Unfortunately, Johansson et al. [ 34 ] did not report whether average stress symptoms increased during their study. In one of the two studies conducted by Fincham and May [ 59 ], the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak also fell within their seven-week study period. However, they reported that in their study, average stress symptoms did not increase from baseline to follow-up. Taken together, the findings suggest that procrastination can cause acute stress in the short term, for example during times when many tasks need to be completed, such as at the end of a semester, but that procrastination does not lead to chronic stress over time. It seems possible that students are able to recover during the semester from the stress their procrastination caused at the end of the previous semester. Because of their procrastination, they may also have more time to engage in relaxing activities, which could further mitigate the effect of procrastination on stress. Our conclusions are supported by an early and well-known longitudinal study by Tice and Baumeister [ 61 ], which compared procrastinating and non-procrastinating students with regard to their health. They found that procrastinators experienced less stress than their non-procrastinating peers at the beginning of the semester, but more at the end of the semester. Additionally, our conclusions are in line with an interview study in which university students were asked about the consequences of their procrastination [ 62 ]. The students reported that, due to their procrastination, they experience high levels of stress during periods with heavy workloads (e.g., before deadlines or exams). However, the stress does not last, instead, it is relieved immediately after these periods.

Even though research indicates, in line with the assumptions of the procrastination-health model, that stress is a risk factor for physical and mental disorders [ 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ], perceived stress did not have a significant effect on depression and anxiety symptoms in our study. The relationship between stress and mental health is complex, as people respond to stress in many different ways. While some develop stress-related mental disorders, others experience mild psychological symptoms or no symptoms at all [ 67 ]. This can be explained with the help of vulnerability-stress models. According to vulnerability-stress models, mental illnesses emerge from an interaction of vulnerabilities (e.g., genetic factors, difficult family backgrounds, or weak coping abilities) and stress (e.g., minor or major life events or daily hassles) [ 68 , 69 ]. The stress perceived by the students in our sample may not be sufficient enough on its own, without the presence of other risk factors, to cause depression and anxiety symptoms. However, since we did not assess individual vulnerability and stress factors in our study, these considerations are mere speculation.

In our study, procrastination led to depression and anxiety symptoms over time, which is consistent with the procrastination-health model as well as previous cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence [ 18 , 21 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. However, it is still unclear by which mechanisms this effect is mediated, as perceived stress did not prove to be a substantial mediator in our study. One possible mechanism would be that procrastination impairs affective well-being [ 70 ] and creates negative feelings, such as shame, guilt, regret, and anger [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 62 , 71 ], which in turn could lead to depression and anxiety symptoms [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Other potential mediators of the relationship between procrastination and depression and anxiety symptoms emerge from the behavioral pathway of the procrastination-health model, suggesting that poor health-related behaviors mediate the effect of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease. Although evidence for this is still scarce, the results of one cross-sectional study, for example, indicate that poor sleep quality might mediate the effect of procrastination on depression and anxiety symptoms [ 35 ].

In summary, we found that procrastination leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time and that perceived stress is not a mediator of this effect. We could not show that procrastination leads to perceived stress over time, nor that perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time. For the most part, the relationships between procrastination, perceived stress, and depression and anxiety symptoms did not match the relationships between trait procrastination, (chronic) stress, and (chronic) disease as assumed in the procrastination-health model. Explanations for this could be that procrastination might only lead to perceived stress in the short term, for example, during preparations for end-of-semester exams, and that perceived stress may not be sufficient enough on its own, without the presence of other risk factors, to cause depression and anxiety symptoms. In conclusion, we could not confirm long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by (chronic) stress, as assumed for the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

In our study, we tried to draw causal conclusions about the harmful consequences of procrastination on students’ stress and mental health. However, since procrastination is a trait that cannot be manipulated experimentally, we have conducted an observational rather than an experimental study, which makes causal inferences more difficult. Nonetheless, a major strength of our study is that we used a longitudinal design with three waves. This made it possible to draw conclusions about the causal direction of the effects, as in hardly any other study targeting consequences of procrastination on health before [ 4 , 28 , 55 ]. Therefore, we strongly recommend using a similar longitudinal design in future studies on the procrastination-health model or on consequences of procrastination on health in general.

We chose a time lag of six months between each of the three measurement occasions to examine long-term effects of procrastination on depression and anxiety symptoms mediated by perceived stress. However, more than six months may be necessary for the hypothesized effects to occur [ 72 ]. The fact that the temporal stabilities of the examined constructs were moderate or high (0.559 ≤ β ≤ 0.854) [ 73 , 74 ] also suggests that the time lags may have been too short. The larger the time lag, the lower the temporal stabilities, as shown for depression and anxiety symptoms, for example [ 75 ]. High temporal stabilities make it more difficult to detect an effect that actually exists [ 76 ]. Nonetheless, Dormann and Griffin [ 77 ] recommend using shorter time lags of less than one year, even with high stabilities, because of other influential factors, such as unmeasured third variables. Therefore, our time lags of six months seem appropriate.

It should be discussed, though, whether it is possible to detect long-term effects of the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model within a total study period of one year. Sirois [ 9 ] distinguishes between short-term and long-term effects of procrastination on health mediated by stress, but does not address how long it might take for long-term effects to occur or when effects can be considered long-term instead of short-term. The fact that an effect of procrastination on stress is evident at shorter study periods of four weeks or less but in most cases not at longer study periods of seven weeks or more, as we mentioned earlier, could indicate that short-term effects occur within the time frame of one to three months, considering the entire stress-related pathway. Hence, it seems appropriate to assume that we have examined rather long-term effects, given our study period of six and twelve months. Nevertheless, it would be beneficial to use varying study periods in future studies, in order to be able to determine when effects can be considered long-term.

Concerning long-term effects of the stress-related pathway, Sirois [ 9 ] assumes that chronic procrastination causes chronic stress, which leads to chronic diseases over time. The term “chronic stress” refers to prolonged stress episodes associated with permanent tension. The instrument we used captures perceived stress over the last four weeks. Even though the perceived stress of the students in our sample was relatively stable (0.559 ≤ β ≤ 0.696), we do not know how much fluctuation occurred between each of the three occasions. However, there is some evidence suggesting that perceived stress is strongly associated with chronic stress [ 78 ]. Thus, it seems acceptable that we used perceived stress as an indicator for chronic stress in our study. For future studies, we still suggest the use of an instrument that can more accurately reflect chronic stress, for example, the Trier Inventory for Chronic Stress (TICS) [ 79 ].

