ADULTS’ EXPERIENCE OF PROCRASTINATING: A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY

by

Elizabeth Ann Parker

GABRIELA MIHALACHE, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

DIANA RIVIERA PhD, Committee Member

DONNA DIMATTEO PhD, Committee Member

Andrea Miller, PhD, Dean of Psychology

Harold Abel School of Social and Behavioral Sciences

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

August 2017

© Elizabeth Ann Parker, 2017

Abstract

Procrastination is an extremely pervasive phenomenon, which can produce serious consequences

for individuals in all life domains. Negative consequences of procrastination include lost

opportunities in academics, business, and family life. It is reported to affect up to 45% of adults

at some time. The research question for this study was, “What is adults’ experience of

procrastinating? The literature on procrastination includes research on personality traits,

perfectionism, anxiety, and motivation, as they relate to the phenomenon of procrastination and

its consequences. The research method used for this study was grounded theory in the style of

Charmaz. This constructivist method provided a guide for all phases of the research. It was the

scaffolding for the data collection and analysis, which supported the formation of a cohesive

theory related to adults’ experience with procrastination. The outcomes of this study illustrate

that adults who procrastinate are aware of their actions and the negative consequences of

procrastination behaviors. While they experience negative feelings about procrastinating due to

external societal pressures, from an internal standpoint procrastination is a viable work strategy

that, when leveraged skillfully and in conjunction with strategic planning, allows them to finish

complex projects in relatively brief periods of time.

3

Dedication

This work would have been impossible to achieve without the following people: My

parents, Joseph and Nancy Braucher, my children Sarah Parker and Jack Prendas, my sister

Rebecca Braucher Gall and my friend Anne Heller. They were endlessly patient and

encouraging. I cannot leave this project without recognizing Dr. Marge Tye Zuba without whom

I would never have graduated high school, much less arrived at this point in my career. Finally,

in all things God sustains me. This degree is a step on a longer path dedicated to the service of

my fellow travelers. Glory be to God.

4

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my dissertation committee, Dr. Gabriela Mihalache, Dr. Diana

Riviera and Dr. Donna DiMatteo for their support during the dissertation process. I would also

like to thank Dr. Steven Schneider for his encouragement and support, especially at the

beginning of the process when I was at a loss of how to begin.

5

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments....................................................................................................4

List of Tables ...........................................................................................................8

List of Figures ..........................................................................................................9

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1

Background of the Study .........................................................................................1

Need for the Study ...................................................................................................8

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................9

Significance of the Study .........................................................................................9

Research Question .................................................................................................12

Definition of Terms................................................................................................12

Research Design.....................................................................................................13

Assumptions and Limitations ................................................................................16

Philosophical Assumptions .............................................................................16

Limitations ......................................................................................................18

Organization of the Remainder of the Study .........................................................18

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................20

Methods of Searching ............................................................................................21

Theoretical Orientation for the Study ....................................................................21

Review of the Literature ........................................................................................33

Synthesis of the Research Findings .......................................................................39

Summary ................................................................................................................40

6

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................42

Research Question .................................................................................................44

Research Design.....................................................................................................44

Target Population and Sample ...............................................................................51

Sample ............................................................................................................51

Procedures ..............................................................................................................52

Participant Selection .......................................................................................52

Protection of Participants ................................................................................54

Data Collection ...............................................................................................55

Data Analysis ..................................................................................................56

Instruments .............................................................................................................58

The Role of the Researcher .............................................................................58

Guiding Interview Questions ..........................................................................59

Ethical Considerations ...........................................................................................61

Summary ................................................................................................................63

CHAPTER 4. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA............................................................64

Introduction: The Study and the Researcher ..........................................................64

Description of the Sample ......................................................................................66

Research Methodology Applied to the Data Analysis ...........................................70

Presentation of Data and Results of the Analysis ..................................................74

Focused Codes ...............................................................................................77

Summary ................................................................................................................90

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS ....................92

7

Summary of the Results .........................................................................................92

Discussion of the Results .......................................................................................94

Conclusions Based on the Results .........................................................................95

Comparison of Findings with Theoretical Framework

and Previous Literature ..............................................................................96

Interpretation of the Findings...............................................................................105

Limitations ...........................................................................................................107

Implications for Practice .....................................................................................109

Recommendations for Further Research ..............................................................111

Conclusion ...........................................................................................................112

References ........................................................................................................................114

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK ..........................................................................125

APPENDIX A. SCREENING SURVEY .......................................................................127

APPENDIX B. INITIAL CODING TABLE ..................................................................130

8

List of Tables

Table 1. Demographic information .........................................................................................67

Table 2. Results of focused coding ........................................................................................75

9

List of Figures

Figure 1. Driving Perceptions of Procrastination ...................................................................90

1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Procrastination has been discussed in the literature for many years. References to

procrastination or putting things off until tomorrow, and overall slowness have appeared in

influential writings throughout history. For instance, Steel (2007) references an influential

spiritual text for Hinduism, the Bhagavad Gita, dated at around 500 BC. “Undisciplined, vulgar,

stubborn, wicked, malicious, lazy, depressed, and procrastinating; such an agent is called a

Taamasika agent”, an agent, by the way, who was unable to get into heaven due to these qualities

(Steel, 2007, p. 67).

Bringing the concept home to psychology the American philosopher and psychologist

William James (1890/2012) is attributed with saying,

I know a person who will poke the fire, set chairs straight, pick dust specks from the floor,

arrange his table, snatch up a newspaper, take down any book which catches his eye, trim his

nails, waste the morning anyhow, in short, and all without premeditation -- simply because the

only thing he ought to attend to is the preparation of a noonday lesson in formal logic which

he detests (loc. 6292).

Fast forward from the 1890’s to the 1980’s and psychologists were still talking about

procrastination. By this time the subject had been finely dissected and spread out for inspection,

but the voluminous research still retained the woeful quality of James’ lament; why do we put

important tasks off until the last moment? Upon exploration, it was discovered to be more than

just a deficit of time or organizational skills and it has been shown that the phenomenon of

2

procrastination involves a “complex interaction of psychological variables” (Bridges & Roig,

1997, p. 943).

Not only is procrastination a complex behavior, but it is difficult to overcome. Time and

again people are caught flat-footed by procrastination habits, even when they have suffered

negative consequences previously (Krause & Freund, 2014). Procrastination is an extremely

pervasive phenomenon, and can produce serious consequences for individuals in all life domains

(Klingsieck, 2013a). These domains include healthcare, family life, academics, and the

workplace (Klingsieck, 2013b). Some groups have been found to be more affected by

procrastination than others. Steel and Ferrari (2013) discuss demographics, and attributes of

people who procrastinate, noting that younger persons, males, and students have a higher rate of

procrastination than other groups. It has also been found that procrastination is a key symptom of

ADHD (Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013).

Procrastination takes its toll in individuals’ daily lives and affects those around them at

home, in school, and in their work situations. Negative consequences of procrastination include

lost opportunities in business, and family situations (Glick, Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014; Murray &

Warden, 1992). It is reported to affect up to 45% of adults at some time (Rozental & Carlbring,

2014; Steel, Brothen, & Wambach, 2001). Procrastination has also been shown to negatively

affect grades (Weinstein, 2010), employability (Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013), and earnings

(Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013). Procrastination has a great material impact on people, and this

can lead to health issues as well.

Procrastination can affect people’s physical and psychological health. Some people will

postpone not only well-visits, but appointments when they are sick as well, leading to worsening

conditions (Rozental & Carlbring, 2014). Procrastination has been shown to have psychological

effects, and be related to poor perceived health (Sirois & Tosti, 2012) in addition to impacting

3

mental and physical health (Rozental & Carlbring, 2014). Procrastination also creates excess

stress and anxiety which can exacerbate health issues (Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Rozental &

Carlbring, 2014; Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles, 2014).

Stress and anxiety are factors in academic and workplace procrastination. Procrastination

in these domains has particularly complex sets of factors involved (Aremu, Williams, & Adesina,

2011; Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari 2013). Not only are diverse personality traits in play, but task

aversiveness, self-protection, and resentment at having to meet deadlines come together to form

a fertile environment for procrastination behaviors (Bridges & Roig, 1997; Johnson & Bloom,

1995; Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995). Takács (2010) examines some of the external

reasons why people procrastinate in academics and the workplace. These include lack of interest

in tasks stemming from the level of relevance to one’s own situation. Procrastination does not

just affect material outcomes, but it has also been shown to have affective components (Krause

& Freund, 2014; Rothblum, Solomon, & Murakami, 1986).

Krause and Freund (2014) discuss certain emotional aspects that are consequences of

procrastination such as guilt and frustration. Procrastinating generates anxiety and triggers

negative emotions for many people (Azure, 2011; Diaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008; Glick,

Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014). In self-report measures participants who identify as procrastinators

report negative emotions such as anxiety, guilt, and sadness around their behaviors (Krause &

Freund, 2014).

Procrastination can have an impact on all aspects of an individual’s life. It may threaten

their physical and psychological well-being. It has been found to cause anxiety and stress, not

just for the individual, but for those who interact with the individual at home, work, or in

academic situations. It can result in the loss of material gains, and limit opportunities for growth

4

as well. Overall, procrastination is a pervasive and costly behavior that derails almost half of

adults at some time.

Procrastination and its Causes

Many causes of procrastination have been introduced in the literature, including biological

predisposition, self-regulatory failure, irrational thinking, personality traits, and perfectionism.

Gustavson, Miyake, Hewitt, and Friedman (2014) have shown that some people may be

genetically predisposed toward procrastination and that procrastination is closely related to

impulsivity (Amato, Pierro, Chirumbolo, & Pica, 2014; Schouwenburg, 1995). Steel (2010)

argues this impulsivity trait was necessary for early hunter gatherers because the need to find

sustenance, and find it quickly, was paramount to survival. Long term planning was not a

priority. It has been proposed that humans’ environment has shifted toward a paradigm in which

long term planning is necessary and desirable, but evolution has not caught up with this shift,

making humans susceptible to procrastination (Steel, 2010).

In this vein, another cause of procrastination explored is self-regulatory failure. Baumeister

(1997) discussed procrastination as it relates to self-regulatory failure and emotional breakdown,

noting that self-defeating behavior is essentially a defense mechanism which assures that one’s

own self-interest is put in jeopardy, marking a limit between rational and irrational behavior. A

decade later Steel (2007) called procrastination the “quintessential self-regulatory failure” (p.

70). Most recently in the literature procrastination is referred to as “common self-regulatory

failure” suggesting this definition of the concept has become widely accepted among researchers

(Rozenthal & Carlbring, 2014, p. 1488). The links between procrastination and irrational

thinking have been studied as well. Bridges and Roig (1996) examined the links between

procrastination and irrational thinking, noting that the phenomenon of procrastination has a

myriad of components and positing that irrational fears and fear of failure form the basis of

5

procrastination behaviors. They explain that once these behaviors are triggered, work and

organizational behaviors break down (Bridges & Roig, 1996). This finding was supported by

Cao (2012a), and Dryden (2012).

Lay and Silverman (1996) found that fear of failure played only a minor role in

procrastination, and that procrastination was a personality trait. Self-report measures of dilatory

behavior and state anxiety were compiled from 58 university students who participated in the

study. The measures were administered 5 times. Beginning 5 days before an examination period

the measures were administered every other day, and then twice on the day exams began.

Multiple regression analysis showed that trait procrastination was more highly correlated with

dilatory behavior than anxiety. In a later study, however, Haghbin, McCaffrey, and Pychyl

(2012) combined the variables of perceived competence and fear of failure. A research study of

300 university students used four measures to collect data and gauge procrastination tendencies,

fear of failure, and autonomy and competence. When the results were compiled, a significant

positive correlation between fear of failure and procrastination was found when perceived

competence was low.

There is an abundance of literature discussing procrastination as it relates to the “Big 5

Personality Factors” (Diaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008; Gupta, Hershey, & Gaur, 2012;

Johnson & Bloom, 1995; Schouwenburg, 1992: Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995; Watson, 2001).

The Big 5 personality factors are Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness, and

Conscientiousness. When discussing procrastination, conscientiousness is mentioned with great

frequency. Conscientiousness has been defined along terms of impulse control, achievement

orientation, thoroughness and reliability, amongst others (Steel, 2007). It is described by

Schouwenburg (1992) as will or strength of character. Watson (2001) and Lay, Kovacs, and

Danto (1997) have overlapping lists of attributes for conscientiousness including competence,

6

order, dutifulness, self-discipline and striving. Steel (2013) adds that procrastination and

conscientiousness have characteristics that can be found on opposite sides of a scale.

These characteristics include, cautiousness, conformity, impulse control and industriousness. It

has been found that conscientiousness is inversely related to procrastination (Steel, 2007;

Watson, 2001), that low conscientiousness is the largest component of procrastination (Watson,

2001), and that conscientiousness and perfectionism have a correlational relationship (Achtziger

& Bayer, 2013).

There is research available on the links between procrastination and perfectionism as well

(Cao, 2012b; Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin,1992). This research explored two distinct

areas of perfectionism. Internal or self-oriented perfectionism was associated with both the fear

of failure and necessity for continual success. External or socially prescribed perfectionism is the

perception that others expect one to be perfect and is strongly associated with fear of failure.

(Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). Procrastination has also been linked to trait anxiety

and perfectionism and that some are predisposed toward this behavior (Baumeister, 1997; Walsh

& Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002). Task capability relates to the discussion of procrastination in

terms of ego protection and perfectionism (Robinson, Zabelina, Boyd, Bresin, & Ode, 2014).

Task capability contributes to task aversiveness if one feels unprepared to meet the task. If one

does not feel capable of meeting certain demands (at work or in an assignment) there is an

increased likelihood of procrastination (Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002; Wäschle, Allgaier,

Lachner, Fink, & Nückles, 2014).

When procrastination is related to perfectionism and trait anxiety it can lead more readily

to increased stress (Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002), and breakdowns in self-esteem

(Baumeister, 1997; Cao, 2012b; Haghbin, McCaffrey, & Pychyl, 2012). Self-handicapping

becomes a greater issue when related with trait anxiety and perfectionism (Howell, 2009; Murray

7

& Warden, 1992). Lowering standards for performance, or expectations of high quality outcomes

to some people means when criticism is inevitably received it is felt less intensely; the objective

consequences of procrastination (a job that is not well finished) can be separated from the

personal emotions (a job the person felt was well finished, but was criticized) (Milgram &

Naaman, 1996). In these instances, a Catch-22 is created, and the person has now set themselves

up for future failures. When they do not invest themselves fully in a project, and wait until the

last moment to complete it, they feel relief, which creates a situation in which evaluations will

probably be more rushed and not as in-depth. Consequently, more superficial feedback will be

received, which does not threaten the person’s ego (Baumeister, 1997; Walsh & Ugumba-

Agwunobi, 2002). With little feedback to incorporate into new work, the quality of future work

will also be threatened, creating a vicious cycle (Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles

2014).

Many causes and consequences of procrastination are well documented, but the process of

procrastinating itself is not (Cao, 2012a). Much of the research on procrastination has been done

through quasi-experimental studies using self-report measures, and there is little literature

documenting the procrastination process from the perspective of people who procrastinate.

People procrastinate for many reasons. Some people are predisposed toward procrastination due

to their personality traits (Diaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008; Gupta, Hershey, & Gaur,

2012), some procrastinate due to a lack of intrinsic motivation or interest in the task at hand

(Glick, Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014) and for some it is a result of irrational thinking (Dryden,

2012). Procrastination can have a strong impact in academic, home and work life domains

(Klingsieck, 2013a). It can result in lower grades, in lower earning power, lost opportunities, and

poorer health (Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013).