It is also possible that the occasions were inconveniently chosen, as they all took place in a critical academic period near the end of the semester, just before the examination period began. We chose a similar period in the semester for each occasion for the sake of comparability. However, it is possible that, during this preparation periods, stress levels peaked and procrastinators procrastinated less because they had to catch up after delaying their work. This could have introduced bias to the data. Therefore, in future studies, investigation periods should be chosen that are closer to the beginning or in the middle of a semester.

Furthermore, Sirois [ 9 ] did not really explain her understanding of “chronic disease”. However, it seems clear that physical illnesses, such as diabetes or cardiovascular diseases, are meant. Depression and anxiety symptoms, which we chose as indicators for chronic disease, represent mental health complaints that do not have to be at the level of a major depressive disorder or an anxiety disorder, in terms of their quantity, intensity, or duration [ 40 ]. But they can be viewed as precursors to a major depressive disorder or an anxiety disorder. Therefore, given our study period of one year, it seems appropriate to use depression and anxiety symptoms as indicators for chronic disease. At longer study periods, we would expect these mental health complaints to manifest as mental disorders. Moreover, the procrastination-health model was originally designed to be applied to physical diseases [ 3 ]. Perhaps, the model assumptions are more applicable to physical diseases than to mental disorders. By applying parts of the model to mental health complaints, we have taken an important step towards finding out whether the model is applicable to mental disorders as well. Future studies should examine additional long-term health outcomes, both physical and psychological. This would help to determine whether trait procrastination has varying effects on different diseases over time. Furthermore, we suggest including individual vulnerability and stress factors in future studies in order to be able to analyze the effect of (chronic) stress on (chronic) diseases in a more differentiated way.

Regarding our sample, 3,420 students took part at the first occasion, but only 392 participated three times, which results in a dropout rate of 88.5%. At the second and third occasion, invitation e-mails were only sent to participants who had indicated at the previous occasion that they would be willing to participate in a repeat survey and provided their e-mail address. This is probably one of the main reasons for our high dropout rate. Other reasons could be that the students did not receive any incentives for participating in our study and that some may have graduated between the occasions. Selective dropout analysis revealed that the mean score of procrastination was lower in the group that participated in all three waves ( n  = 392) compared to the group that participated in the first wave ( n  = 3,420). One reason for this could be that those who have a higher tendency to procrastinate were more likely to procrastinate on filling out our survey at the second and third occasion. The findings of our dropout analysis should be kept in mind when interpreting our results, as lower levels of procrastination may have eliminated an effect on perceived stress or on depression and anxiety symptoms. Additionally, across all age groups in population-representative samples, the student age group reports having the best subjective health [ 80 ]. Therefore, it is possible that they are more resilient to stress and experience less impairment of well-being than other age groups. Hence, we recommend that future studies focus on other age groups as well.

It is generally assumed that procrastination leads to lower academic performance, health impairment, and poor health-related behavior. However, evidence for negative consequences of procrastination is still limited and it is also unclear by which mechanisms they are mediated. In consequence, the aim of our study was to examine the effect of procrastination on mental health over time and stress as a possible facilitator of this relationship. We selected the procrastination-health model as a theoretical foundation and used the stress-related pathway of the model, assuming that trait procrastination leads to (chronic) disease via (chronic) stress. We chose depression and anxiety symptoms as indicators for (chronic) disease and collected longitudinal data from students at three occasions over a one-year period. This allowed us to draw conclusions about the causal direction of the effects, as in hardly any other study examining consequences of procrastination on (mental) health before. Our results indicate that procrastination leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time and that perceived stress is not a mediator of this effect. We could not show that procrastination leads to perceived stress over time, nor that perceived stress leads to depression and anxiety symptoms over time. Explanations for this could be that procrastination might only lead to perceived stress in the short term, for example, during preparations for end-of-semester exams, and that perceived stress may not be sufficient on its own, that is, without the presence of other risk factors, to cause depression and anxiety symptoms. Overall, we could not confirm long-term effects of trait procrastination on (chronic) disease mediated by (chronic) stress, as assumed for the stress-related pathway of the procrastination-health model. Our study emphasizes the importance of identifying the consequences procrastination can have on health and well-being and determining by which mechanisms they are mediated. Only then will it be possible to develop interventions that can prevent negative health consequences of procrastination. Further health outcomes and possible mediators should be explored in future studies, using a similar longitudinal design.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

University Health Report at Freie Universität Berlin.

Abbreviations

Comparative fit index

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition

Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2

Heidelberger Stress Index

Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical

Robust maximum likelihood estimation

Short form of the Procrastination Questionnaire for Students

Patient Health Questionnaire-2

Patient Health Questionnaire-4

Root mean square error of approximation

Structural equation modeling

Standardized root mean square residual

Tucker-Lewis index

Lu D, He Y, Tan Y, Gender S, Status. Cultural differences, Education, family size and procrastination: a sociodemographic Meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.719425 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yan B, Zhang X. What research has been conducted on Procrastination? Evidence from a systematical bibliometric analysis. Front Psychol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.809044 .

Sirois FM, Melia-Gordon ML, Pychyl TA. I’ll look after my health, later: an investigation of procrastination and health. Pers Individ Dif. 2003;35:1167–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00326-4 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Grunschel C. Akademische Prokrastination: Eine qualitative und quantitative Untersuchung von Gründen und Konsequenzen [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]: Universität Bielefeld; 2013.

Steel P. The Nature of Procrastination: a Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review of Quintessential Self-Regulatory failure. Psychol Bull. 2007;133:65–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Corkin DM, Yu SL, Lindt SF. Comparing active delay and procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective. Learn Individ Differ. 2011;21:602–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.005 .

Balkis M, Duru E. Procrastination, self-regulation failure, academic life satisfaction, and affective well-being: underregulation or misregulation form. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2016;31:439–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0266-5 .

Schulz N. Procrastination und Planung – Eine Untersuchung zum Einfluss von Aufschiebeverhalten und Depressivität auf unterschiedliche Planungskompetenzen [Doctoral dissertation]: Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster; 2007.

Sirois FM. Procrastination, stress, and Chronic Health conditions: a temporal perspective. In: Sirois FM, Pychyl TA, editors. Procrastination, Health, and well-being. London: Academic; 2016. pp. 67–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802862-9.00004-9 .

Harriott J, Ferrari JR. Prevalence of procrastination among samples of adults. Psychol Rep. 1996;78:611–6. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1996.78.2.611 .

Ferrari JR, O’Callaghan J, Newbegin I. Prevalence of Procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia: Arousal and Avoidance delays among adults. N Am J Psychol. 2005;7:1–6.

Google Scholar  

Ferrari JR, Díaz-Morales JF, O’Callaghan J, Díaz K, Argumedo D. Frequent behavioral Delay tendencies by adults. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2007;38:458–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022107302314 .

Day V, Mensink D, O’Sullivan M. Patterns of academic procrastination. JCRL. 2000;30:120–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2000.10850090 .

Höcker A, Engberding M, Rist F, Prokrastination. Ein Manual Zur Behandlung Des Pathologischen Aufschiebens. 2nd ed. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2017.

Kim KR, Seo EH. The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: a meta-analysis. Pers Individ Dif. 2015;82:26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038 .

Khalid A, Zhang Q, Wang W, Ghaffari AS, Pan F. The relationship between procrastination, perceived stress, saliva alpha-amylase level and parenting styles in Chinese first year medical students. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2019;12:489–98. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S207430 .

Sirois FM. I’ll look after my health, later: a replication and extension of the procrastination–health model with community-dwelling adults. Pers Individ Dif. 2007;43:15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.003 .

Reinecke L, Meier A, Aufenanger S, Beutel ME, Dreier M, Quiring O, et al. Permanently online and permanently procrastinating? The mediating role of internet use for the effects of trait procrastination on psychological health and well-being. New Media Soc. 2018;20:862–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675437 .

Westgate EC, Wormington SV, Oleson KC, Lindgren KP. Productive procrastination: academic procrastination style predicts academic and alcohol outcomes. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2017;47:124–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12417 .

Feyzi Behnagh R, Ferrari JR. Exploring 40 years on affective correlates to procrastination: a literature review of situational and dispositional types. Curr Psychol. 2022;41:1097–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02653-z .

Rahimi S, Hall NC, Sticca F. Understanding academic procrastination: a longitudinal analysis of procrastination and emotions in undergraduate and graduate students. Motiv Emot. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-023-10010-9 .

Patrzek J, Grunschel C, Fries S. Academic procrastination: the perspective of University counsellors. Int J Adv Counselling. 2012;34:185–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-012-9150-z .

Watson D, Clark LA, Carey G. Positive and negative affectivity and their relation to anxiety and depressive disorders. J Abnorm Psychol. 1988;97:346–53. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.97.3.346 .

Cândea D-M, Szentagotai-Tătar A. Shame-proneness, guilt-proneness and anxiety symptoms: a meta-analysis. J Anxiety Disord. 2018;58:78–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.07.005 .

Young CM, Neighbors C, DiBello AM, Traylor ZK, Tomkins M. Shame and guilt-proneness as mediators of associations between General Causality orientations and depressive symptoms. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2016;35:357–70. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2016.35.5.357 .

Stead R, Shanahan MJ, Neufeld RW. I’ll go to therapy, eventually: Procrastination, stress and mental health. Pers Individ Dif. 2010;49:175–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.028 .

Dow NM. Procrastination, stress, and sleep in tertiary students [Master’s thesis]: University of Canterbury; 2018.

Sirois FM, Stride CB, Pychyl TA. Procrastination and health: a longitudinal test of the roles of stress and health behaviours. Br J Health Psychol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12658 .

Hofmann F-H, Sperth M, Holm-Hadulla RM. Psychische Belastungen Und Probleme Studierender. Psychotherapeut. 2017;62:395–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00278-017-0224-6 .

Liu CH, Stevens C, Wong SHM, Yasui M, Chen JA. The prevalence and predictors of mental health diagnoses and suicide among U.S. college students: implications for addressing disparities in service use. Depress Anxiety. 2019;36:8–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22830 .

Aftab S, Klibert J, Holtzman N, Qadeer K, Aftab S. Schemas mediate the Link between Procrastination and Depression: results from the United States and Pakistan. J Rat-Emo Cognitive-Behav Ther. 2017;35:329–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-017-0263-5 .

Flett AL, Haghbin M, Pychyl TA. Procrastination and depression from a cognitive perspective: an exploration of the associations among Procrastinatory Automatic thoughts, rumination, and Mindfulness. J Rat-Emo Cognitive-Behav Ther. 2016;34:169–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-016-0235-1 .

Saddler CD, Sacks LA. Multidimensional perfectionism and academic procrastination: relationships with Depression in University students. Psychol Rep. 1993;73:863–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941930733pt123 .

Johansson F, Rozental A, Edlund K, Côté P, Sundberg T, Onell C, et al. Associations between procrastination and subsequent Health outcomes among University students in Sweden. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.49346 .

Gusy B, Jochmann A, Lesener T, Wolter C, Blaszcyk W. „Get it done – schadet Aufschieben Der Gesundheit? Präv Gesundheitsf. 2023;18:228–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11553-022-00950-4 .

Glöckner-Rist A, Engberding M, Höcker A, Rist F. Prokrastinationsfragebogen für Studierende (PFS): Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher items und Skalen. ZIS - GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences; 2014.

Klingsieck KB, Fries S. Allgemeine Prokrastination: Entwicklung Und Validierung Einer Deutschsprachigen Kurzskala Der General Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986). Diagnostica. 2012;58:182–93. https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000060 .

Lay CH. At last, my research article on procrastination. J Res Pers. 1986;20:474–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(86)90127-3 .

Schmidt LI, Obergfell J. Zwangsjacke Bachelor?! Stressempfinden Und Gesundheit Studierender: Der Einfluss Von Anforderungen Und Entscheidungsfreiräumen Bei Bachelor- Und Diplomstudierenden Nach Karaseks Demand-Control-Modell. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller; 2011.

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Löwe B. An Ultra-brief Screening Scale for anxiety and depression: the PHQ-4. Psychosomatics. 2009;50:613–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-3182(09)70864-3 .

Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ Primary Care Study. JAMA. 1999;282:1737–44. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.18.1737 .