8

In the literature, there is discussion about helping modify procrastination behaviors by

teaching time management and goal setting strategies (Farrington, 2012), or by replacing specific

irrational thoughts with specific rational thoughts about time management to help curb

procrastination (Dryden, 2012). However, these approaches can only work if the person who

procrastinates fits the profile where these strategies would be advantageous. Milgram and

Naaman (1996) have suggested that procrastination is an escape or avoidant behavior, triggered

by anxiety. Studies by both Bridges and Roig (1997) and Wang (2016) have pointed out that for

some who procrastinate, the behavior is not a time-management problem. More study is needed

on the process of procrastination itself.

Need for the Study

Many causes and consequences of procrastination are well documented, but the process

of procrastinating itself is not (Cao, 2012b). Much of the research on procrastination has been

done through quasi-experimental studies using self-report measures, and there is little literature

documenting the procrastination process from the perspective of people who procrastinate. The

literature does not reflect whether people who procrastinate can identify the specific points or

moments in the process where they turn away from their intended course of action. This

research study included exploring the triggers that caused the participants to turn away from an

intended course of action. Are people who procrastinate conscious of this moment? When does

the process begin? This study examined the process of procrastination and this nexus moment

for clues as to what triggered procrastination behaviors for the participants, and whether they

were aware of the moment they were triggered. To date no studies have been found that focus on

this phenomenon, the process of procrastination itself.

9

Purpose of the Study

While gathering literature for this study it was discovered that much of the literature

focused on procrastination as a problem to be solved, framing the phenomenon as an entirely

negative occurrence (Eckert, Ebert, Lehn, Sieland, & Berking, 2016; Rahimi, Hall, & Pychyl,

2016; Rozental & Carlbring, 2014). The present study focused on discovering the process of

procrastination and its role in the lives of the participants from a neutral perspective. Cao (2012a)

suggested that further qualitative research was needed on “behavioral, motivational and affective

domains” (p. 57). Schraw, Wadkins, and Olafsun (2007) suggested “in-depth qualitative studies

that compare and contrast such specific themes as adaptive and maladaptive aspects of

procrastination. Qualitative studies may help researchers distinguish among multiple reasons for

procrastinating, including which reasons are most important in different circumstances” (p. 13).

The combination of grounded theory methodology and constructivist perspective used in this

study provided a unique opportunity to contribute to the existing literature base by providing data

about the process of procrastination and its purpose, or the need it fulfills for participants. It

offered insight into procrastination from the perspective of the individual participants, which

provided a fuller picture of the process and its effects.

Significance of the Study

One of the goals of this study was to provide expanded information on the process of

procrastination and the role it plays in the lives of individuals who procrastinate. This

information will advance the knowledge base by offering a better understanding of the process of

procrastination through participants’ input about their own experiences. Through this new

information the vocabulary surrounding procrastination can perhaps be clarified, as this diffuse

vocabulary is noted in the literature (Klingsieck, 2013a; Krause & Freund, 2014). The present

study is also geared toward building a foundation for continuing research, to continue identifying

10

and defining concepts more clearly. The literature on procrastination is not particularly cohesive,

and definitions of procrastination vary (Klingsieck, 2013a). There is no overall agreement as to

what constitutes procrastination, versus what constitutes strategic delay (Klingsieck, 2013b;

Krause & Freund, 2014). In this dissertation, the process of procrastination from the perspective

of the participants is explored. One goal of the present research was to fill a gap in the literature,

another was to lay foundation for future studies involving the process of procrastination. The

intent was to shed light on the process of procrastination to find better ways to monitor and

control this behavior.

Modifying procrastination behaviors by teaching time management and goal setting

strategies (Farrington, 2012), or using commitment devices (Wang, 2016), has been explored in

the literature. Another modification strategy outlined is replacing specific irrational thoughts

about time management with specific rational thoughts, to help curb procrastination (Dryden,

2012). However, these approaches can only work if the person who procrastinates fits the

profiles where these strategies would be advantageous. Studies by both Bridges and Roig (1997),

and Wang (2016) have pointed out that for some who procrastinate, the behavior is not a

time-management problem. Milgram and Naaman (1996) have suggested procrastination is an

escape or avoidant behavior, triggered by anxiety.

Another reason to do a qualitative study on the process of procrastination is the

prevalence of quantitative research based on self-report surveys. It is difficult to capture the

essence of a phenomenon with this type of survey. They are often brief, and do not capture the

fullness of the phenomenon because the concept cannot be well developed in such a short span,

therefore the participants are unable to express their ideas completely through them (Hoskin,

2012). In the context of this study, the shortest procrastination survey found was the Irrational

Procrastination Scale (IPS), which has only nine questions (Steel, 2010). The Procrastination

11

Assessment Scale for Students (PASS) is somewhat more comprehensive, with 44 questions

divided into 7 sections (Steel, 2010). Whatever the length of the survey, however, participants

sometimes feel pressure to respond in a socially acceptable manner, which can have a significant

effect on results (Fan et al., 2006).

The Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS) and the Procrastination Assessment Scale for

Students (PASS) are frequently used to assess whether a person procrastinates, and to what

degree. They are focused on time management, and what types of tasks the participant

procrastinates on. Using Likert-type scales they give a range from “never” to “always”, and are

focused on the degree of procrastination. Some of the questions are directed toward emotional

facets and reasons for procrastinating, but they are also on a Likert scale and therefore closed-

ended which limits input from the participant. Through qualitative research more input can be

received from the participant, increasing the understanding of the phenomenon (Charmaz, 2014).

For individuals, finding a way to delay reflex emotional responses to stimuli that are

perceived as negative and lead to procrastination could be advantageous. A delay in the reflex

response would offer a space for metacognition, the awareness of the cognitive processes

involved in assessing situations, possibly creating a greater sense of awareness of what is

happening internally (Frewen et al., 2010; Sadeghi, Hajloo, Babayi, & Shahri, 2014). This in turn

would allow individuals a space to choose their most appropriate response to the stimuli and

open a decision-making opportunity rather than just having a reflex response. For those who do

not procrastinate, but are affected by the procrastination tendencies of others, understanding the

phenomenon more completely could help establish strategies for finding common ground

between individuals’ workflow patterns. In turn this would allow them to leverage or modify the

behavior should they choose to do so. This will be useful at a personal, corporate and community

12

level as the costs of procrastination have been shown to be high at these levels (Schraw,

Wadkins, & Olafson, 2007; Steel, 2007).

Research Question

What is adults’ experience of procrastinating?

Definition of Terms

Procrastination as a manifestation of a lack of conscientiousness is perceived by some

researchers to be the main component of procrastination (Lay, Kovacs, & Danto, 1997;

Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995; Watson, 2001). Researchers often discuss procrastination as the

discrepancy between intention and action, not because of the intentional shunning of tasks (Steel,

Brothen, & Wambach, 2001). Lay, Kovacs, and Danto (1997) discuss the self-discrepancies

involved in the irrational thinking behavior surrounding procrastination, and explore differences

between ideals and wishes, versus duties and obligations. These points highlight differences

between the internal climate of the procrastinator and their external reality. In general

procrastinators report having every intention of finishing set tasks, but in some cases, do not

follow through with their intentions (Wang, 2016).

Over the last several decades, other themes that have emerged in the scientific conversation

on procrastination include: procrastination as a personality trait (Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995),

procrastination as a reaction to perfectionism and anxiety (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin,

1992; Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Strand, 2009), procrastinating because of low self-efficacy

(Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles 2014).

In addition to the diverse categories, there are distinct definitions of procrastination in the

literature. They overlap in some cases but do not always agree; as some focus on the emotional

discomfort, and others focus on the action of procrastination. Definitions of procrastination

include the following:

13

• A failure to self-regulate by choosing to voluntarily delay a course of action, even though this

will have a negative impact on outcomes (Rozental & Carlbring, 2014; Steel, 2007).

• An experience of “psychological discomfort or distress because of failing to complete or

indefinitely postponing a task or an activity” (Bridges & Roig, 1997, p. 943).

• “The purposive and frequent delay in beginning or completing a task to the point of

experiencing subjective discomfort” (Diaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008, p. 228).

• “An irrational tendency to delay tasks that should be completed” (Walsh & Ugumba-

Agwunobi, 2002, p. 242).

• “Voluntarily yet irrationally delaying an intended course of action” (Gustavson, Miyake,

Hewitt, & Friedman, 2014, p. 1).

• ‘‘Intentionally deferring or delaying work that must be completed’’ (Farrington, 2012, p. 11)

• ‘‘Procrastination is a prevalent and pernicious form of self-regulatory failure’’ (Steel, 2007,

p. 65).

Research Design

The current proposal is for a qualitative, constructivist grounded theory study in the style

of Charmaz (2014). A grounded theory study was an appropriate approach to the research

question, because it allowed for a broad variety of input from the participants. Grounded theory

is particularly suited to poorly understood situations, or where there is not much information

available. The purpose of the method is to generate a theory and it does so from the ground up,

using inductive data and iterative strategies (Charmaz, 2014). Data is analyzed in a continuous

comparison pattern, analyzing and comparing; while returning to the data again as often as

necessary (Charmaz, 2014).

14

A purposive sample of participants was recruited. Ideal participants not only met the

inclusion criteria to participate, but were able to fully articulate their experiences with

procrastination. As the study progressed the initial broad sampling criteria become narrower as

data was analyzed. Charmaz (2014) discussed the need for theoretical sampling to focus in on the

phenomenon being studied and saturate the categories. To interview and collect data, a

researcher should recruit participants who are the best examples of the phenomenon. Data

collection techniques included semi-structured in depth interviews and written material from the

participants. Interviews for grounded theory studies are semi-structured and based on questions

that encourage a participant to share as much information as they can about the phenomenon

being explored (Charmaz, 2014). According to Patton (1999) interview questions should have

the characteristics of being “open ended, neutral, singular and clear” (p. 446). Initial interview

questions are starting points to direct discovery toward the phenomenon being explored, and they

may evolve (Charmaz, 2014). In grounded theory studies Charmaz (2014) discussed the

importance of gathering data that is both "broad and deep…to cover emerging categories" (p.

89).

The design of this study focused on bringing credibility and dependability to the research.

As a qualitative, interview based study, several things needed to be considered. First was the role

of the participant as the “expert” in the phenomenon studied (Charmaz, 2014, p. 70). The data for

this study was collected and framed from the perspective of the participants. Communicating the

participants’ experience with the procrastination process was the goal, and as such the credibility

of the study rested on whether the participants found the results credible (Trochim, 2006).

A strong, transparent study allows for transferability of the research. While the researcher

pursued the data where it led, it was important to keep in mind future study as well. Gathering

rich data, engaging in thoughtful and careful analysis, and providing a transparent window into

15

the processes of the study will allow other researchers to use the study to inform their own

research. While transferability of a study is the burden of the researcher who wants to apply the

research to a different context (Trochim, 2006); the burden is on the researcher of the original

study to add a well-organized, well-written, transparent research piece to the knowledge pool.

Grounded theory considers shifting hierarchies and tensions in the environment (Charmaz,

2014). Context is extremely important in grounded theory, and data are considered at many

different levels. Language and choice of words is important, as are pauses, silence and body

language (Charmaz, 2014). The dynamic of the setting is important as well, which includes the

researcher’s place within the setting. Capturing these elements is crucial for designing a

dependable study (Trochim, 2006).

As this type of qualitative study grows from the interviews between researcher and

participant, there are several pitfalls that need to be avoided to achieve confirmability (Trochim,

2006). The researcher recruited the participants, developed and conducted the interviews, and

analyzed the data. This immersion of the researcher in the process meant the researcher’s

perspective was somewhat limited due to close proximity to the study. Personal bias needed to be

addressed throughout the study by taking notes on preconceived ideas and assumptions about the

material. The researcher’s experience had its own part in discoveries and discourse, and instead

of trying to suspend or bracket previous knowledge to set it apart, questions were pursued with

an “awakened and passionate curiosity” as described by LeVasseur (2003, p. 418). Cross

checking of the results by another researcher exposed weaknesses and limitations in the analysis,

and provided a fresh perspective of the material. Member checking, the practice of providing the

transcripts to the participants for their approval, provided another layer of security to boost

confirmability (Carlson, 2010).

16

Assumptions and Limitations

Philosophical Assumptions

Qualitative methodology is a holistic approach to research in psychology which considers

the factors of individual participants and researchers, as well as social elements and the context

in which the study is taking place (Leedy, 2012). Certain assumptions underlie all research, and

should be clearly defined before beginning (Creswell, 2012). Lincoln and Guba (2013) outline

three fundamental questions which provided the philosophical framework from which the data

was analyzed.

The ontological assumption accepted for this study was relativism. Knowledge is

constructed within groups, and each knower has a different perspective; therefore, there can be

no absolute knowledge (Charmaz, 2014; Lincoln & Guba, 2013). The ontological axis of the

present study embraced the multitude of different realities present in context and sought to build

an informed and dynamic construction (Creswell, 2012). The present study is a qualitative view

of a phenomenon that is experienced by individuals. Each participant expressed their own

perceptions and experiences, and these are reported in Chapter 4. Similarities and differences of

the perceptions are reported in the analysis in Chapter 5.

The epistemological axis or assumption accepted for this study is transactional

subjectivism (Lincoln & Guba, 2013). In qualitative research the researcher and participants

have a close relationship while collaborating over what is being studied (Charmaz, 2014). In this

study the data from participants worked in concert with analysis from researcher to construct or

create new knowledge. This new knowledge grew from the collective previous knowledge,

context, and material explored; it reflected their unique perspective (Lincoln & Guba, 2013).

The axiological assumption accepted for this study was subjectivity. Research is value

laden (Creswell, 2012); the values of the researcher, participants and other stakeholders have

17

their own part in the generation of the outcomes of the study. Instead of trying to suspend or

bracket previous knowledge to set it apart, questions were pursued with curiosity, as seeing them

for the first time, as described by LeVasseur (2003, p. 418). Charmaz (2014) considers the

importance of perspectives of both researcher and participants in the interpretation of data, and

the importance of the examination of tacit and implicit expressions. From a constructivist

viewpoint meaning is created between stakeholders, and the credibility of the study will only be

apparent if the participants agree with the results of the study (Trochim, 2006).

Researcher Assumptions

One of the expectations for the study was that the participants would be able to identify

certain areas of their procrastination process, and recognize the thoughts or scenarios that lead

them to procrastinate. Another expectation was that each participant would have a different

perspective on procrastination and that each would have a different set of factors that caused

them to procrastinate. As indicated in previous sections, procrastination may be a response to

fear, anxiety, stress, or low self-efficacy. It may be a planned pause in the work at hand, and

some individuals may wait to finish projects as they feel it sparks their creativity. As such there

were no expectations that participants’ responses would fit into any predetermined categories

except one: that the participants have self-identified as people who procrastinate, whatever their

perspective may be on that.

Procrastinating is used quite often as a blanket term for any waiting or delay behaviors.

The volume of literature categorizing the behavior as bad has also stigmatized some waiting

behaviors that can be beneficial. Laying the groundwork for a project, and then waiting for the

idea to ripen or for additional information to surface to polish the idea can be advantageous.

Mixed responses from the participants were expected, based on their own expectations of

18

themselves which may contrast sharply with what others expect of them which could feed into

their procrastination process.

Limitations

Limitations of this research study include a small sample size, a homogenous sample,

and possible researcher bias. The results are not generalizable to the greater population. Small

sample sizes are common in qualitative inquiry and Capella University guidelines stipulate a

sample size of between 8 and 15 participants for this type of study. Once the interview and

analysis process began, recruiting did not end until saturation of categories was reached. Nine

participants contributed data to this study. The sample for this study was homogeneous as well.

Six of the participants were of retirement age, two were between 30-50 years of age and one

participant was a young adult. The educational level was high and most had completed college

level studies, two participants had doctorate degrees, and two participants were doctoral

candidates.

In grounded theory studies the researcher is an instrument in the collection and analysis

of data. As the researcher is involved at such a fundamental level, bias can be difficult to detect.