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item Depression Screener. Med Care. 2003;41:1284–92.

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Monahan PO, Löwe B. Anxiety disorders in Primary Care: prevalence, impairment, Comorbidity, and detection. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:317–25. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004 .

Khubchandani J, Brey R, Kotecki J, Kleinfelder J, Anderson J. The Psychometric properties of PHQ-4 depression and anxiety screening scale among College Students. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2016;30:457–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2016.01.014 .

Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, Spitzer C, Glaesmer H, Wingenfeld K, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disorders. 2010;122:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.019 .

Boomsma A, Hoogland JJ. The robustness of LISREL modeling revisited. In: Cudeck R, Du Toit S, Sörbom D, editors. Structural equation modeling: Present and Future: a festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International; 2001. pp. 139–68.

Hu L, Bentler PM. Fit indices in Covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to Underparameterized Model Misspecification. Psychol Methods. 1998;3:424–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 .

Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. MPR. 2003;8:23–74.

Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in Covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria Versus New Alternatives. Struct Equ Model. 1999;6:1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 .

Geiser C, Eid M, Nussbeck FW, Courvoisier DS, Cole DA. Analyzing true change in Longitudinal Multitrait-Multimethod studies: application of a Multimethod Change Model to Depression and anxiety in children. Dev Psychol. 2010;46:29–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017888 .

Putnick DL, Bornstein MH. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: the state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev Rev. 2016;41:71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 .

Satorra A, Bentler PM. A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika. 2001;66:507–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296192 .

Geiser C. Datenanalyse Mit Mplus: Eine Anwendungsorientierte Einführung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften; 2010.

Book   Google Scholar  

Chen F, Curran PJ, Bollen KA, Kirby J, Paxton P. An empirical evaluation of the use of fixed cutoff points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural equation models. Sociol Methods Res. 2008;36:462–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124108314720 .

Dormann C, Zapf D, Perels F. Quer- und Längsschnittstudien in der Arbeitspsychologie [Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies in occupational psychology.]. In: Kleinbeck U, Schmidt K-H,Enzyklopädie der Psychologie [Encyclopedia of psychology]:, Themenbereich D, Serie III, Band 1, Arbeitspsychologie [Subject Area, Series D. III, Volume 1, Industrial Psychology]. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag; 2010. pp. 923–1001.

Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.

Gignac GE, Szodorai ET. Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Pers Indiv Differ. 2016;102:74–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069 .

Funder DC, Ozer DJ. Evaluating effect size in Psychological Research: sense and nonsense. Adv Methods Practices Psychol Sci. 2019;2:156–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847202 .

Fincham FD, May RW. My stress led me to procrastinate: temporal relations between perceived stress and academic procrastination. Coll Stud J. 2021;55:413–21.

Daniali H, Martinussen M, Flaten MA. A Global Meta-Analysis of Depression, anxiety, and stress before and during COVID-19. Health Psychol. 2023;42:124–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001259 .

Tice DM, Baumeister RF. Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and Health: the costs and benefits of Dawdling. Psychol Sci. 1997;8:454–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00460.x .

Schraw G, Wadkins T, Olafson L. Doing the things we do: a grounded theory of academic procrastination. J Educ Psychol. 2007;99:12–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.12 .

Slavich GM. Life Stress and Health: a review of conceptual issues and recent findings. Teach Psychol. 2016;43:346–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628316662768 .

Phillips AC, Carroll D, Der G. Negative life events and symptoms of depression and anxiety: stress causation and/or stress generation. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2015;28:357–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2015.1005078 .

Hammen C. Stress and depression. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:293–319. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.143938 .

Blazer D, Hughes D, George LK. Stressful life events and the onset of a generalized anxiety syndrome. Am J Psychiatry. 1987;144:1178–83. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.144.9.1178 .

Southwick SM, Charney DS. The Science of Resilience: implications for the Prevention and Treatment of Depression. Science. 2012;338:79–82. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1222942 .

Ingram RE, Luxton DD. Vulnerability-stress models. In: Hankin BL, Abela JR, editors. Development of psychopathology: a vulnerability-stress perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005. pp. 32–46.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Maercker A. Modelle Der Klinischen Psychologie. In: Petermann F, Maercker A, Lutz W, Stangier U, editors. Klinische psychologie – Grundlagen. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2018. pp. 13–31.

Krause K, Freund AM. Delay or procrastination – a comparison of self-report and behavioral measures of procrastination and their impact on affective well-being. Pers Individ Dif. 2014;63:75–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.050 .

Grunschel C, Patrzek J, Fries S. Exploring reasons and consequences of academic procrastination: an interview study. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2013;28:841–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0143-4 .

Dwyer JH. Statistical models for the social and behavioral sciences. New York: Oxford University Press; 1983.

Cohen JA, Power Primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:155–9. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 .

Ferguson CJ. An effect size primer: a Guide for clinicians and Researchers. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2009;40:532–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015808 .

Hinz A, Berth H, Kittel J, Singer S. Die zeitliche Stabilität (Test-Retest-Reliabilität) Von Angst Und Depressivität Bei Patienten Und in Der Allgemeinbevölkerung. Z Med Psychol. 2011;20:24–31. https://doi.org/10.3233/ZMP-2010-2012 .

Adachi P, Willoughby T. Interpreting effect sizes when controlling for stability effects in longitudinal autoregressive models: implications for psychological science. Eur J Dev Psychol. 2015;12:116–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2014.963549 .

Dormann C, Griffin M. Optimal time lags in Panel studies. Psychol Methods. 2015;20:489–505. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000041 .

Weckesser LJ, Dietz F, Schmidt K, Grass J, Kirschbaum C, Miller R. The psychometric properties and temporal dynamics of subjective stress, retrospectively assessed by different informants and questionnaires, and hair cortisol concentrations. Sci Rep. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-37526-2 .

Schulz P, Schlotz W, Becker P. TICS: Trierer Inventar Zum chronischen stress. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2004.