In order to overcome the limitation of researcher bias, journaling was practiced throughout the

research process to identify bias and realign the perspective when necessary. Transcripts of the

interviews and iterations of analysis were reviewed by the researcher’s mentor. The limitations

are common to qualitative inquiry, and appropriate steps were taken to reduce their effects on the

study. The limitations did not significantly affect the outcomes.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

This introductory chapter is followed by a literature review outlining the methods used to

gather the pertinent material for the study. The theoretical orientation of the study included a

glimpse into the origin of grounded theory, its history, and an analysis of constructivism in

19

relation to the method. A rationale is given for using grounded theory in this research project as

well. Following this section there is a review of the gathered literature, and the phenomenon of

procrastination will be examined through the lenses of different definitions and theories. After

this, a synthesis of the literature will close the chapter.

In Chapter 3 a detailed description of the methodology used in the study is provided. A

detailed view of the procedures pertaining to the study forms the basis of the chapter. The

purpose of the study, the research design and how grounded theory was used to pursue the

research question is also found here. The target population and sample, including procedures for

participant recruiting and selection can be reviewed, as well as data collection and analysis. A

list of instruments follows. Finally, ethical considerations observed throughout the present

research study closes Chapter 3.

Chapter 4 consists of the presentation of the data. A brief look at the researcher’s

experience and subsequent perspective is followed by a précis of the characteristics of the

participants, a description of the sample and profiles of each individual participant. A summary

of the coding process follows. Here the participants speak about the phenomenon of

procrastination in their own words, offering the reader a firsthand account of their experiences.

Initial and focused codes are enumerated in this section and the chapter closes with a compilation

of the theoretical codes.

Chapter 5 is a synthesis of the implications of the study, including a summary and

discussion of the results, and conclusions based on those results. Limitations and implications for

practice follow and the chapter concludes with recommendations for further research.

20

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

This literature review is built upon peer reviewed articles, some of which were published

as early as 1972. The extended time range is important to the literature review for the purpose of

documenting the evolution of the literature and exploration of the phenomenon. After reviewing

much literature, the phenomenon of procrastination is as perplexing today as it was in the 1970’s.

This chapter of the dissertation is divided into several sections. First, methods of searching are

reviewed. Then the theoretical orientation of the study is outlined. The challenges that come

when working with theory while simultaneously creating a grounded theory research study and

dissertation are then presented. Following this section there is a detailed review of the literature.

The literature review portion of the chapter is divided into subsections, and includes analysis and

synthesis of motivation, personality traits, and perfectionism as they relate to procrastination.

The literature surrounding the topic of procrastination is extensive, but also rather vague

and confusing. Researchers pull from many diverse sources when setting up studies. Theories

about procrastination revolve around personality factors and traits, motivation, psychological

inflexibility, and goal setting, among others. There are constellations of literature around

demographics and attributes of people who procrastinate (Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Strand, 2009;

Steel & Ferrari, 2013). Over the last several decades, other themes have emerged in the scientific

conversation on procrastination as well. They include procrastination as a personality trait

(Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995) and procrastination as a reaction to perfectionism or anxiety (Flett,

Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992; Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Strand, 2009). Procrastination

due to low self-efficacy has been researched as well (Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, &

Nückles, 2014). Procrastination is considered to be the discrepancy between intention and action,

not a result of the intentional shunning of tasks (Steel, Brothen, & Wambach, 2001). Lay,

Kovacs, and Danto (1998) explored self-discrepancies involved in the irrational thinking

21

behavior surrounding procrastination, and noted differences between ideals and wishes, which

represent internal climate, versus duties and obligations, which represent a person’s external

reality. In the literature, people who procrastinate report having good intentions toward finishing

set tasks, but in some cases they do not follow through with these intentions (Wang, 2016).

Methods of Searching

Search terms used: Procrastination, procrastinate, procrastinating, procrast*, anxiety, affirmation,

perfectionism, behavior, metacognition, metacog*, trigger, approach, avoid, turn away,

motivation, motivator, intrinsic, extrinsic.

An exhaustive list of sources and search terms would be impossible, as articles have been

collected over the course of several years. The bulk of the articles came from, in order of

importance, the Capella library, Questia and Google Scholar. The pattern of seeking literature in

different categories started with a broad search and then narrowed in on particular facets like

perfectionism or anxiety. Once the search was narrowed sufficiently, individual databases were

combed. Sage Publications, EBSCO, Elsevier, and other databases were intensively searched

individually for articles to augment the literature review. While collecting the literature, an

abstract file was created, using keywords and citation information to organize the file. Each

article’s abstract was copied into a spreadsheet, and this spreadsheet could be viewed either in

alphabetical order or by subject matter; allowing diverse types of articles to be juxtaposed to

explore different ideas. This helped gain clarity on the next route to follow in the search.

Theoretical Orientation for the Study

Theory is an important part of research, and provides a structure with which to compare

emerging information (Adams & Buetow, 2014). Wilk (1999) raises a cautionary note, stating

that theory can sometimes ignore the complexity of systems and should, therefore, be used with

caution; while Reichardt (2009) explains the necessity of looking at the body of quantitative and

22

qualitative studies on one topic as a whole, rather than dividing them strictly into experimental

and nonexperimental categories. This section examines the theoretical orientation of grounded

theory methodology, as well as several theories researched to build a working knowledge of the

phenomenon.

Within the realm of qualitative research, the grounded theory method focuses on building

theory by exploring a structure that can be described, but not explained or defined (Trochim,

2006). Grounded theory is an inductive process that involves building theory from data, rather

than testing an existing theory or hypothesis for confirmation (Charmaz, 2014). With this

methodology, existing theories are not used to build a working hypothesis. One reason for this is

to avoid preconceptions while building the theory. Another is that grounded theory explores

phenomena that are not well defined, thus there may not be an existing theory or hypothesis to

work from.

Grounded theory was founded by Anselm Strauss and Barney Glaser at the University of

California, San Francisco (UCSF) in the 1960’s (Charmaz, 2014). At the time, quantitative

theory was the norm for research studies. It was considered more rigorous than qualitative work.

During a study on death and dying, Glaser and Strauss became disillusioned with this type of

inquiry process (Kenny & Fourie, 2014). They felt quantitative inquiry removed the study from

the true experience of the participants, because the focus was more on rote procedures that were

mainly geared toward verification of theories. To move away from this type of inquiry, grounded

theory was founded (Charmaz, 2014).

From its inception, grounded theory was very different from the methods being used at

the time. Glaser and Strauss sought the development of a research method that was rigorous but

also allowed for deeper inquiry into poorly understood phenomena. It blended Glaser’s

background in quantitative inquiry, with Strauss’s pragmatic qualitative philosophy. This

23

combination forged a new, rigorous method which was robust enough to generate new theory.

Grounded theory focused on the generation of theory by exploring the experience of the

participants, and digging in to the phenomenon being studied. Instead of seeking the verification

or extension of a pre-existing theory, grounded theory asks a question and seeks answers in the

form of narrative data from the participants (Kenny & Fourie, 2014).

Glaser and Strauss’s seminal study was on the experience of dying, and with their

burgeoning method they started a movement in qualitative research that was not focused on the

description of experiences. They used semi-structured, in-depth interviews with individual

participants to collect rich data. In contrast to using surveys or tests, the data flowed from the

participants; it was not pre-formed by Likert style questions on a survey. This data was then used

to build theory. In this way grounded theory moved away from, not only the rote procedures of

quantitative inquiry, but also from the merely descriptive dimension of qualitative inquiry

(Kenny & Fourie, 2014).

Glaser and Strauss created an inquiry protocol based on pragmatism and symbolic

interactionism inquiry (Kenny & Fourie, 2014). The grounded theory method is rigorous, and in

the beginning the founders insisted on a rigid adherence to certain protocols. A study was to be

approached without prejudgment, therefore the ubiquitous literature review found in other types

of studies was not encouraged. As the method evolved, books and papers were published using

the grounded theory methodology, and about the method itself. As more researchers undertook

studies using the method, they adapted it per their needs, imbuing the method with characteristics

that sometimes changed from study to study. Even Anselm Strauss, one of the founders of

grounded theory, moved away from the original protocol and philosophy. This resulted in a split

between the founders of the method (Charmaz, 2014).

24

Barney Glaser kept his vision of grounded theory as a pure method; cleaving to his

positivistic philosophical roots and quantitative background. He expressed that those who had

diverged from the original method of grounded theory were engaging more in description of a

phenomenon rather than the generation of theory. On the other hand, Anselm Strauss had moved

away from the initial form of the method and reintroduced it in collaboration with Juliet Corbin.

One of the most drastic changes in this evolution was the reintroduction of the literature review.

Together Strauss and Corbin eschewed the original method’s lack of a literature review stating,

“there is a difference between an open mind and an empty head” (Thornberg, 2012, p. 249). This

divergent collaboration led to the development of what came to be known as Straussian GT

(Kenny & Fourie, 2014).

Glaser was upset with the changes to grounded theory and strived mightily to keep the

original methodological discipline pure, even insisting that Strauss and Corbin withdraw their

work at one point. When they did not acquiesce, he published a book as an exact counterpoint to

theirs (Kenny & Fourie, 2014). The rift between the founders of grounded theory has been noted

by several different sources (Charmaz, 2014; Kenny & Fourie, 2014; Thornberg, 2012). It has

been pointed out that Anselm Strauss used material developed collaboratively with Glaser

without proper citation. From this grew Barney Glaser’s campaign to reclaim and promote the

original or pure method (Kenny & Fourie, 2014).

Into this philosophical quagmire waded doctoral student Kathy Charmaz (Kenny &

Fourie, 2014). Charmaz was a doctoral student of both Glaser and Strauss at UCSF. She was

influenced positively by both, enjoying classes and workshops that stimulated her own growth as

a grounded theory practitioner (Kenny & Fourie, 2014). She developed a strong professional

relationship with Strauss which lasted through her time in the UCSF program and persisted

throughout her career until his death in 1996. The influences of both Glaser and Strauss helped

25

Charmaz forge another style of grounded theory, one that follows the philosophy of

constructivism. Her method considers the hierarchical structures of society, and views reality as

subjective. In constructivism, a multidimensional reality is formed by, and between, its

participants. Individuals respond to a myriad of social pressures and expectations, and each

individual’s input and output affects those around them (Charmaz, 2014).

The rich history of grounded theory research philosophies might be summed up by saying

there has been a progression from the positivist viewpoint, which pursues data and strives to say

this is, to the pragmatist viewpoint, which says, whatever this is, it works, to a constructivist

viewpoint which says, this is what it is where it is. While the philosophical standpoints may

differ, grounded theory remains loyal to the pillars that uphold it. It requires a focus on rigorous

data collection, careful coding and interpretation, and above all, the edification of a theory, rather

than a descriptive painting of a phenomenon.

All instruction on grounded theory warns against prejudgment of the phenomenon to be

explored (Charmaz, 2014; Glazer & Strauss, 1967). Glazer and Strauss (1967) suggested a

literature review may contribute to prejudgment and bias, and recommended little if any

literature review to avoid these conflicts. The tide changed when Corbin and Strauss reinstated

the literature review, and suggested it was possible to avoid bias while still preparing to embark

on a study by reviewing material related to the phenomenon (Thornberg, 2012). Charmaz (2014)

is a proponent of the literature review in certain circumstances, especially as it is necessary for a

doctoral dissertation. For this study initially accommodating the conflicting viewpoints was not

an easy task. With time, however, the literature review proved to be a distinct advantage.

By extensively researching the literature, it was possible to pursue the study from a good

vantage point. Engaging in an extensive literature review helped compile a great deal of

background information for the study. Rather than crystallizing preconceived notions on the

26

subject, the literature review offered a topographical map of the terrain, which provided the

option to compare previous discoveries with new data and ask more in-depth questions, rather

than covering the same terrain again. The literature review ameliorated worry about

inadvertently reinventing the wheel. Early researcher bias and a narrowly informed perspective

was overcome with the addition of each new layer of information. This allowed for a greater

confidence to scrutinize incoming data through many lenses, rather than just one, and created the

possibility of an entirely new perspective. Charmaz (2014) states the literature can be used

critically for comparison and context, especially when developing codes and categories. By

becoming knowledgeable about the available literature early in the process, it was possible to

relax with the understanding of what was known about the topic, consequently freeing the

exploration of other possibilities.

Theoretical Foundation for Research Topic

Three theories were explored with the topic of procrastination in mind. While reviewing

the literature, several stood out and seemed a good fit for the pursuit of the question, “What is

adults’ experience of procrastinating?” The three theories with the best fit are analyzed in this

chapter. As the research was done using grounded theory methodology, exact fit of a theory was

not required; the goal of a grounded theory study is not to prove or disprove an existing theory,

but generate a new one. Previously developed theories, however, provided diverse contexts from

which to examine incoming data. The different perspectives allowed for creative perusal of the

question in conjunction with the incoming data. In the following section, Festinger’s cognitive

dissonance theory is explored, after which approach-avoidance motivation theory is addressed.

Finally, Steel’s (2007) temporal motivation theory is examined with one of its parent theories,

expectancy theory.

27

Cognitive Dissonance Theory. Cognitive dissonance is defined as, ‘‘the tension that

arises when one is simultaneously aware of two inconsistent cognitions (Murray, Wood, &

Lillienfeld, 2012, p. 526). Cognitive dissonance theory postulates that when a person is in a state

of negative arousal they will seek an internal stasis or status quo (Festinger, 1962). Dissonance

refers to the cognitive inconsistencies one may have when trying to hold two competing

cognitions simultaneously. Consonance occurs when cognitions are consistent or congruent

(Festinger, 1962). Upon having two (or more) cognitions in opposition, a person will enter a

state of negative arousal and seek to reduce this sensation by reducing the inconsistency

(Festinger, 1962). Cognitive dissonance may occur when one has contradictory behaviors

pointed out, or one realizes he or she has acted contrary to their usual attitudes. Per Festinger

(1962) this dissonance is a motivating factor to change or modify some cognitive element to

regain consonance. Dissonance can be reduced in several ways.

Festinger (1962) asserted that by ignoring cognitions one can reduce or eliminate the

negative state of arousal. For instance, by pretending one does not know smoking is a health risk

one can continue to smoke peacefully. Adding new cognitions or rationalizing may help reduce

this negative state as well. For instance, saying, “yes, I smoke, but not very much”, “My

grandmother lived to be 100 years old, and she was a smoker” or “I also work out and that helps

counter the effects of smoking” are examples of this type of rationalization. Finally, simply

refusing to accept new information on the subject is a tremendously effective way to avoid

cognitive dissonance. Gawronski (2012) introduced a large body of evidence suggesting people

are more concerned with feeling good than they are with accuracy, and asserted that cognitive

consistency is so important to people it should be given status as a core motive in decision

making.

28

An example of this situation would be a person who makes de facto political choices.

Their actions may be based on a variation of “I (or my family) have always voted for this party”

or something similar. Positive new information about an opposing party will likely be rejected

outright, and incoming negative information will help reinforce the low opinion of the opposing

party. Critically examining new information and considering it could open the door to reflection,

possibly resulting in cognitive dissonance. It is thus avoided (Breslavs, 2013). The literature on

cognitive dissonance tends to explore ideals and social issues like health, race, and gender issues.

It is not much of a departure, however, to see how this concept could apply to one’s internal

psychological climate and the myriad of factors surrounding procrastination, including perceived

competence or perfectionism.

When considering aversive tasks leading to procrastination, be they mundane and labor

intensive, like balancing a checkbook, or psychologically threatening like having a cancer

screening each year, or writing for a wider audience, it is important to note each of these tasks

can be overwhelming. They can knock a person off balance and threaten their sense of cognitive

consistency or consonance. Self-beliefs may include being an intelligent and organized person.

When the checkbook does not balance, one can feel frustrated and unintelligent. Or the case of a

person who works hard at remaining healthy but has a family history of cancer and thus is

recommended extra screenings. This could be a blow to the sense of well-being, and well-visits

might be avoided. As a defensive measure, someone might decide not to follow up on healthcare

saying it is not important, and their exercise regimen offsets their genetic precursors. Another

might decide their checkbook makes them feel frustrated so they might forego careful

maintenance of their finances, revising their ideals to lower their discomfort, saying such care is

not necessary. In both cases the procrastinator may find themselves with short lived peace in

exchange for long term consequences.

29

The irrational revision of internal attitudes to reach congruence would seem to approach

the mindset of procrastination. Baumeister (1997) suggested that procrastination marks a limit

between rational and irrational behavior. One of the definitions of procrastination is “to

voluntarily delay an intended course of action despite expecting to be worse off for the delay”

(Steel, 2007, p. 66), which by any standards would seem to be irrational. Lay, Kovacs, and Danto

(1998) examined the self-discrepancies involved in the irrational thinking behavior around

procrastination, and explored the differences between ideals and wishes versus duties and

obligations.

Lay, Kovacs, and Danto (1998) presented a scale of intended behaviors. At one end of the

scale are duties and obligations and at the other are ideals and wishes. Take as an example the

college student who, despite all evidence to the contrary, believes he can complete all phases of a

complicated project in a few hours. To achieve cognitive consistency or congruence he exercises

false optimism, repeatedly telling himself the project is achievable in an ever-shrinking amount

of time, thus damping the state of negative arousal down to a supportable level. This shows both

irrational, and wishful thinking. With this analysis, cognitive dissonance would seem to be a

good place it is to start a conversation about what might lead someone to procrastinate. Upon

reflection, however, it fails to reach the heart of procrastination behaviors. Procrastination may

begin with a piece of information that causes dissonance, but it goes beyond the accommodation

and revision of thoughts. Procrastination is an action, a decision to follow through, or not, on

intentions.

Approach-Avoidance Motivation. Approach-avoidance motivation theory has been

studied in the literature for many years. The American psychologist and philosopher William

James explained how pleasure and pain function as “springs of action” propelling people towards

or away from certain behaviors (James, 1890/2012, loc.7903). James (1890/2012) referred to

30

pain as a “tremendous inhibitor”, and pleasure as a “tremendous reinforcer” (loc. 7906). Later,

Freud posited that the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain (psychic or physical) is the

underlying motivation for all behavior, and avoiding pain can become as great a motivator as

obtaining pleasure (Freud, 1920/2014, loc. 5835). Balanced approach-avoidance motivation is

considered a normal adaptive behavior which orients people toward survival (Krieglmeyer, De

Houwer, & Deutsch, 2013). It requires people to plan and engage in strategic movement (Elliot,

Eder, & Harmon-Jones, 2013). It has also been proposed that approach and avoidant tendencies

are biologically based, and that some individuals may be more sensitive and oriented towards

achieving positive outcomes while others are more sensitive toward avoiding negative ones

(Elliot & Thrash, 2002; Ferris et al., 2011).

Procrastination is thought to be a mechanism of avoidance. It has been described as a

behavior to protect self-concept and the ego from situations perceived as threatening where one

feels vulnerable, as in academics or the workplace (Baumeister, 1997; Helmke & van

Aken,1995; Skaalvik, 1997). When examining academic procrastination problem avoidance is a

key factor (Bridges & Roig, 1997). People who are highly anxious have been found to be more

likely to procrastinate because it is more reinforcing to avoid current anxiety about the task at

hand than receive later (and not necessarily guaranteed) benefits for completing the task. Elliot

and Thrash (2002) explored approach and avoidance motivation as differences in valence, or the

intrinsic attractiveness or aversiveness of an event or situation. Approach motivation is also

linked to the concepts of appetition, reward and incentive; while avoidance is linked to threat,

aversion or punishment (Elliot, Eder, & Harmon-Jones, 2013).

In addition to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, there is also a polarity when discussing

outcomes, even positive ones. A nexus forms here of being motivated to do something, or being

motivated to avoid something. Even the same goal can be approached from opposing points on

31

the scale. Ferris et al. (2011) define approach behaviors as the desire to procure positive

outcomes. Those who are oriented toward approach behaviors are sensitive to the situations in

which positive cognitions are perceived. On the other side of the spectrum, a person who exhibits

avoidance motivation designs behaviors to try to prevent negative outcomes. For example, two

students set an identical goal of earning straight A’s in school. The first student set the goal

because of a love of learning and a desire to do well. This is an example of intrinsic motivation,

and working toward Mastery Goals (Seo, 2009). The action demonstrates an approach

motivation. The second student pursued the same goal as the first. In contrast, however, the

reason behind the goal is extrinsic. “If I do not get straight A’s my parents will be angry with

me” or “I do not want to look bad in front of my classmates.” This last is referred to a

performance goal, putting oneself in competition with others (Seo, 2009). The second student is

demonstrating an avoidance motivation (Ferris et al., 2011).

Even when goals and the results are the same, there is evidence to support that avoidance

motivation has negative effects on desirable outcomes (Elliot, 2006). If not balanced properly

with appropriate motivation, avoidance motivation can lead to prolonged feelings of guilt (i.e. I

should have done more. I could have done better.) This in turn can lead to depression (Díaz-

Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008; Senécal, Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997). Unchecked, these

emotions can trigger self-consciousness, which is another facet of neuroticism that can add to the

negative affective cycle of procrastination (Díaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008). Together

these can create a vicious circle and lead to the formation of maladaptive behaviors (Breslavs,

2013; Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink & Nückles, 2014).

Temporal Motivation Theory. Temporal motivation theory (TMT) integrates aspects of

expectancy theory, need theory (Steel & König, 2006), and hyperbolic discounting (the tendency

to choose smaller but more immediate rewards over larger long term rewards). It emphasizes

32

time as a motivating factor. TMT asserts that procrastination reflects a pattern of temporal

discounting, wherein the value of rewards available at a delay is discounted relative to the value

of rewards available in the short-term. A person prone to procrastination may suspend efforts for

completion of a long-term goal with large consequences in order to gain an immediately

available, but smaller, rewarding outcome.

Derived from expectancy theory, TMT uses a simple formula for illustration,

Utility = E * V/ΓD

Steel (2007) outlines and defines the variables in the above equation thus:

Utility refers to task desirability.

E refers to expectancy, the belief that one can complete the contemplated task.

V refers to value, a balance of the needfulness of the task (for achievement for instance) and

whether the task is pleasant or unpleasant.

Γ refers to a person’s sensitivity to time and,

D refers to delay or distance in time (Steel, 2007, p. 71).

McCrea, Liberman, Trope, and Sherman (2008) point to this distance in time as an

abstracting factor which makes tasks seem less complicated and concrete than they are.

Enjoyable activities that supply immediate gratification are high in both expectancy and value,

and are valued more highly than activities whose benefits will not be shown until sometime

further in the future. When examining the variables, it can be observed that at times cognitive

dissonance may occur between value and utility. Cognitive dissonance is defined as a situation in

which an individual must hold conflicting beliefs (Brehm & Cohen, 1962). This creates stress.

Since this stress creates psychological discomfort, an individual may try to escape the situation

by bringing the conflicting beliefs into balance (Brehm & Cohen, 1962). This could create an

environment for procrastination.

33

Using the college academic experience as an example, several points may be highlighted.

Maintaining passing grades and an active social life may both be important to the student, but

social life is something that provides immediate gratification and is always available, while

grades (and their corresponding rewards or consequences) only come a few times per semester.

Additionally, a student may hold a high grade point average as a worthy goal, while at the same

time believing their work is never good enough, a type of perfectionism associated with

procrastination (Achtziger & Bayer, 2013; Rice, Neimeyer, & Taylor, 2011). This creates an

atmosphere of cognitive dissonance that can possibly be relieved temporarily through

procrastination (Seo, 2011). While grading-times are still a long way off, the equation (for a

person who procrastinates) will give a higher utility to socializing. Once the grading deadline is

closer, a tipping point is reached and studying will have greater utility (Steel, 2007).

All of the theories explored above explicate and put different facets of procrastination in

perspective. Both the cognitive dissonance and approach-avoidance theories provide a view of

the cognitive and emotional difficulties some people who procrastinate may be facing. TMT is a

useful theory as it operationalizes certain facets of procrastination, however it does not take

enough into account the emotional charge it can create. The theories outlined here do not reach

far enough into the affective aspect of procrastination, nor do they consider the person for whom

procrastination is a conditioned response.

Review of the Literature

Over the last several decades, various themes have emerged in the scientific conversation

on procrastination. They include: procrastination due to feeling of low self-efficacy (Wäschle,

Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles 2014), as a personality trait (Schouwenburg & Lay, 1995),

and as a reaction to perfectionism and anxiety (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992;

Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Strand, 2009). A lack of conscientiousness is perceived by some

34

researchers to be the main component of procrastination (Lay, Kovacs, & Danto, 1998;

Shouwenburg & Lay, 1995; Watson, 2001). It is an extremely pervasive problem which can have

serious effects in all life domains (Klingsieck, 2013a), and it has been shown to affect about 50%

of students and 20-45% of adults (Rozental & Carlbring, 2014; Steel, Brothen, & Wambach,

2001). Up to 95% of college students have reported habitual procrastination as an issue in their

studies (Steel, Brothen, & Wambach, 2001). It has been found that women procrastinate slightly

less than men, and it presents as a key symptom of ADHD (Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013).

Procrastination can lead to lost opportunities in academics, business, and family situations

(Glick, Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014; Murray & Warden, 1992), and it creates excess stress and

anxiety for the person who is procrastinating and those around them (Rozental & Carlbring,

2014; Stöber & Joorman, 2001; Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink & Nückles, 2014).

There is a small proportion of the recent literature in which procrastination has its

proponents. There are research studies submitting procrastination as an advantageous behavior,

noting that the decision to set projects aside to develop while completing other worthwhile tasks

is beneficial (Chun Chu & Choi, 2005; Steel, 2007). The researchers assert that at times putting

things off is a benefit, because new information may arise which would positively affect the

outcome; therefore, depending on the level of uncertainty, procrastination might be an added

value in the cost benefit analysis of the work (Steel, 2007). It has been found some people

deliberately wait for deadlines because they work better under pressure (Freeman, Cox-

Fuenzalida, & Stoltenberg, 2011; Ferrari, O'Callaghan, Newbegin, & Freeman, 2005). Arousal

procrastinators will purposely delay their work, hoping the impending deadline will provide an

adrenaline rush to carry them through the termination of the task at hand (Ferrari, O'Callaghan,

Newbegin, & Freeman, 2005). While this would appear to be irrational behavior, some

personality types suffer adverse effects when they do not have enough cognitive stimulation, thus

35

the impending deadline provides them the spark they need to gather their resources and finish a

project. In other literature “arousal procrastination” is not supported (Simpson & Pychyl, 2009;

Steel, 2010).

Schraw, Wadkins, and Olafson (2007) conducted a grounded theory study on academic

procrastination in college students. The study revealed that some students plan procrastination

into their schedule. These students will plan their end of semester projects, pull materials and

write outlines; then deliberately wait for the deadline to approach. In some cases, this strategic

delay has been found to be beneficial (Chun Chu & Choi, 2005). Mostly though, procrastination

is viewed askance, as it has been shown to be a detriment in virtually all life domains

(Klingsieck, 2013a). As researchers have become more aware of the consequences of

procrastination, the knowledge base has grown accordingly. Many theories and studies overlap

between the diverse domains where procrastination is an issue. Also overlapping are contributing

internal and external factors of procrastination, including personality traits, individual

motivations, and social pressures.

Definitions

As seen in Chapter 1, there are diverse definitions of procrastination in the literature.

These definitions overlap in some cases, but do not always agree. Some focus on the emotional

discomfort associated with procrastinating, and others focus on the action of procrastination.

Bridges and Roig (1997) defined procrastination as an experience of “psychological discomfort

or distress as a result of failing to complete or indefinitely postponing a task or an activity” (p.

943). Procrastination was defined by Steel, Brothen, and Wambach (2001), as the discrepancy

between intention and action, and not a result of the intentional shunning of tasks. Takács (2010)

set forth the definition, “Chronic procrastination is considered the tendency to postpone in a

variety of situations that seem necessary to reach goals.” (p. 51). In general procrastinators

36

report having every intention of finishing set tasks, but in some cases, do not follow through with

their intentions (Wang, 2016). Procrastination has also been defined as, “an irrational tendency to

delay tasks that should be completed” (Lay & Silverman, 1996, p. 62; Walsh & Ugumba-

Agwunobi, 2002, p. 242). Lay, Kovacs, and Danto (1998) also examine the self-discrepancies

involved in the irrational thinking behavior surrounding procrastination, and explore the

differences between ideals and wishes, versus duties and obligations. Finally, Steel (2007)

defined procrastination as a “voluntarily delay in an intended course of action despite expecting

to be worse off for the delay” (p. 66).

It can be observed that the definitions of procrastination have evolved over time.

Baumeister (1997) posited procrastination as a consequence of self-regulatory failure and

emotional breakdown, noting that self-defeating behavior is essentially a defense mechanism that

assures one’s own self-interest is put in jeopardy which marks a limit between rational and

irrational behavior. A decade later Steel (2007) called procrastination the “quintessential self-

regulatory failure”. Most recently in the literature Rozenthal and Carlbring (2014) referred to

procrastination as “common self-regulatory failure” suggesting that this definition of the concept

has become widely accepted among researchers (p. 1488).

Personality Traits

It has been found that some are predisposed toward procrastination, and it has been

linked to trait anxiety and perfectionism (Baumeister, 1997; Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi,

2002). There is an abundance of early literature examining procrastination as it relates to the

“Big 5 Personality Factors” (Johnson & Bloom, 1995; Schouwenburg, 1992; Schouwenburg &

Lay, 1995; Watson, 2001). The Big 5 personality factors are neuroticism, extraversion,

agreeableness, openness and conscientiousness. In the context of procrastination,

conscientiousness is the trait most referred to, followed by neuroticism. Conscientiousness has

37

been defined along terms of impulse control, achievement orientation, thoroughness, and

reliability amongst others (Steel, 2007). It was described by Schouwenburg (1992) as will or

strength of character. Watson (2001), and Lay, Kovacs, and Danto (1998) have overlapping lists

for conscientiousness, including the attributes of competence, order, dutifulness, self-discipline

and striving. Watson (2001) conducted a study of procrastination and how it correlates with

personality traits. Three hundred and forty-nine college students took the Procrastination

Assessment Scale for Students and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. The results of the

measures were analyzed with a multiple regression analysis and conscientiousness was shown to

have an inverse relationship with procrastination. This result was duplicated in a meta-analysis

by Steel (2007) that also found that conscientiousness is inversely related to procrastination.

Procrastination as a manifestation of a lack of conscientiousness is perceived by some

researchers to be the main component of procrastination (Lay, Kovacs, & Danto, 1998;

Shouwenburg & Lay, 1995; Watson, 2001).

Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, and Koledin (1992) examined the links between procrastination

and perfectionism. Their research explored two distinct areas of perfectionism. Externally or

socially prescribed perfectionism is the perception that others expect one to be perfect. This

aspect of perfectionism is strongly associated with fear of failure. Internal or self-oriented

perfectionism was associated with fear of failure and the necessity of continual success (Flett,

Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). The perception of task capability contributes to task

aversiveness if one feels unprepared to meet the task. Task capability relates back to the

discussion of procrastination above, in terms of ego protection and perfectionism (Robinson,

Zabelina, Boyd, Bresin, & Ode, 2014). If one does not feel capable of meeting certain demands

(at work or in an assignment) there is an increased likelihood of procrastination (Walsh &

38

Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002; Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles 2014). These points

highlight differences between the internal climate of the procrastinator, and their external reality.