Heidemann C, Scheidt-Nave C, Beyer A-K, Baumert J, Thamm R, Maier B, et al. Health situation of adults in Germany - results for selected indicators from GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS. J Health Monit. 2021;6:3–25. https://doi.org/10.25646/8459 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Open Access Funding provided by Freie Universität Berlin.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Prevention and Psychosocial Health Research, Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, 14195, Berlin, Germany

Anna Jochmann, Burkhard Gusy, Tino Lesener & Christine Wolter

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: A.J., B.G., T.L.; methodology: B.G., A.J.; validation: B.G.; formal analysis: A.J., B.G.; investigation: C.W., T.L., B.G.; data curation: C.W., T.L., B.G.; writing–original draft preparation: A.J., B.G.; writing–review and editing: A.J., T.L., B.G., C.W.; visualization: A.J., B.G.; supervision: B.G., T.L.; project administration: C.W., T.L., B.G.; All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Anna Jochmann or Burkhard Gusy .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Selective dropout analysis and correlation matrix of the manifest variables

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Jochmann, A., Gusy, B., Lesener, T. et al. Procrastination, depression and anxiety symptoms in university students: a three-wave longitudinal study on the mediating role of perceived stress. BMC Psychol 12 , 276 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01761-2

Download citation

Received : 25 May 2023

Accepted : 02 May 2024

Published : 16 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01761-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Student health
• Longitudinal study

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Think Like a Doctor to Avoid Procrastinating in Medical School

U.S. News & World Report

May 20, 2024, 8:00 PM

• Share This:
• share on facebook
• share on threads
• share on linkedin
• share on email

There are various causes of procrastination. Fear of failing, fear of success, perfectionism and other people may be causing overwhelming anxiety that leads to procrastination.

It is critically important for medical school students to be honest with themselves and periodically self-reflect to consider if they are procrastinating. Consider what might be the cause of this problematic behavior and begin to turn it around.

A common reason for procrastination in school is the belief that every test, paper or assignment must be absolutely perfect. Humans are not perfect! Students can try hard, but constant perfection isn’t going to happen.

Procrastinating over fear of a flawed result must be attacked quickly before a huge amount of time is lost. Waiting too long can actually make fears of failure come true. Students can begin to think they made a mistake and give up on something very important to them.

Once accepted to medical school, try combating procrastination by starting to think and work like a doctor. This is the time to learn for the sake of learning.

[ Read: What a First-Year Medical School Student Can Expect. ]

Many individuals believe they have to be motivated before they can begin a project. We try to teach action before motivation. Forget about waiting for motivation or inspiration and just start doing what needs to be done.

Taking baby steps is much more important. I have heard it said that writing only five minutes a day, but writing every day, can enable a person to become an author in very short order.

We also remind our students that Mark Twain once said that if you have to eat an ugly green frog every day, you want to do it the first thing in the morning. That way it will be the worst thing you have to do all day. And if you have to eat two ugly green frogs, eat the uglier one first. Some of my students have kept little plastic green frogs by their computers, just as a reminder.

Doctors try to do their best with every patient. You can’t procrastinate or people will die. If you need to ask a question or look up a dose, do it at once. Doing what is the best choice at the critical moment, even if the solution is not perfect, will be necessary.

Failure to complete a task, such as charting a patient, means the doctor on call will not be able to figure out what you did or what the next step should be if the patient ends up in the emergency room.

Another cause of procrastination comes from making an unrealistic or unnecessary comparison to your classmates instead of focusing on your own efforts. Ask questions of your faculty and residents to learn — forget your pride for the sake of your future patients.

[ Read: 4 Skills Every Premed Student Should Develop Before Medical School ]

During medical school, you will be given opportunities to do research with your professors, often voluntarily. Students can be invited to watch procedures in the operating room that last for hours. Both of these sound enjoyable and helpful to your career.

However, before you say “yes,” consider your other mandatory commitments. Prioritize if tomorrow’s exam matters to you — and it should. Do you still have time to turn in the patient work-up that is due first thing in the morning? Can you really function well and recall what you need tomorrow if you have not slept?

Students might feel they cannot say “no,” and rather than communicating this, they say “yes” without considering, negotiating or acknowledging that this is not the time. Ask if the offer stands for another week. Try to start with a plan that can work, do not procrastinate and mobilize to begin.

When I was an intern , I remember having to finish dictations on 60 charts left undone by a resident who was terminated from the program. This was certainly a lesson I have never forgotten.

When hospitals stopped paying doctors if their charts weren’t finished on time, behavior changed quickly. This was certainly a message not to put off your duties.

Fear, perfectionism and feeling overwhelmed likely caused some residents to fall into a spiral of uncompleted responsibilities. There were little or no resources to deal with this problem.

[ READ: 6 Signs of a Compassionate Medical School. ]

Currently, medical schools and hospitals offer assistance when a student or resident is struggling. If procrastination is a problem for you, ask your institution what resources are available.

Waiting for inspiration won’t happen. Don’t put the cart before the horse; always think about action before motivation.

Most students will certainly not look forward to a hard task and long commitment, but breaking it into small pieces and initiating the first step will make each of the following steps easier. You will begin to feel satisfaction as you accumulate each success.

Take those baby steps. Nibble them off one bite at a time, just keep going and remember to eat that ugly green frog!

More from U.S. News

Evaluate Priorities to Balance Personal Life, Medical School

How to Discuss Mental Health Issues in Medical School Applications

How Hard Is Medical School and What Is the Med School Curriculum?

Think Like a Doctor to Avoid Procrastinating in Medical School originally appeared on usnews.com

Related News

What we know so far about the helicopter crash that killed Iran’s president and others

Vatican moves to adapt to hoaxes, Internet and overhauls its process for evaluating visions of Mary

Mexico’s cartel violence haunts civilians as the June 2 election approaches

Recommended.

Md. Gov. Moore lays out next steps at Key Bridge collapse site after refloating Dali ship

Swifties are taking European vacations just to see Taylor Swift

Supreme Court declines case on Montgomery Co. Public Schools gender identity policy

Related categories:.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Letter of Recommendation

What I’ve Learned From My Students’ College Essays

The genre is often maligned for being formulaic and melodramatic, but it’s more important than you think.

By Nell Freudenberger

Most high school seniors approach the college essay with dread. Either their upbringing hasn’t supplied them with several hundred words of adversity, or worse, they’re afraid that packaging the genuine trauma they’ve experienced is the only way to secure their future. The college counselor at the Brooklyn high school where I’m a writing tutor advises against trauma porn. “Keep it brief , ” she says, “and show how you rose above it.”