Self-handicapping also becomes a greater issue when related with trait anxiety and

perfectionism (Howell, 2009; Murray & Warden, 1992). This self-handicapping takes the form

of using procrastination as an alibi for low quality work; since the project did not have enough

time dedicated to it, it was not as successful as it could have been. This serves the purpose of

shifting the focus of the poor-quality work onto the reduced amount of time spent, and the rushed

job, rather than the procrastinator’s abilities. For the person who procrastinates, an additional

advantage to this type of thinking is that there is less emotional investment in the project, and

criticism can be taken more lightly (Milgram & Naaman, 1996). A Catch-22 is created because

the person has now set themselves up for future failures. They feel relief at not completing tasks

as well as their abilities allow them to, which creates a situation in which evaluations will

probably be more rushed and not as in-depth, resulting in more superficial feedback that does not

threaten the person’s ego (Baumeister, 1997; Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002). Then with

little feedback to incorporate into new work future quality will also be threatened, thus creating a

vicious cycle (Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles, 2014).

While procrastination has been shown to be closely linked to personality, in many cases

there are external factors that exacerbate the problem. Milgram, Marshevsky, and Sadeh (1995)

created a research study to explore the correlations between discomfort, task aversiveness, and

task capability. Two hundred and thirty high school students completed a modified PASS scale

to measure task aversiveness in terms of pleasant, unpleasant or neutral tasks. Depending on the

person, tasks deemed “routine” might be neutral, while long repetitive tasks, even with a low

degree of difficulty, might be deemed unpleasant. It was found that task aversiveness and

perceived capability were correlated with delay on tasks (Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995).

39

When external factors and situational determinants are combined with personality factors like

trait and situational procrastination, the probabilities of procrastination behaviors increase

(Baumeister, 1997; Milgram & Dangour, 1992; Senécal, Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997) When these

are then paired with additional anxiety about evaluation in work or school an extremely

complicated situation is created (Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002). When procrastination is a

result of combined trait anxiety and perfectionism there is a higher probability of increased stress

(Walsh & Ugumba-Agwunobi, 2002), and breakdowns in self-esteem (Baumeister, 1997).

Synthesis of the Research Findings

Academic and workplace procrastination have particularly complex sets of factors

involved (Aremu, Williams, & Adesina, 2011; Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari 2013). Not only are

personality factors in play, but task aversiveness, self-protection and resentment at having to

meet deadlines are part of the phenomenon as well (Bridges & Roig, 1997; Johnson & Bloom,

1995; Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995). There are emerging questions that are not fully

answered. Is one putting off a task due to worry about receiving criticism and therefore engaging

in self-handicapping (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992; Murray & Warden, 1992)? Is

the contemplated task perceived as too boring or too difficult, and therefore aversive (Senécal,

Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997; Steel, 2007)? Or is one predisposed by biology and personality traits

to engage in dilatory behavior (Lay & Silverman, 1996; Milgram & Naaman, 1996)? When

perfectionism is involved does it precede anxiety? Perhaps the person has set unreasonable goals

for themselves, or feels that unreasonable demands have been set? Or perhaps procrastination a

conditioned response set off by an anxious amygdala (Denny et al., 2015; Milgram & Naaman,

1996)?

The literature on procrastination is voluminous but not particularly cohesive, and

definitions of procrastination vary (Klingsieck, 2013b; Krause & Freund, 2013). Additionally,

40

the lack of consistent operationalized terms around procrastination has been noted (Klingsieck,

2013b; Krause & Freund, 2014; Seo, 2011). There is no overall agreement to what constitutes

procrastination, versus what constitutes strategic delay (Klingsieck, 2013b; Krause & Freund,

2014). Some articles sustain that all types of waiting can be classified as procrastination, and that

once a task is assigned it should be planned and executed immediately to avoid anxiety and

missed deadlines. Other articles explore procrastination in the context of waiting to let ideas take

shape as a part of the workflow with specific advantages such as discovery of new information,

and the benefits of working under pressure (Ferrari, 1992; Simpson & Pychyl, 2009; Wang,

2016). Authors have defined procrastination as both an emotion, or a feeling of discomfort

(Bridges & Roig, 1997) and an action (Wang, 2016).

Summary

There is ample literature describing procrastination as a costly and pervasive behavior

(Rozental & Carlbring, 2014). It results in the loss of many opportunities (Owens, Bowman, &

Dill, 2008). People procrastinate for many reasons. Some people are predisposed toward

procrastination due to their personality traits (Diaz-Morales, Cohen, & Ferrari, 2008; Gupta,

Hershey, & Gaur, 2012), others due to a lack of intrinsic motivation or interest in the task at hand

(Glick, Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014). For some, procrastination is a result of irrational thinking

(Dryden, 2012).

Steel and Ferrari (2013) consider the impact of procrastination on well-being and the

implications of delaying health care or planning for economic changes like retirement. Sirois and

Tosti (2012) explore links between procrastination and stress. Procrastination can have a strong

impact in academic, work, and home life domains (Klingsieck, 2013a). It can result in lower

grades, in lower earning power, lost opportunities, and poorer health (Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari,

2013). Procrastination has also been linked with overall lowered academic performance

41

(Klingsieck, 2013b; Schraw, Wadkins, & Olafson, 2007) and issues in the home and at work

(Klingsieck, 2013a).

The research includes empirical studies on the specific personality types and traits of

those most likely to engage in procrastination such as: psychological inflexibility (Glick,

Millstein, & Orsillo, 2014), impulsivity (Gustavson, Miyake, Hewitt, & Friedman, 2014), and

perfectionism (Howell & Buro, 2011). One of the consequences of procrastination is lowered

self-esteem, which can trigger a negative cycle of behavior (Patrzek, Grunschel, & Fries, 2012;

Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles, 2014).

The diffuse nature of the literature makes it difficult to narrow in on effective strategies

for helping people who procrastinate to change their behaviors and be more efficient, as not all

people who procrastinate do so for the same reasons. There is considerable time spent

examining time management techniques and goal setting strategies to help curb procrastination.

Studies by both Watson (2001), and Wang (2016), have pointed out that for some who

procrastinate the behavior is not a time-management problem, and suggest that more study is

needed on the process of procrastination itself.

42

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

The present research study explored the process of procrastinating from the perspective

of the participants. There were several goals for this dissertation. One was to shed light on the

process people go through when they decide to procrastinate on a task. The dynamic between the

individual's perspective and the societal perspective was explored and discussion with the

participants revealed whether or when procrastination can be a positive action. The data was

gathered to augment and complement previous research. It is also hoped this research can help

develop a better approach to monitor, modify, or even leverage this perplexing behavior.

Despite the volume of existing literature, concepts are not particularly cohesive from one

study to the next, and definitions of procrastination vary (Klingsieck, 2013b). As discussed in

Chapter 2 of this dissertation, there is no overall agreement on what constitutes procrastination,

versus what constitutes strategic delay (Klingsieck, 2013b; Krause & Freund, 2014). There is

literature that defines procrastination as a personality trait (Lyons & Rice, 2014), while other

literature defines procrastination along the lines of time management issues (Gupta, Hershey, &

Gaur, 2012). The combination of amorphous concepts and diverse definitions informed the

direction of the research for this dissertation. The overall sense of the literature was that of a

concept that has been over applied and often misunderstood.

This chapter revisits the purpose of the study, and provides a more extensive look at the

design, method, and procedures involved. A brief history of grounded theory is presented,

including the genesis of grounded theory along with two variations of the method. Additionally,

the target population and recruiting procedures for the study will be explained. The ethical

principles and norms will follow.

43

Purpose of the Study

In Chapter 1 the purpose of the study was outlined. Searching the topic of procrastination,

it was discovered that most of the literature frames procrastination from a negative perspective,

as a problem to be solved (Eckert, Ebert, Lehn, Sieland, & Berking, 2016; Rahimi, Hall, &

Pychyl, 2016; Rozental & Carlbring, 2014). In contrast, the perspective of the present research

was from a more neutral perspective; focused on discovering the process of procrastination and

its role in the lives of the participants. Suggested research from previous studies provided a

framework for the current research. Cao (2012a) recommended further research on the

“behavioral, motivational and affective domains” of those who procrastinate (p. 57). Schraw,

Wadkins, and Olafsun (2007) suggested “in-depth qualitative studies that compare and contrast

such specific themes as adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination. Qualitative studies

may help researchers distinguish among multiple reasons for procrastinating, including which

reasons for the behavior are most important in different circumstances” (p. 13).

Many causes and consequences of procrastination are well documented, but the

behavioral process of procrastination itself is not (Cao, 2012b). Much of the research on

procrastination has been done through studies using self-report measures, and there is scant

literature documenting the procrastination process from the perspective of people who

procrastinate. In the present study, participants shared their own experience about their processes

and perceptions around procrastinating. These processes included preparation rituals, stages of

emotion, social pressures, and other aspects unique to each individual.

To effectively approach the topic of procrastination with the participants, and explore all

facets of this phenomenon, participants were asked to engage in metacognition. Metacognition is

thinking about thinking, or the information individuals have about their understanding of their

inner space and coping strategies (Rahmani, Talepasand, & Ghanbary-Motlagh, 2014).

44

Metacognition refers to a range of dispositions for thinking about one’s own thoughts and

feelings (Blanc, Boyer, Le Coz, & Auquier, 2014). Teasdale (1999) combined these themes and

examined mindfulness and metacognition as ways to alter one’s relationship with “inner

experience”. The research questions in the present study were points of inquiry designed to help

participants reflect on their inner experience with procrastination and observe their thoughts,

feelings, and reactions when faced with the tasks of everyday life. During the interviews, they

were encouraged to articulate the steps they take during the process of procrastination.

Throughout the study, participants were encouraged to reflect non-judgmentally on their

procrastination process, by using metacognition to explore the phenomenon in their own context.

It was not known whether people who procrastinate could identify the specific points or

moments in the process where they turned away from their intended course of action. Interview

questions in this research study included exploring the triggers that caused a turning away from

the intended course of action. Were the participants conscious of this moment; and when did the

process begin? This study examined the process of procrastination with the participants, and

sought to unravel this nexus moment in search of clues. It was hoped that if clues to the different

causes of procrastination were revealed, it would be possible to develop strategies to turn this

juncture into a conscious decision-making opportunity, rather than a reflex reaction to a trigger.

Research Question

What is adults’ experience of procrastinating?

Research Design

Per Charmaz (2014) constructivist grounded theory is a process of creating a reality.

Researcher and participants work together to illuminate and explain a phenomenon. In this

process, the researcher is not an objective observer, but a participant that stands within the

process (Charmaz, 2014). In research, none of the stakeholders exist in a vacuum, and when one

45

stakeholder speaks of something that is occurring, and provides tangible examples there are

many unspoken intangible aspects and circumstances accompanying this example. It is a

situation somewhat like the circumstances in Sherlock Holmes novel Silver Blaze, where a dog

that did not bark indicated that a horse thief was known to the family; similarly, in grounded

theory there is much unspoken information. Charmaz (2014) gives a concise appraisal of

working with this tacit information, and theorizing in grounded theory.

From a constructionist perspective, theories reflect what their authors bring to their

research as well as what they do with it. Yes, some theories in similar areas, particularly

those without much abstraction, may resemble each other. However, theories that

explicate tacit phenomena and construct abstract categories of them can generate unique

interpretations. The results of theoretical sampling and an interpretive rendering can give

the reader, as well as the researcher, a moment of joy in savoring original ideas. Neither

objectivist nor constructivist researchers may intend that readers view their written

grounded theories as theory, shrouded in all its grand mystique, or acts of theorizing.

Instead they just are doing grounded theory in whatever way they understand it (p.259-

260).

Grounded theory inquiry is multifaceted, and there are many different approaches.

Overall though, it can be defined as “a largely inductive method of developing theory through

close-up contact with the empirical world” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008, p. 383). A grounded theory

study was the most appropriate approach to the research question, because it allowed for a broad

variety of input from the participants (Charmaz, 2014). In addition to the interviews the

participants had the opportunity to correspond via email with their thoughts during the data

collection phase of the study. Grounded theory is particularly suited to poorly understood

situations, or situations in which there is not much information available. It provided rich

46

information for the insight and development of the present study and hopefully future inquiry as

well.

Constructivist grounded theory considers both data and context. It is a multi-layered

approach to analyzing and exploring data. The words and phrases coming from the interviews

are the most obvious points of focus, however the choice of words and how they are chosen is

also considered. Pauses, silence, and displays of emotion are considered data as well.

Participants’ relationships with other people or other things provide context and are important

facets to consider during analysis. Additionally, the quiet places between these elements is

important to consider as it has its own effect on the dynamic in the phenomenon. The researcher

is not an aloof or invisible part of the study, and so must be considered as well. Capturing these

elements is crucial for designing a dependable study (Trochim, 2006).

The setting of the interviews included Adobe Connect rooms, FaceTime, or Skype,

depending on the technological capabilities of the participants. The flexibility of the grounded

theory method allowed the interviews to proceed at a pace that was comfortable for the

participants, giving them time to expand on thoughts that were important to them. To achieve

confirmability, results were cross checked by another researcher to expose weaknesses and

limitations in the analysis. This also provided a fresh perspective of the material (Trochim,

2006). To ensure confirmability, member checking was carried out with each participant

(Carlson, 2010).

The grounded theory method guided all the procedures including, purposive sampling,

data collection, and data analysis. Purposive sampling is defined as choosing participants who

best represent the phenomenon of interest (Charmaz, 2014). For this research study, the

participants chosen to take part in the research study were adults who identify as people who

procrastinate. They had experienced procrastination and its effects in their own lives, and would

47

be able to “purposefully inform an understanding of the research problem” (Creswell, 2012, p.

125). In grounded theory studies the researcher is an entity through which all information flows.

Inward, in the form of data collection, and outward, in the form of analysis. Throughout the

study a series of journal entries was written to process emotional bias, and reflex reactions to the

data. This process is necessary to maintain transparency and record the influence of the

researcher on the diverse aspects of the study (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Maintaining a reflective

practice throughout the study was necessary for processing data and developing theoretical

sensitivity. “Theoretical sensitivity is the ability to understand and define phenomena in abstract

terms and to demonstrate abstract relationships between studied phenomena” (Charmaz, 2014, p.

160). While the reflective practice of journaling sometimes led to memos during the data

analysis process, the journal itself was not considered a data source and is therefore not included

in the materials analyzed.

The participants were encouraged to share their thoughts in the interviews, and elaborate

on them in writing if they felt moved to do so after the interview had taken place. Each

subsequent interview influenced the interview questions chosen, and some of the questions were

reworded as necessary for clarity and to elicit deeper responses. While transcribing each

interview, observational data was documented. Tone of voice, length of pauses, laughter,

discomfort, and other emotions, were observations that could contribute to the articulation and

understanding of the shared experience and edification of theory. Each interview was transcribed

shortly after the interview took place, and each transcript was checked against its audio recording

for accuracy. Following this process, the transcripts were sent to the participants for member

checking. This provided each participant with the opportunity to add or clarify information about

their experience. These opportunities of contact with the participants meant the data could be

reviewed for consistency (Patton, 2014). Collecting and transcribing the data was an iterative

48

process, and continued until new categories ceased to emerge, existing categories were saturated,

and emergent concepts were fully developed. In the present study, it was found that

procrastination began as a reflex behavior triggered by discomfort, but over time it became an

adaptive behavior leading to the development of viable work strategies for those interviewed.

Credibility and Dependability in the Research Study

One important aspect of a grounded theory study is that it makes sense (Stern, 2009).

This sounds like it would be an obvious aspect of any research inquiry, however it is an excellent

benchmark to use in terms of scientific merit. It is possible for a researcher to become so

immersed in a study that things stop making sense (Stern, 2009). Moving toward making sense,

and conducting a credible, dependable study were the keys to establishing the protocol for this

research inquiry.

The design of this study focused on providing credibility and dependability to the

research. According to Charmaz (2014) the basis for a solid, credible study begins with the data

and is woven through both data and its subsequent analysis. She called on professional integrity

in researchers when she states, “…seek professional credibility. In short, my advice is to learn

what constitutes excellence rather than adequacy in your field – and beyond, if your project

portends of having larger import…” (Charmaz, 2014, p. 108). Fieldwork that is systematic,

careful, and detail oriented facilitates the production of high quality data (Charmaz, 2014). A

focus on skillful interviewing and unbiased data analysis also helps determine the credibility of

the study (Patton, 2014). In the study at hand, the researcher’s experience had its own part in

discoveries and discourse. The data for this study was collected and framed from the perspective

of the participants. Clearly communicating the participants’ experience with the procrastination

process was the goal, and as such the credibility of the study rested on whether the participants

found the results credible (Trochim, 2006).

49

In this type of research, the participant holds the role of the expert in the interview

equation and the data for this study was be collected and framed from their perspective

(Charmaz, 2014). Clearly communicating the participants’ experience with the procrastination

process is the goal, and as such the credibility of the study rested on whether the participants find

the results credible (Trochim, 2006). Participants actively participated in the quest for credibility

by providing approval for their transcripts, and having the space to voice further opinions or

concerns while the research is ongoing. Additionally, member checking required that all

transcripts be approved by their respective participants. The transcripts were sent to the

participants for their approval to assure they agreed with the information they had provided.

Carlson (2010) emphasizes the importance of carefully planned member checking to maintain

participant rapport.

Dependability is analogous to a quantitative study’s reliability (Patton, 2014). The

process of the study must be documented clearly, and the study itself must be logical, traceable

and replicable. This is often referred to informally as following the steps of a recipe. Experience

came to bear here. This experience included collecting and sorting data, gathering student

information, and tracking it over long periods of time to spot patterns. The researcher has had

experience interviewing young adults about their concerns in academics and other areas of their

lives, is an experienced interpreter and transcriptionist, accustomed to searching for patterns and

keywords in voluminous amounts of data.

Constructivist grounded theory considers shifting hierarchies and tensions in the

environment (Charmaz, 2014). Context is extremely important in grounded theory, and data are

considered at many different levels. Language and choice of words is important, as are pauses,

silence and body language (Charmaz, 2014). The dynamic of the setting is important as well,

which includes the researcher’s place within the setting. Capturing these elements is crucial for

50

designing a dependable study (Trochim, 2006). These points dovetail with the goals of the

present research study as what was be explored was the process of procrastination from the

participants’ point of view. The researcher guided the interviews and asked questions, but was

also required to fade into the background as much as possible.

A strong, transparent study allows transferability of research. While data will be pursued

where it leads in the study, it is important to keep in mind future research as well. Gathering rich

data, engaging in thoughtful and careful analysis, and providing a transparent window into the

study will allow other researchers to use the study to inform their own work. While the

transferability of a study is the burden of the researcher who wants to apply the research to a

different context (Trochim, 2006); it is still the responsibility of the author of the original study

to add a well-organized, well-written, transparent research piece to the knowledge pool.

As this type of qualitative study grows from the interviews between researcher and

participant, there are several pitfalls that need to be avoided to achieve confirmability (Trochim,

2006). The researcher recruited the participants, developed and conducted the interviews, and

analyzed the data. This immersion in the process meant the perspective would be somewhat

limited due to close proximity to the study. Personal bias needed to be addressed throughout the

study by taking notes on preconceived ideas and assumptions about the material. The

researcher’s experience had its own part in discoveries and discourse, and instead of trying to

suspend or bracket previous knowledge to set it apart, questions were pursued with fresh eyes

and great curiosity as described by LeVasseur (2003). Cross checking the results by another

researcher exposed weaknesses and limitations in the analysis, as well as providing a fresh

perspective of the material. Member checking, providing the transcripts to the participants for

their approval, provided another layer of security to boost confirmability (Carlson, 2010).

51

Target Population and Sample

Theoretical sampling is the process of searching for future data based on emerging codes

from previously collected data (Glaser, 1967). A purposive sample of participants was recruited

and participants who were the best examples of the phenomenon to interview were chosen. As

the study evolved the initial broad sampling criteria became narrower as the data was analyzed.

Charmaz (2014) expressed the need for theoretical sampling to focus in on the phenomenon

being studied and saturate the categories.

Population

The population from which the sample was drawn were adults who identified as having

issues with procrastination, irrationally putting off tasks despite the expectation that this would

result in less than optimum outcomes. To be viable candidates, these reduced outcomes had to

have produced consequences of mild to moderate severity.

Sample

A purposive sample of participants was recruited for this study. The inclusion criteria

were the following:

a) The participants had to be either working, students or both.

b) Their score on the modified PASS scale needed to be a 4 or above, which per the

instructions of the scoring guide represents a moderate to high degree of

procrastination (Rothblum, 2015).

c) At the time of the study they should have identified as persons having issues with

procrastination and they should have experienced some type of negative

consequences due to their procrastination behaviors. Examples of moderate

consequences included earned grades that were lower than desired due to

procrastinating, or being charged fees for paying bills or parking tickets late.

52

The exclusion criteria for participants included:

a) Having ties or pre-established relationships with the researcher that would result in a

sense of obligation from the participant (Fisher, 2012).

b) Exclusion of someone who had experienced extreme issues with procrastination; for

instance, someone who had suffered severe consequences because of procrastination

(i.e. bankruptcy, serious illness, dropping out of school, getting fired from a job) and

who might have been caused undue distress when exposed to the diverse aspects of

the study thus complying with the principle of “do no harm”.

Procedures

This section outlines the procedures used to carry out the study. Participant selection is

discussed, including methods of recruitment and screening. There is a section on the protection

of participants, discussing the protocol for the handling of sensitive data. Following this there are

sections describing the methods of data collection and analysis.

Participant Selection

Upon receiving approval from the IRB, and completing indicated milestones, participant

recruitment began. Online recruiting was done through virtual flyers on social media, and

snowball recruiting was done through email. A brief description of the study was provided in the

recruiting media, with a fuller description available on a dedicated companion website. Potential

participants completed an online survey which contained demographic information, inclusion,

and exclusion criteria. After this step volunteers completed a modified version of the open-

source PASS scale to ascertain the degree to which they identified as individuals who

procrastinate (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). Rothblum, Solomon, and Murukami (1986) tested

this measure for construct validity and sensitivity. It was found to be a reasonably sensitive

53

measure and have high construct validity for non-clinical applications. According to instructions

given by Rothblum (2015), a score of 4 or above indicates a moderate to high level of

procrastination and is a good benchmark when using the measure. Participants who met the

requirements for the study continued with the steps for informed consent. Ideal participants did

not only meet the inclusion criteria to participate, but could fully articulate their experiences with

procrastination. As the study progressed the initial broad sampling criteria become narrower as

the data was analyzed. Charmaz (2014) explicates the need for theoretical sampling to focus in

on the phenomenon being studied and saturate the categories. Participants were sought who were

the best examples of the phenomenon.

Purposeful sampling was the chosen sampling method for this research study. This type

of sampling is consistent with the grounded theory method (Charmaz, 2014). Adults over the age

of 18, who recognized their difficulties with procrastination, and agreed to take part in the

research were chosen for this study. They were chosen for their willingness to share their

experiences living as people who procrastinate on academic, home or workplace tasks. The

participants provided in depth information and insight into their personal understanding of the

phenomenon of procrastination, and reflected upon and clearly articulated their experiences

during the interview.

A combination of a snowballing email protocol and social media was used to recruit for

this research project. An initial wave of emails was sent to people known to the researcher. The

email provided a description of the study and a link to the dedicated website. The initial

recipients were asked to forward the email at their discretion to people they thought might be

interested in participating in the study. At the same time a link to the dedicated website was

provided on personal social media pages including Facebook and LinkedIn. This post invited

people to share the information from there as well.

54

The website procrastinationresearch.com gave potential participants an expanded version

of the study’s details, its methodology, and its purpose. Contained in the recruitment materials

was a description of the study in a cover letter above the informed consent form (Fisher, 2012).

The recruitment process included a series of emails. The first was an introduction to direct the

volunteer to pertinent information about the study. The second was a follow up to set a time for

an appointment and include the informed consent letter for their signature. A final confirmation

email included the logistics of the call, including a link to the Adobe or Skype meeting room and

connection instructions. Occasionally additional emails were necessary to reschedule

appointments. Participants were provided with a link and instructions on how to enter the online

meeting area via email. A partial list of open-ended research questions was made available to

participants before the interview as well. The interviews took place in an Adobe meeting room,

and the meetings themselves were recorded.

Capella University requires 8 -15 participants for a grounded theory study, and

recruitment is to continue until saturation is reached. In the present study, recruitment strategies

were successful, and nine articulate and well prepared individuals were interviewed. After the

ninth participant was interviewed, incoming data was fitting in to previously defined categories,

and no new insights were emerging, which indicated saturation of the data (Charmaz, 2014, p.

345).

Protection of Participants

Confidentiality must be strictly maintained (Fisher, 2012). As this study was conducted

online, proper management and storage of digital information was vital. Participant privacy and

confidentiality was maintained through encryption of materials and participants were issued a

pseudonym in all materials used in the study. Any artifacts collected, including audio recordings,

were handled per the appropriate APA and other governing body guidelines as mandated by

55

Capella University. Audio recordings require particular care, and have been handled accordingly

(Fisher, 2012). Identifiable information is stored in an encrypted, password protected, cloud

based storage area, and is not kept on personal devices.

Contacts and communication made through the dedicated website and through snowball

email recruitment were kept on a remote, password protected server.

Each interview recording and its backup is kept in a cloud based, password protected data

base. All local copies were deleted immediately from personal devices.

The matching key for pseudonyms is a password protected document that has been stored

in the cloud based server as well.

The informed consent documents are in a locked file cabinet and do not have matching

pseudonym information with them.

Data Collection

Following the recruitment and informed consent process, interviews were scheduled with

participants. All participants agreed to participate in up to 2 interviews. Additionally, they agreed

to read and sign off on their transcripts as part of the member checking process. The agreed upon

protocol was to cover their experience with procrastination in the first interview with the option

of initiating a second interview if they felt there were topics in need of clarification after reading

their transcript. Data was collected through semi-structured, in depth interviews and some

informal written correspondence from the participants. Interviews for grounded theory studies

are semi-structured and based on questions that encourage a participant to share as much

information as they can about the phenomenon (Charmaz, 2014). According to Patton (2014),

these questions should have the characteristics of being “open ended, neutral, singular and clear”

(p. 446). Interview questions provide starting points to direct discovery toward the phenomenon

56

being explored, and they may evolve over the course of the interviews and the data collection

phase (Charmaz, 2014).

In grounded theory studies Charmaz (2014) signals the importance of gathering data that

is both "broad and deep" to "cover emerging categories" (p. 89). Patton (2014) makes a

distinction between questions that seem open ended, but are really asking about a level or a

degree of some feeling or emotion, and truly open-ended questions that encourage discourse such

as, “How did you react to the situation? What were your feelings surrounding what happened?”

Releasing questions to the participant served a dual purpose. First, for reasons of transparency

the questions were provided to reduce the anxiety some participants might have felt about the

interview process. Secondly, by reading the questions before the interview, the thought process

could be triggered and spark reflection on the topic, thereby promoting metacognition. The

interviews varied somewhat depending on participant responses. In some cases, all the questions

were asked, in others the participant was sufficiently self-guided and fewer questions were

needed to prompt responses. The questions were designed to keep participant and interviewer on

track, but distinct avenues of the phenomenon were explored when the participant introduced

them during the interview process (Charmaz, 2014). Thus, the research evolved.

Data Analysis

Charmaz (2014) described the process of data analysis as an iterative process where both

researcher and participant take part in the construction of categories. In the present study data

collection and analysis happened simultaneously. Interviews were transcribed into MAXQDA

software soon after they took place, and analysis began immediately. To begin, the transcripts

were read in their entirety and then extraneous material was crossed out. Interview data was

arranged by subject using the chunking technique described by Charmaz (2014). Narrative data

was considered in context, and each chunk of data was coded. One chunk of data might have

57

been assigned multiple codes. The codes were arranged individually, and then along the axes of

time, space, intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, self and other, amongst others. The data

transcripts were compared throughout the process. As written correspondence was received it

was added to the data and analyzed.

Once the data was collected and transcribed the constant comparison coding process

began as described by Charmaz (2014). New data brought new categories to light and existing

data was seen from a new perspective as categories emerged.

Coding means naming segments of data with a label that simultaneously categorizes,

summarizes, and accounts for each piece of data. With grounded theory coding, you

move beyond concrete statements in the data to ma king analytic sense of stories,

statements, and observations. We aim to make an interpretative rendering that begins

with coding and illuminates studied life. If you concentrate on taking fragments of data

apart and asking what meanings you glean from these fragments, you will move into

analysis. (Charmaz, 2014, p. 110)

Asking analytical questions while coding was a key part of the process. During the data

collection and analysis phase, initial codes did not cease to appear until the last interview was

transcribed, and the focused codes began to appear soon after the third transcription was finished.

Early in the process initial codes began to coalesce into focused codes, and then focused codes

gave rise to theoretical codes. Observational data, comparing incidents, clustering and coding by

incidents prompted the creation of memos, which helped the analysis process greatly.

As analysis progressed, there were codes that did not seem to fit anywhere. They were

not mentioned often, but carried a great deal of weight with the participants. After struggling for

some time with this part of the analysis, the literature on grounded theory was reviewed again.

Charmaz (2014) explained that the odd bits of data and code that do not seem to fit in the overall

58

analysis can be very important. She states, “A code does not have to appear again and again to be

a category” (Charmaz, 2014, p. 145). With this guidance, it was these less prominent but

weightier codes that became the genesis of the theory.

Instruments

• Modified PASS/IPS measure for screening volunteers.

• The researcher

• Skype phone and video service

• Adobe Connect

• FaceTime

The Role of the Researcher

The researcher was responsible for recruiting the participants, developing and conducting

the interviews, and analyzing the data. This immersion in the process meant that the perspective

was somewhat limited due to proximity to the study. Personal bias needed to be addressed

throughout the study. This was done by taking notes on preconceived ideas and assumptions

about the material, and discussing the material with instructors and peers. Previous professional

experience had its own part in discoveries and discourse, and instead of trying to suspend or

bracket previous knowledge to set it apart, questions were pursued with an “awakened and

passionate curiosity” as described by LeVasseur (2003, p. 418).

The literature was a springboard for the interview questions. Over the course of the

interviews, there were times when the incoming data closely matched the previous literature.

Rather than stopping with a match, additional questions were pursued on the topic to follow the

question as far toward its root as possible. It was in this broader data that departures from the

what was reported in the literature were discovered.

59

The researcher is a filter through which the data will flow, and care must be taken to

organize and interpret the data without imprinting bias upon it. Charmaz (2014) states, “Like

your coding itself, what the codes say relies on how you define their meanings. You are a part of

your analytic work. You bring your analytic skills and perspectives to bear on the analysis

throughout the research process” (p. 140). The role of the researcher in constructivist grounded

theory is as an instrument, working with the participants to create theory (Charmaz, 2014).The

researcher cannot completely suspend all beliefs and perspectives; it is more reasonable to have

conducted a significant literature review and be well informed on as many aspects of the topic as

possible in order to approach the research from a unique, yet informed perspective.

During the analysis, original expectations for outcomes were challenged by the data. This

created an uncomfortable space, as the original expectation was in alignment with the literature

in that procrastination is a negative behavior that needs to be controlled. However, throughout

the course of the interviews and analysis a different perspective was presented. In order to

acknowledge the unexpected perspective, and interpret the data with integrity required parting

ways with bias and long held beliefs. Memoing and journaling occurred simultaneously to keep

bias front and center to assure that the data were being analyzed in the context of the

participants’ perspective, and not in the context of researcher bias. Maintaining a reflective

practice throughout the study was necessary for processing data and developing theoretical

sensitivity. “Theoretical sensitivity is the ability to understand and define phenomena in abstract

terms and to demonstrate abstract relationships between studied phenomena” (Charmaz, 2014, p.