I started volunteering in New York City schools in my 20s, before I had kids of my own. At the time, I liked hanging out with teenagers, whom I sometimes had more interesting conversations with than I did my peers. Often I worked with students who spoke English as a second language or who used slang in their writing, and at first I was hung up on grammar. Should I correct any deviation from “standard English” to appeal to some Wizard of Oz behind the curtains of a college admissions office? Or should I encourage students to write the way they speak, in pursuit of an authentic voice, that most elusive of literary qualities?

In fact, I was missing the point. One of many lessons the students have taught me is to let the story dictate the voice of the essay. A few years ago, I worked with a boy who claimed to have nothing to write about. His life had been ordinary, he said; nothing had happened to him. I asked if he wanted to try writing about a family member, his favorite school subject, a summer job? He glanced at his phone, his posture and expression suggesting that he’d rather be anywhere but in front of a computer with me. “Hobbies?” I suggested, without much hope. He gave me a shy glance. “I like to box,” he said.

I’ve had this experience with reluctant writers again and again — when a topic clicks with a student, an essay can unfurl spontaneously. Of course the primary goal of a college essay is to help its author get an education that leads to a career. Changes in testing policies and financial aid have made applying to college more confusing than ever, but essays have remained basically the same. I would argue that they’re much more than an onerous task or rote exercise, and that unlike standardized tests they are infinitely variable and sometimes beautiful. College essays also provide an opportunity to learn precision, clarity and the process of working toward the truth through multiple revisions.

When a topic clicks with a student, an essay can unfurl spontaneously.

Even if writing doesn’t end up being fundamental to their future professions, students learn to choose language carefully and to be suspicious of the first words that come to mind. Especially now, as college students shoulder so much of the country’s ethical responsibility for war with their protest movement, essay writing teaches prospective students an increasingly urgent lesson: that choosing their own words over ready-made phrases is the only reliable way to ensure they’re thinking for themselves.

Teenagers are ideal writers for several reasons. They’re usually free of preconceptions about writing, and they tend not to use self-consciously ‘‘literary’’ language. They’re allergic to hypocrisy and are generally unfiltered: They overshare, ask personal questions and call you out for microaggressions as well as less egregious (but still mortifying) verbal errors, such as referring to weed as ‘‘pot.’’ Most important, they have yet to put down their best stories in a finished form.

I can imagine an essay taking a risk and distinguishing itself formally — a poem or a one-act play — but most kids use a more straightforward model: a hook followed by a narrative built around “small moments” that lead to a concluding lesson or aspiration for the future. I never get tired of working with students on these essays because each one is different, and the short, rigid form sometimes makes an emotional story even more powerful. Before I read Javier Zamora’s wrenching “Solito,” I worked with a student who had been transported by a coyote into the U.S. and was reunited with his mother in the parking lot of a big-box store. I don’t remember whether this essay focused on specific skills or coping mechanisms that he gained from his ordeal. I remember only the bliss of the parent-and-child reunion in that uninspiring setting. If I were making a case to an admissions officer, I would suggest that simply being able to convey that experience demonstrates the kind of resilience that any college should admire.

The essays that have stayed with me over the years don’t follow a pattern. There are some narratives on very predictable topics — living up to the expectations of immigrant parents, or suffering from depression in 2020 — that are moving because of the attention with which the student describes the experience. One girl determined to become an engineer while watching her father build furniture from scraps after work; a boy, grieving for his mother during lockdown, began taking pictures of the sky.

If, as Lorrie Moore said, “a short story is a love affair; a novel is a marriage,” what is a college essay? Every once in a while I sit down next to a student and start reading, and I have to suppress my excitement, because there on the Google Doc in front of me is a real writer’s voice. One of the first students I ever worked with wrote about falling in love with another girl in dance class, the absolute magic of watching her move and the terror in the conflict between her feelings and the instruction of her religious middle school. She made me think that college essays are less like love than limerence: one-sided, obsessive, idiosyncratic but profound, the first draft of the most personal story their writers will ever tell.

Nell Freudenberger’s novel “The Limits” was published by Knopf last month. She volunteers through the PEN America Writers in the Schools program.

84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples

Is procrastination good or bad? Some people judge procrastination and call it “lazyness”. Others insist that procrastinating helps them to do their best under pressing deadlines.

If you assigned to write an essay on this topic, we’ve got your back covered! In this article you will find 51 interesting procrastination essay topics. Keep reading!

🏆 Best Procrastination Topics & Essay Examples

📌 interesting procrastination essay topics to write about, 👍 good procrastination research topics, ❓ research questions about procrastination.