160).

Guiding Interview Questions

• How would you describe your experience around the process of procrastination?

60

• What does “procrastination” mean to you?

• How would you describe your experience with putting things off that need to be done

within a certain time boundary?

• If you have one, describe the process or routine that you use to prepare to do a task that

you tend to procrastinate on. (Example, do you use a handwritten agenda, journal, to do

lists on a regular basis and how do you use them? Do you have cues that it is “time” to do

something, pens lined up and a hot beverage…whatever you do as a warmup or routine?)

• Can you describe what is happening with you during the hardest part of getting started?

During the easiest part?

• When do you feel like the procrastination process begins?

• Do you find that you have less difficulty once a task is started (get the ball rolling), or are

tasks just hard from beginning to end? Can you describe the experience?

• If it does, can you describe how the thought process around things that you procrastinate

on differs from your thought process to go about doing things that you do not have a

tendency to procrastinate on?

• How would you describe your state of mind or emotions surrounding this process?

• What kinds of outcomes or consequences motivate you?

• Think about a time that you were trying to go from thinking about something to doing it,

and you could not. What happened in that transitional space?

• How do you feel when you finish tasks on time? (For instance handing in a written

project or assignment or getting the bills in on time.)

61

Ethical Considerations

Heilbronn and Foreman-Peck (2015) describe ethical deliberation in terms of the

following question, “What ought to be done in a given set of circumstances, all things

considered” (p. 94)? They relate the innate difficulties of taking into account all of the facets in

complex situations that include the following: the facts of the situation itself, the law, the rules of

the institution, bias and personal feelings, among others. Navigating complex situations in

psychology where there is a myriad of cultures, laws and emotionally charged material, can be

difficult and to this end specific ethical codes have been created.

The APA principles provide a framework for the enforceable standards. They are

aspirational in nature and offer a guide for application in ethically questionable circumstances.

Overall guidance for this research study is drawn from Principles A and E of the APA Code of

Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2002). Principle A calls for beneficence and

nonmaleficence, and is the principle reflected in the statement, “do no harm” (American

Psychological Association, 2002). Principle E of the APA code of conduct calls for the respect

for people’s rights and dignity (Fisher, 2012). Together these principles support and guide the

present research project in its entirety from the planning stage through execution.

The studies examined for this paper were quite benign. The phenomenon of

procrastination is well known, and while it is certainly associated with negative effects and

consequences it posed a minimal risk to participants. Beneficence and nonmaleficence underlies

the entire proposed study from preparation and planning to execution and data handling.

Interview questions are designed to probe facets of the process of procrastination, but they are

open, offering participants an opportunity to express their thoughts and experiences without

asking for painful specifics. That being said, it needed to be considered that painful memories

62

might surface. If a participant was uncomfortable they were perfectly within their rights to

postpone the interview or withdraw from the study.

In compliance with Principle B of the ethics code a list of resources was available on the

dedicated website in case of need. The principle of Fidelity and Responsibility states that

researchers have an obligation to assure the best services possible under the law (Fisher, 2012).

One must be prepared for the eventuality that someone may be touched more deeply by the

research than was planned. Providing and up to date list of services in case of trauma, and

following up with participants is one of the responsibilities of a researcher.

Principle E-Respect for people’s rights and dignity goes hand in hand with Principle B.

Participants had the right to withdraw from the study at any time. They are also the owners of all

the information they provided. Participants were given the transcripts of their interviews for

review and they signed off on them if they were agreement with the information they contained

and the statements that they had made.

The confidentiality and privacy of the participants is paramount. This includes protecting

phone numbers, email addresses, identities and transcripts. Identities will be protected by using

only initials or pseudonyms on the transcripts and the key linking identities to the transcripts will

be kept in a separate secure location in the event it is needed for an audit. Digital data will be

kept for 7 years in a remote password protected location. When the time period has expired data

will be erased from disks and written over, and any hard copies of files will be burned to white

ash.

For the most part the research was carried out with adult participants who were either in

college, in the workplace or both. One study did explore the topic of procrastination with school

aged children. While procrastination affects many people, and can have serious effects in

different life domains, it is not a hot button topic nor would it be expected to trigger strong

63

emotions. None of the cited studies reported attrition due to psychological effects therefore there

was a high confidence level that the study would not provoke undue anxiety in the participants.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to explore the process of procrastination via a grounded

theory methodology in the style of Charmaz. The goal was to obtain insight into how people who

procrastinate perceive the different facets of their experience including the process, associated

emotions and the wider effects. The study seeks to add to the scientific knowledge base and

psychological literature, and provide a stepping stone for further study. The ethical

underpinnings of the study were set to protect the participants and enhance the credibility and

dependability of the study. In addition, the study was designed to be as transparent as possible,

and engaged the help of the participants through member checking to confirm data and allow for

changes if necessary.

These points are reflected in the following chapter where the participants will be

introduced individually in brief vignettes and they will speak in their own voices about their

unique experiences in the coding tables. The next chapter is a presentation of the data collected

during the study. It is arranged in clusters around concepts related to the phenomenon of

procrastination and includes the open and theoretical codes.

64

CHAPTER 4. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA

The purpose of this study was the generation of a theory focusing on adults’ experience

of procrastinating and their process of procrastination. These experiences with procrastination,

explored from the participants’ personal perspective, included the reasons and motivations

underlying their procrastination behaviors, as well as an exploration of the emotional and social

components. A grounded theory approach was used to plan, organize and execute the study. As

outlined in Chapter 3, the grounded theory approach was developed by Glazer and Strauss and

then adapted by different researchers over time. This study followed the constructivist model of

Charmaz (2014).

The purpose of this chapter is to provide detailed information about the study including

the interest and background of the researcher, basic demographics of the participants along with

brief profiles of each. The procedures will be outlined in detail including sampling procedures,

and the data collection process. Following these, there is a detailed reporting of the results

including initial and focused codes with quotes directly from the participants, and a synthesis of

the findings.

Introduction: The Study and the Researcher

The researcher’s interest in procrastination developed during her seven years as an

administrator and shareholder in a private high school in Costa Rica. There it could be observed

that no matter what the status of the stakeholder, procrastination was always present. Students,

instructors, local and district administrators and parents all seemed to procrastinate. Exams,

meetings and cultural events routinely started late due to last minute preparations that were put

off even though they could have easily been finished well beforehand. This interest grew as the

researcher attended Capella University first in pursuit of a Master’s Degree in Education and

then a PhD in Psychology.

65

At Capella, procrastination was everywhere. Learners procrastinated, instructors warned

against procrastination while quite a few procrastinated themselves, and the home page of the

university had a dedicated area replete with tips and strategies to avoid procrastination. Despite

the warnings, tips and strategies however, procrastination persisted. As an undergraduate at

Rosary College, the researcher’s personal experience included some serious bouts with

procrastination. As a graduate student, this phenomenon was resolved, but the question

remained. Why do we do this? It’s no secret that procrastination can result in lower grades,

missed opportunities and higher stress (Klingsieck, 2013b).

Throughout the course of the doctoral program primary sources were read on qualitative

inquiry in general, and grounded theory in particular. Research seminars were attended with the

goal to develop a strong proposal and further clarify the research question and manner of pursuit.

Also during the doctoral coursework phase at Capella informal inquiry among students and

fellow learners led the researcher to believe that “procrastination” had become a catch-all word;

handy, negative in connotation, but no longer particularly descriptive. According to the literature

the behavior of delaying tasks has many underlying motivations, and there seemed to be a strong

disconnect in the perception of society and the perception of the individual as to the necessity

and usefulness of this behavior. It also seemed delaying behaviors were deemed procrastination

when a higher member of the social hierarchy was pointing out the behavior, but when that same

member was engaging in the behavior it was sometimes referred to as pacing oneself.

Unique skills for the dissertation journey were developed while working as a guidance

counselor and radio program transcriptionist. As a guidance counselor, rapport building skills

were developed. Other skills honed included conducting interviews while taking notes, and

sifting through large quantities of data to spot patterns. Interview skills included formulating

non-leading, non-judgmental questions while also being able providing examples if the

66

interviewee was unsure of what the question meant. An interview style was developed

incorporating closed ended questions as priming questions followed by open ended questions.

The priming questions were helpful in orienting the conversation toward a new subject, and

make transitions from one subject to another happen more smoothly. With a closed ended

question, a student or parent could think about the question in a more finite manner as it related

to their circumstances; the follow-up open ended question could then be pursued. The priming

question had the additional advantage of serving as an anchor or reference point for the topic as

well, helping keep interviews on track.

Description of the Sample

Table 1 below contains the demographic information pertinent to the study. The age

range was from 24-60+ years old. Family and civil status is noted in the table, as well as level of

education and current or previous career path.

67

Table 1

Demographic Information

Pseudonym Age Gender Profession Educational level

Dan 60+ m Psychologist, faculty PHD

John 60+ m Retired, magazine editor BA

Ruth 60+ f Retired, business owner,

insurance industry

HS

Marnie 60+ f Semi-retired, nonprofit

fundraiser

BA

Mel 40 f Welfare services MA

Kenzie 40 f Marketing manager MS

Janice 24 f Academic coach BA

Brad 74 m Law Professor PHD

Jane 50 f Teacher MBA

68

Participant Profiles

Dan. Dan referred to himself as the king of procrastination, and indicated that

procrastination had been an issue for him since he could remember. He indicated that

procrastination was a particular problem with academics, but that it had also permeated other

areas of his life. During the interview, he revealed how procrastination had evolved from being a

negative issue to being an effective work strategy for him.

John. John is a retired magazine editor who worked for many years in the publishing

business. He referred to himself as the emperor of procrastination. The snowballing email

recruitment had resulted in Dan contacting John and encouraging him to participate. During the

preparations for the interview John referenced Dan’s referral and said, “Well, if Dan is the king

of procrastination, then I am the emperor because I procrastinate way more than he does.” Both

Dan and John procrastinated quite a bit as college students. John handed in an independent study

paper, a requisite for graduation, on the morning of commencement, nearly missing his own

college graduation. Dan took 9 years to get through his work and thesis to earn his PhD. So it

would appear that both had a certain claim to a royal title in procrastination.

Ruth. Ruth is married and has grown children. For many years, she owned and operated

a successful business related to the medical industry, and she is now retired. The topic of

procrastination resonated with her particularly in terms of doing routine jobs around the house,

especially jobs that require a lot of moving pieces like painting and sewing. Her take on

procrastination was that she felt she got a “lazy butt” around certain tasks, but did not feel herself

to be a lazy person. Over the course of the interview she enumerated many areas of full

engagement in her life, within her family and community.

At the time of the interview Marnie was semi-retired and working part time for a real

estate company. Her first career was in fundraising for nonprofit organizations. Procrastination is

69

a new behavior for her. She said, “I always had to take care of myself, but now that I am retired I

find it easier to put off things I don’t feel like doing.” For this participant, the behavior of

procrastination appeared to come about as her life roles changed.

Mel. Mel is a full time doctoral student. At the time of the interview she was working for

a welfare services office. She is married and has a blended family with young children and

teenagers. She started procrastinating later than many of the participants, and has a clear

recollection of the watershed moment she went from having things finished ahead of time to

procrastinating “literally on everything”. She disclosed her habit of putting everything off, be it

the mundane task of moving dinner from freezer to refrigerator to defrost, or compressing large

academic projects into hours versus days or weeks.

Kenzie. Kenzie is female, and works as a marketing manager for a retail food chain. She

is also a part time instructor at a university. She holds a Master’s Degree and lives with her

partner and young children. Her initial response during out conversation was, “Procrastination!

My arch nemesis!” She spoke of procrastination as a prioritization strategy, emphasizing her

hectic career (where she rarely procrastinates) and how home maintenance tasks are lower

priority and can fall off the radar. She made the observation that her partner considered

procrastination to be disrespectful, and she recognized that while also saying that work and

family time was more important than chores in the grand scheme of things.

Janice. Janice works part time as a tutor and academic coach. She is also studying full

time at university. She is single and lives with her parents at home. She recalls procrastinating on

academic tasks as early as primary school, calling much of the work in those early and formative

years, “boring and pointless”. She recognized procrastination as problem that sometimes “trips

her up” at the end of the semester due to miscalculations. On the other hand, like Participants 1,

2 and 5 she organizes her schedule to coincide exactly with deadlines; prepping thoroughly and

70

then laying projects aside until crunch time comes. This participant perhaps perceives the most

positive relationship with procrastination, aside from Participant 1. She enjoys the benefits of the

adrenaline rush and “forced organization” created by the deadline, without worrying overmuch

about the voiced opinions of others in terms of her scheduling arrangements.

Brad. Brad is a law professor, and holds a PhD. He lives with his wife and has grown

children. His response was also a result of the snowball recruiting method, and he had a singular

reason for wanting to participate. While he and his wife engage in mild procrastination

behaviors when faced with routine tasks like grading papers or maintenance tasks, he was

concerned about the amount of time it seemed to be taking to sort out the large task of

consolidating 2 homes into one, and deciding on where to live when there are strong attractions

on each coast of the country. He had also learned to manage his habit of procrastinating on tasks

by setting specific goals or work quotas to finish before engaging in a more pleasurable activity.

Jane. Jane has grown children and lives with her husband. She works in the legal

compliance department of a financial advising firm. Her interest in participating in the study was

rooted in her desire to gain insight into why she sometimes did not follow through with planned

activities. During the interview, she spoke of being diagnosed with ADD as an adult but said, “it

goes deeper than that. It isn’t that I can’t concentrate or I get distracted. It’s just like if I’m not up

against a deadline I can’t produce anything. It’s frustrating!” This is similar to thoughts

expressed by other participants over the course of the data collection period. She continued, “I

can have everything ready, and then just walk away because it doesn’t feel like the right time to

do it yet.”

Research Methodology Applied to the Data Analysis

The methodology for data analysis was based on the model set by Charmaz (2014). The

process of coding in grounded theory is iterative, analytic. It flows from categorizing and

71

organizing material to analysis and back again, creating an interpretive picture of the

phenomenon being pursued. Charmaz (2014) sets the minimum of coding phases at two. Initial

coding, where data is organized and defined, and focused coding, where codes that appear most

frequently or seem most significant are compared against the rest of the data. In her own work,

Charmaz (2014) stresses that she “prefers to keep the codes simple, direct, analytic and

emergent” (p. 19). She indicates that initial and focused coding are sufficient for most research

projects, but does offer guidance for researchers who would like to use other types of coding.

She explicates axial coding, reminiscent of Strauss and Corbin, as tightly packed relationships

around an axis. She also discusses theoretical coding, which is somewhat like axial coding in that

data are arranged around an axis. However, theoretical codes are looser, and prior theories can be

used to facilitate the integration of current data without stifling the current work. In the present

study, three types of coding are presented: Initial coding, focused coding and theoretical coding.

After making a duplicate of the transcript that would remain unaltered, each transcript

was read straight through without making any marks or assigning codes. The next step involved

eliminating any information not related to the topic. This was done by using the strikethrough

option, which left the information obscured but still visible so it was not distracting but still

searchable. Following these preliminary steps, the process of initial coding began. The data was

reviewed word by word and line by line and sorted into meaningful sections (Charmaz, 2014).

The initial effort at coding, perhaps due to a combination of an abundance of inexperience and

enthusiasm, yielded an unwieldy amount of codes. This first effort was scrapped entirely, and

chalked up to a practice run. The second time the data was approached with a strategy that

Charmaz (2014) calls “clustering. The data was considered from several different perspectives,

individual, society or other, physical spaces, emotional spaces, and the dimension of time. With

these perspectives in mind the coding went much more smoothly. Furthermore, instead of trying

72

to impose code on the data in a linear fashion, a more circular route was taken allowing the codes

to rise by themselves during the analysis of multiple transcripts. Many of the initial and focused

codes were provided by the participants themselves. Appendix B has a complete listing of the

initial codes, and Table 2 shows the focused codes that provide the basis for the generated

theory. A keyword index was created to capture concepts within the different perspectives. For

instance, in the code “emotional spaces”, phrases that included words like anxiety and relief

would be captured and coded.

MAXQDA allows for data chunks to have multiple codes, and the codes themselves can

be activated and deactivated to view the data from different angles. As more data was coded,

initial and focused codes started to emerge from the data. Some of the patterns seemed to follow

known phenomena related to procrastination, covered previously in the literature review. Memos

were written concurrently with the codes, and a journal was kept about particularly difficult bits

of data in order to assure that personal bias was being addressed and to increase reliability

(Charmaz, 2014). Perhaps due to the unsuccessful initial attempt to analyze the data, focused

codes began to emerge fairly early in the analysis. Charmaz (2014) states, “After you have

established some strong analytic directions through your initial coding, you can begin focused

coding to synthesize, analyze and conceptualize larger segments of data” (p. 138). By the time

the third transcript was analyzed early initial codes had begun to coalesce around individual axes

that started during the clustering process. Later, the focused codes began to emerge as the

relationships between what participants thought they should be doing as dictated by society in

the form of parents, partners, and bosses, and what works well for them as individuals. Dan said,

“societal sanctions against procrastination came to my awareness and my comparing myself with

other people.” He continued, “Procrastination serves a more subtle need or process for me…and

that is that there are times when it just doesn’t feel right to, and that’s the way I put it, does not

73

feel right, to be trying to do the project at a particular given time… “Marnie shared, “Well I got

older! I find it easier and easier to put off doing things that I don’t like to do…because I have a

choice.” John said, “I knew that it was in some ways a hopeless venture, and I almost felt guilty

about taking the guy’s money, because he was trying to have a book published and because of

the…he was a first-time novelist and due to the length of the book and his refusal to let me

shorten it much and various other issues related to the manuscript I knew that he was going to

have problems.”

The next section outlines the initial and focused codes with examples of each in the

participants’ own words in Table 1. Focused codes are meant to help make the transition from

the concreteness of the spoken words to the abstractness of the unspoken context to “capture and

crystallize the stories” (Charmaz, 2014, p. 138). To see the results of the initial coding one can

refer to Appendix A at the end of this dissertation. Once the data was collected, initial data

analysis began while simply transcribing the recorded interviews and sorting the data into a

spreadsheet for analysis. Early in the process, however, a fellow learner recommended the

MAXQDA software program to facilitate the transcription and coding of data. After a trial run, it

was decided that the software was an asset because it allowed for transcription and coding of

interviews within the same program which was especially helpful in the later stages as the codes

were coalescing into their focused forms. The software made it possible to transcribe the

interview, code data chunks with either existing or new codes, and add memos, all within the

same program. There was a learning curve with the program, and quite a bit of time was invested

with tutorial videos to learn to use the program effectively. This was an important step in order to

avoid possible misrepresentation of the data during the analysis which might have caused

mistakes due to frustration or inexperience with the software program.

74

As interview questions were formulated, interviews were guided, and data was analyzed

it was necessary to recognize that one cannot stand outside of the research itself. As analysis was

underway, and the coding and memo bank grew, it was necessary to return to the data constantly

to ensure consistency between the data and the coding. Working with the data in this fashion

required insight and intuition, a willingness to renounce certain ideas, and the patience to return

to the data repeatedly for confirmation. A journal was kept throughout the process to document

personal bias and assumptions, and proved to be a useful key, especially toward the end of the

analysis.

The data analysis for this study followed the constructivist model of coding, as outlined

by Charmaz (2014). The first step of the analysis was listening to the interviews and transcribing

them. For the first two interviews this was a linear process. As the analysis progressed, it became

more iterative as data strings and concepts were compared between transcripts. Each transcript

was checked against its audio recording before sending it to the participant for review.

Presentation of Data and Results of the Analysis

Initial coding began with line by line analysis (Charmaz, 2014). Notes were taken and

initial codes were parsed but not analyzed, and data was chunked into large groups based on

common attributes. In the next step of analysis, focused coding extended from the initial coding,

and was where the phenomena being studied came more into focus (Charmaz, 2014). Once the

focused codes were somewhat established, they were arranged around topics and themes. Topics

began to decipher the relationships between the categories (Charmaz, 2014). provided a structure

or scaffolding for the emerging theory and provided a place to compare or attach emerging

categories. Theoretical coding examined the relationships between all the codes, comparing and

contrasting information from within and among interviews to try and capture the full experience

of the phenomenon as described by the participants (Charmaz, 2014). Interpretive theory was the

75

final step in the cycle. “Interpretive theorizing can move beyond individual situations and

immediate interactions to include collectivities and institutions (Charmaz, 2014, p. 231).

Other activities that took place constantly during the research process included taking

field notes during interviews and transcriptions, and memoing. Charmaz (2014) describes

memoing as the written articulation of the process flow while working through the study. It was

important to capture fleeting thoughts about the material, as they represented new ways to

organize or link material and lead to new research questions (Charmaz, 2014).

Initial and Focused Codes

Appendix A shows the full table of initial codes and the respective number of segments

from the participants. These codes were then analyzed and arranged around focused codes as

shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2

Results of Focused Coding, Organization of Initial Codes into Focused Codes with

Frequencies

Focused Codes Initial Codes Frequency

Perceptions of Procrastination Positive perceptions 7

Negative perceptions 52

Conflicts triggered by procrastination Conflicts with family

members

10

Lack of autonomy 17

Changing life roles 9

76

Emotions triggered by procrastination Anxiety 21

Annoyance 5

Overwhelmed 20

Accomplished 12

Relief 17

Vulnerability 6

Needs served by procrastinating Protection 30

Work strategy 12

Procrastination as a work strategy Tipping point 25

Alternate activities 13

List making 8

Project preparation

and alignment

10

Strategic delay 13

The role of the

deadline

9

Internal clock 8

Expectations Personal performance 12

77

Self-criticism 21

Perfectionism 11

Expectations of self 21

Expectations of others 24

Domains where procrastination is

triggered

Home and personal

life

12

Work and career 9

Academics 30

Conflicts between self and other Conflicts with others

due to procrastination.

Conflicts due to a lack

of autonomy.

Conflicts due to

changing life roles.

36

Physical dimension of procrastination Physical sensations 25

Physical spaces 20

Focused Codes

The focused codes that arose from this research are grounded in the data that emerged

during the interviews. The data reflected experiences between the participants and their

environment. Analysis focused on actions, and participants’ responses to stimuli in their

environment. As outlined in Chapter 3, constructivism relates to a multidimensional reality as

formed by, and between, its participants. Much like atoms on their paths exchanging energy, so

78

do individuals respond to a myriad of social pressures and expectations, and each individual’s

input and output affects those around them (Charmaz, 2014). Each focused code is the result of

the tension between the participants and their environment. Different aspects of procrastination

give rise to different tensions, resulting in different codes. The presentation of the codes follows.

There is a brief explanation of the code, followed by meaning units provided by the participants.

Perceptions of procrastination. This code focuses on the perceptions of the participants

and views perceptions along two different axes. First, in terms of self and other (What others

think or say about procrastination. Self-talk related to what others say. What the participant

perceives as best for them.) Second, on a continuum of positive and negative. (Procrastinating is

bad. Procrastinating is good.)

The participants spoke of procrastination and its effect in their lives from many

perspectives. At the beginning of the interviews there was an unanimity of the participants’

opinion of procrastination. They all spoke of it in negative terms. Procrastination was

“uncomfortable”, it “tripped me up”, and “it hadn’t served me well”. It was “my arch nemesis”.

Dan made a statement that captured the overall feeling for the participants as to how being a

person who procrastinates is viewed, “universally negatively, and universally people who accept

a task and do it right away and get it done are invariably viewed quite positively.” John

expressed a similar sentiment, “Well I think that if procrastination… the word itself has a

negative connotation. if you’re a procrastinator everybody, most of society would agree that

that’s not a good thing."

When asked about what types of tasks or projects they procrastinated on the answers

varied. In some cases, it was tasks that were perceived to be of low value. Janice said, “Some

things were just so boring and pointless it seemed a waste of time to do them.” Ruth and Kenzie

79

expressed dislike for outdoor household maintenance, “It’s just the tasks are never done. And

they don’t matter! Who cares?” Marnie had a similar feeling, but about indoor maintenance,

“Cleaning the house is really tedious. I’d rather go and paint the outside.” The counterpoint to

this was tasks perceived to be of such high value by the participant that they became

overwhelming.

At some point in all the interviews the participants began to share positive aspects or

benefits of procrastination, and how this behavior fulfilled certain needs. These positive aspects

included enhanced workflow and stamina for long projects, and a feeling of well-being or flow.

Dan shared, “Procrastination serves a more subtle need or process for me…and that is that there

are times when it just doesn’t feel right to, and that’s the way I put it, does not feel right, to be

trying to do the project at a particular given time… " he continued, “There came a moment when

it suddenly shifted to “I’ve got to approach this” and I had a strategy, through much of my life in

terms of taking on tasks, particularly academic tasks of really the last minute adrenaline rush

allowed me to really focus and to be able to attack the task with a fair amount of intensity and in

a reasonably short period of time, whatever that was, depending on the size of the task, a few

hours to a few, you know, 2 or 3 days, be able to complete the task and complete it…sometimes

quite well.”

Mel expressed a need to have narrow time limits when she said, “So if I know that I

absolutely have to get it done then I can put stuff back on the back burner but I feel like I have a

problem prioritizing things to be done if I have too much time to prioritize. Then I just put if off

and I say, “Oh, I know I’m going to have time to do this, I know I’m going to have time later to

do this” and I just, I end up not doing anything." Janice, who had the least conflictive

relationship with procrastination stated, “It’s better to wait. This creates pressure, and under

pressure a better product is created and delivered." John shared that he has learned to simply

80

accept his tendency to procrastinate, stating, “I can look at something and say, “ok, I know, I

know I’m going to procrastinate on this one” and so I figure out when it has to be due and I just

know I’m going to put it off until the last minute and so I devote, maybe stick it on my calendar

and devote a day, the last day, to doing that and ignore it until then because I know I will

anyway. So it saves me some mental energy.”

Conflicts triggered by procrastination. This code focuses on the conflicts that arise

around the participants’ procrastination tendencies. Conflicts can arise with family members and

coworkers about optimal times to complete tasks. Levels of autonomy were included in this

code. The level of autonomy for the participant was coded as to whether they were making their

own decision to do something or whether a task was assigned by another person. Changing life

roles also created conflicts as participants moved from academics to careers, or careers to

retirement.

Aside from the internal stress and conflicts procrastination caused, participants

recognized the effects that procrastination had on those around them. When asked whether her

tendency to procrastinate influenced those around her, Mel shared, “I don’t want them (my

children) to do the same things that I do because I do think it causes more anxiety and it doesn’t

just affect the person. It affects everybody else that’s around you, you know?” Janice and Ruth

shared similar sentiments. Kenzie shared the perspective of her partner when she said, “My

partner thinks I do it out of disrespect, but I don’t, I just have different priorities. Some things

can wait; they’re not going anywhere.” John shared a feeling that was present for others as well

when he said, “My mom sometimes went a little bit nuts because she knew that I had a project

due and hadn’t seen about it yet and she was always afraid that I just wasn’t going to finish it

and…she was…both my parents were actually I guess, opposite of me in that if there was

81

something that had to be done, there was, “do it now, get it over with, and once it’s done it’s off

your mind and you can really enjoy the fun stuff.”

Emotions related to the phenomenon of procrastination. The emotions that trigger

procrastination include anxiety, feeling overwhelmed, and feeling vulnerable. Procrastination in

turn triggers emotions like annoyance while in the process of completing a project, and feelings

of relief and accomplishment when the project is finished. The emotions run along a range from

positive to negative.

The participants shared that the process of procrastination begins with feeling

overwhelmed about a task or a project. It may be a boring task, but frequently it is an involved

project with a lot of possibilities. Dan shared a thought that was closely echoed by Janice, Mel,

and John, “I think that early on in my life particularly around academics that, and this is as early

as grade school and high school, I had a tendency to, when there was an assignment of some size

or complexity like a term paper or something along those lines and it certainly happened in

college and post graduate work as well that the initial experience was feeling overwhelmed.” He

continued, “I have a way of looking at the big picture and looking at all the potential avenues

there are in a given task and I can quickly just swamp myself with the data and the possibilities

for what it is I have at hand.”

Mel and Janice also felt that important projects needed to be started later rather than

earlier to diminish second guessing. Mel said, “because if I did do things as they’re supposed to

or putting a lot of time and effort into it then I think the stuff would be really good. But on the

other hand then I would have too much time on my hands to question what I’ve done and go

back and start all over and change it.” Mel explained the role the deadline plays in order for her

to gear up, “If I tell myself that I’m going to get done with something earlier then it’s really hard

for me to focus and find direction. If I think about it for a little while but then I don’t actually sit

82

down and apply any of my thoughts of any ideas that I might have, then it becomes a lot easier if

it’s down to a timeline and I have to have it done. The deadline creates a comfortable space.”

Similar thoughts were expressed by Janice, John, Dan and Jane.

An emotion closely related to this feeling of being overwhelmed was anxiety, and Janice

echoed a feeling most of the participants expressed when answering how she felt when she put

something off, “There is relief at first, but then anxiety. Maybe this time I’m not going to get it in

on time, I may have miscalculated.” Dan gave a glimpse at the tipping point of anxiety shifting

behavior from not doing, to doing when he shared, “The process of just shoving it into a box.

Then as the deadline would approach, the anxiety would start to become greater again, of course

because I was aware of the deadline for whatever it is, whatever the project or the task was, and I

would, it would reach a point where the anxiety about not meeting the deadline would be greater

than the anxiety about doing the task and so then I would do the task.”

Needs served by procrastinating. Every behavior has a purpose (Peak, Dayberry,

Martin, & Simpson, 2016) and procrastination is no exception. Procrastination fulfilled the need

of self-protection and it was cited as a viable work strategy. Procrastination on projects

effectively capped anxiety. By waiting until a deadline was impending, the participants had to

proceed with what was available, thus eliminating second guessing and reducing feelings of

vulnerability.

As the process of procrastination began and ended with anxiety the question became,

“why do you continue to procrastinate knowing you will have anxiety as a result?” There were a

couple of distinct reasons given. The first was due to self-handicapping, or providing oneself

with an alibi for less than optimum work. Dan shared, “…so I had a built in alibi for not

producing the work of my own expectations, or the highest expectations.” And Mel expanded on

the thought, “If I wait until the last minute to do something and it doesn’t turn out how it was

83

meant to be my excuse is that I procrastinated and waited until the last minute. I have a huge fear

of success and I don’t know why and I’ve been working on it but I know that it has a lot to do

with why I procrastinate.” The second reason was that without exception the participants were

busy people with full lives. Whatever they were putting off had not reached a priority state. John

explained when asked why he continued procrastinating in light of the anxious moments,

“Because you got to do the fun stuff, and all the grinds were busy at their books, and you got as

good a grade as they did so… why not do it my way?”

Others spoke of the reinforcing component as well. Although the participants experienced

anxiety over outcomes, overall they were high performers in their unique environments, and

procrastination as a work strategy was working for them. Brad said, “it is just self-reinforcing in

that sense…sometimes it doesn’t make sense to do it until the last minute.” John said, “You can

only know what was and what is and if you get, essentially, as in high school, rewarded for

procrastinating, put things off until the last minute so you got to do the fun stuff, waited for the

last minute to study for the test and you still got an A or a B on it, so that’s a reward in a way….”

And finally Dan shared, “There are positive elements of procrastination, there are some rewards

in it…oftentimes is more information that becomes available that is related to the

task…sometimes if you wait long enough, the need to do the project disappears.” This changing

perception of