• A Critical Analysis of Hamlet’s Constant Procrastination in Shakespeare’s Hamlet Claudius is successful in his ambition and Hamlet is left with the decision on whether or not to kill his uncle so as to avenge his father’s death.
• Procrastination Essay In both cases, people procrastinate because they fear the consequences of their actions and prefer to live in uncertainty. These are serious obstacles on the way to success and life satisfaction, which is why it […]
• Students Procrastination Problem If the task is big, it should be broken down into small tasks that are easy to manage and to complete.
• Procrastination and Time Management In case the available time is not properly allocated to all activities to be achieved within a given period, then the available time will not be allocated to the correct event.
• Procrastination: Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods Due to the nature of the research questions of the study, open-ended questionnaires and interviews will be used to gather the required information for the study.
• Procrastination Among College Students It is not the fear of failure that keeps people from taking on assignments, but their personality traits and desire to have fun instead of putting in the effort.
• Procrastination as a Means of Improving Creativity The work’s author is Adam Grant, a professor of management and psychology at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. The point of the essay is to talk about the benefits of procrastination.
• Procrastination Predictors in College Students This is a show of autonomy, the evading of the aversive task, avoidance of a state of anxiety, a response to their fear of failure or they are said to suffer from perfectionism and usually […]
• Procrastination Concept and Reasons The term procrastination is relatively new to psychology, despite the fact that the psychological essence of the phenomenon indicated by this term is familiar to everyone.
• Time Management: How to Beat Your Procrastination? In order to manage time effectively the following solutions can be applied: The most popular solution is to make a schedule to keep track of important facts and ideas that can be of any use […]
• Procrastination in Undergraduates and Graduates In this article, the researcher was interested in investigating the differences in procrastination and the motivation between undergraduate and graduate students.
• Procrastination in the Fields of Education and Psychology Although two articles discuss the topic of procrastination, writings in the fields of psychology and education are similar only in relation to the chosen IMRAD format, vocabulary, and rhetoric appeals, and the articles are different […]
• Frequent Tests as the Ways to Overcome Procrastination and Anxiety The problem can depend not only on the level of the students’ knowledge but also on the degree of the tension and anxiety which are associated with the preparation and review of the material during […]
• Procrastination Issues: Cause and Effect Procrastination is said to be the avoidance of starting or going through on a task that is deemed to be important and necessary.
• Solving the Problem of Procrastination
• Procrastination: The Biggest Problem of Generation
• Negative Consequences of Medical Checkups Procrastination
• Steps for Overcoming Procrastination by Michael Locklear
• Procrastination, and Side Effects of Procrastination
• Procrastination: Causes and Effects
• Measuring the Effect of Procrastination and Environmental Awareness on Households’ Energy-Saving Behaviours
• Overcoming Obstacles of Overcoming Procrastination
• Three Field Experiments on Procrastination and Willpower
• The Causes of the Procrastination to Seek Revenge in Hamlet, a Play by William Shakespeare
• The Cause and Effects of Procrastination Causes Stress
• Behavior Modification & Stopping Procrastination
• Procrastination: Computer and Urgent Legislative Issues
• The Questioning, Procrastination and Rationalization That Defines Hamlet’s Character
• The Effect of Academic Procrastination on Self Determination
• Addressing the Behavior of Procrastination That Needed to Be Fixed
• Procrastination Is a Complex Behavioral Disorder
• The Importance of Procrastination and Their Advantage and How It Affects
• Putting It off for Later: Procrastination and End of Fiscal Year Spending Spikes
• The Struggle With Procrastination in Hamlet by William Shakespeare
• The Effects of Procrastination on Personal Discipline and the Quality of Work
• Procrastination and Its Effects on College Students
• The Different Reasons Why One Commit Procrastination
• Rush and Procrastination Under Hyperbolic Discounting and Interdependent Activities
• Procrastination Is a Psychological Epidemic
• Procrastination Is Synonymous With Hesitation
• Reducing Procrastination by High School Students
• An Analysis of the Causes and Remedies of Procrastination in College
• Procrastination in Teams, Contract Design and Discrimination
• The Relationship Between Academic Procrastination Behaviors of Preservice Science Teachers and Their Attitudes toward Social Media
• Procrastination Is a Dangerous and Seemingly Unbreakable Habit
• The Contributions of Technology to Modern Procrastination
• Transition and Regional Inequality in Russia; Reorganization or Procrastination
• Deadlines, Procrastination, and Forgetting in Charitable Tasks
• The Causes and Effects of Procrastination on Students in School
• Procrastination: Anger and Unrealistic High Expectations
• Procrastination versus Time Management
• The Different Ways of Eliminating Procrastination
• Procrastination and Time Management Skills
• Differences in Procrastination and Motivation Between Undergraduate and Graduate Students
• How Study Environments Foster Academic Procrastination?
• What Are the Pros and Cons of Procrastination?
• What Are the Main Reasons Students Procrastination?
• How Does Procrastination Affect College Education?
• Why Should We Stop Procrastination?
• Is Procrastination a Mental Health Issue?
• What Are the Complex Reasons for Procrastination?
• What Are the Causes and Cures for Procrastination?
• Is Procrastination Caused by Laziness?
• Why Do Students Procrastinate?
• How Permanently End Procrastination?
• What Are the Statistics on Procrastination?
• Can You Be Successful if You Procrastinate?
• How to Achieve the Art of Procrastination?
• What Age Group Is Procrastinate the Most?
• What Is the Most Common Cause of Procrastination?
• What Are the Negative Effects of Procrastination?
• Why Being in Procrastination Is a Serious Problem?
• What Are the Common Types of Procrastination?
• Does Loss Aversion Beat Procrastination?
• How Does Procrastination Affect Success?
• How Many People Procrastinate on Average?
• How Can a Creative Person Use the Procrastination?
• How Can You Avoid Procrastination?
• Is Procrastination a Form of Depression?
• What Happens in Your Brain When You Procrastinate?
• How Can Students Avoid Procrastination?
• What Are the Solutions to Procrastination?
• How Does Procrastination Affect Academic Performance?
• Is Procrastination a Genetic Trait?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 2). 84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/procrastination-essay-examples/

"84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples." IvyPanda , 2 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/procrastination-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples'. 2 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/procrastination-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/procrastination-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "84 Procrastination Ideas & Essay Examples." March 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/procrastination-essay-examples/.

• Developmental Psychology Essay Ideas
• Remote Work Research Topics
• Moral Development Essay Topics
• ADHD Essay Ideas
• Forecasting Questions
• Personality Development Ideas
• Problem Solving Essay Ideas
• OCD Essay Titles

The University of Chicago The Law School

Inside higher ed covers analysis from sonja starr on changes to college essay prompts, re-evaluating the ‘essay carveout’.

When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in two lawsuits against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill last summer, the justices seemed to leave room for colleges to consider race through applicants’ essay responses.

“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA).

Sonja Starr, a law professor at the University of Chicago, has been analyzing changes to college essay prompts since the fall. She told  Inside Higher Ed  that the “essay carveout,” as it’s often called, is a “meaningful path forward” for colleges trying to maintain their racial diversity. Her report on “ Admissions Essays After SFFA ,” published last month in the  Indiana Law Journal , suggests that many selective colleges are taking the approach seriously, too.

Read more at Inside Higher Ed

The Case of Tinker V. Des Moines School District

This essay is about the landmark Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which established the First Amendment rights of students in public schools. In 1969, the Court ruled that students do not lose their constitutional rights to free speech when they enter school, provided their actions do not cause substantial disruption. The case originated when students, including Mary Beth and John Tinker, wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War and were suspended. The ruling set the “Tinker Test” for determining when student speech is protected. This decision has had a lasting impact on student activism and free speech, influencing subsequent cases and ongoing debates about the balance between school authority and individual rights.

How it works

In the American jurisprudence, the case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District stands as a monumental juncture, particularly concerning the First Amendment entitlements of pupils. Rendered by the United States Supreme Court in 1969, this landmark verdict established a pivotal precedent dictating the scope of students’ free speech privileges in public educational institutions. The judgment underscored the immutable tenet that neither students nor educators relinquish their constitutional rights to vocal or expressive liberties upon crossing the threshold of the educational edifice.

The genesis of the legal saga traces back to December 1965, amid the burgeoning anti-war sentiment during the Vietnam conflict. A cadre of pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, among them Mary Beth Tinker, her sibling John Tinker, and their comrade Christopher Eckhardt, elected to don black armbands as a symbolic gesture of protest. Their objective was to mourn the fallen on both sides of the contentious war and advocate for a proposed Yuletide truce. Yet, school authorities swiftly imposed a directive proscribing the wearing of such armbands upon learning of the planned demonstration. Undeterred by this proscription, the Tinker siblings and Eckhardt adorned themselves with the armbands, precipitating their immediate suspension for contravening the new edict.

Convinced that their First Amendment prerogatives had been transgressed, the students, bolstered by parental support, resolved to contest the school district’s decree. The legal imbroglio eventually ascended to the apex court, confronting the justices with the pivotal query of whether the educational institution’s actions encroached upon the students’ constitutionally ordained freedom of expression.

In a seminal 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with the students. Delivering the majority opinion, Justice Abe Fortas averred that students do not “abdicate their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” The tribunal acknowledged that while schools possess the prerogative to preserve decorum, they may not stifle student expression absent demonstrable disruption to the educational milieu. In the Tinker case, no evidence surfaced indicating that the students’ tacit protest had precipitated any such upheaval. Consequently, the school district’s measures were deemed an unwarranted infringement upon the students’ liberties.

The Tinker edict established the precedent now dubbed the “Tinker Test” for assessing student speech. Under this litmus test, student expression is shielded by the First Amendment unless it engenders significant disruption or impinges upon the rights of others. This pronouncement exerted a profound influence on subsequent cases pertaining to student speech and expression, serving as a lodestar in judicial deliberations.

The Tinker v. Des Moines case resonates not only for its legal ramifications but also for its broader cultural resonance. The ruling emboldened students to partake in political and social dialogue within the scholastic milieu, engendering a culture of activism and engagement. It affirmed the premise that young individuals possess a voice, and their perspectives merit safeguarding. This assertion proved particularly salient during the tumultuous 1960s, an epoch characterized by profound social and political convulsions, including the civil rights crusade and widespread dissent against the Vietnam War.

In the aftermath of the Tinker verdict, the contours of student free speech have been delineated and tested through subsequent Supreme Court adjudications. For instance, in Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986), the Court sanctioned the suspension of a student for delivering a salacious oration at a school assembly. The Court differentiated this scenario from Tinker, accentuating schools’ authority to proscribe vulgar language to cultivate a safe and conducive academic milieu. Similarly, in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988), the Court ruled that educational administrators possess the prerogative to wield editorial control over school-sponsored publications, provided such actions are germane to pedagogical imperatives. These rulings epitomize the delicate equilibrium the Court has endeavored to strike between safeguarding student expression and upholding school order and academic integrity.

Notwithstanding these limitations, the foundational tenet of Tinker—that students retain First Amendment rights that endure within scholastic precincts—endures as a keystone of student free speech jurisprudence. It continues to inform debates regarding the equilibrium between school authority and student liberties, encompassing issues such as student dress codes, social media utilization, and political demonstrations.

The cultural and societal reverberations of the Tinker decision transcend the courtroom. It has fostered heightened awareness among students regarding their constitutional prerogatives and has galvanized a more participatory and engaged student body. The verdict has inspired myriad students to advocate for causes they deem significant, cognizant that their voices enjoy protection. This empowerment has manifested in numerous student-led movements over the years, from anti-war protests in the 1960s and 1970s to contemporary campaigns advocating for gun control, environmental conservation, and social justice.

The legacy of Tinker v. Des Moines stands as a testament to the enduring imperative of safeguarding individual rights, even within regimented settings such as educational institutions. It underscores the imperative of balancing the authority of educational establishments with the foundational freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. By affirming that students do not forfeit their constitutional rights at the threshold of the schoolhouse, the Supreme Court affirmed the significance of nurturing a democratic ethos and fostering civic engagement from an early age.

In the contemporary milieu, the principles elucidated in the Tinker case retain salience. The proliferation of digital communication and social media platforms has engendered novel avenues for student expression, prompting fresh challenges and queries regarding the application of First Amendment safeguards. Educational institutions grapple with issues such as cyberbullying, online harassment, and the dissemination of disinformation, all while endeavoring to uphold students’ rights to unfettered expression. The Tinker Test endures as an indispensable tool in navigating these multifaceted dilemmas, furnishing a framework for discerning when curtailment of student speech is justified.

Moreover, the Tinker v. Des Moines case accentuates the role of the judiciary in safeguarding constitutional prerogatives. It serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s pivotal role in shielding individual freedoms from capricious or unjust state actions. The decision epitomizes the judiciary’s capacity to uphold democratic ideals and ensure that the rights enshrined in the Constitution are safeguarded for all citizens, including students.

Upon reflection, it becomes manifest that the Tinker saga transcended a mere protest concerning black armbands. It embodied a robust affirmation of individuals’ fundamental entitlements to articulate their convictions and viewpoints, even in the face of opposition. The fortitude exhibited by Mary Beth Tinker, John Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt in vindicating their rights has indelibly shaped the legal landscape, empowering future cohorts of students.

In summation, the case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District stands as a watershed moment that profoundly influenced the panorama of student rights in the United States. It reaffirmed the constitutional safeguards of free speech within public schools, subject to the constraint that such expression does not precipitate significant disruption. The verdict’s ramifications endure, nurturing a milieu of student activism and serving as a seminal precedent in ongoing discourses regarding the scope and constraints of student expression. The legacy of Tinker underscores the perennial exigency of shielding individual rights, even within regimented settings like schools. By affirming that students retain their constitutional rights at the threshold of the schoolhouse, the Supreme Court has ensured that the voices of youth persist in being heard and respected.

Cite this page

The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District. (2024, May 21). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/

"The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District." PapersOwl.com , 21 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/ [Accessed: 21 May. 2024]

"The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District." PapersOwl.com, May 21, 2024. Accessed May 21, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/

"The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District," PapersOwl.com , 21-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/. [Accessed: 21-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Case of Tinker v. Des Moines School District . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-case-of-tinker-v-des-moines-school-district/ [Accessed: 21-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers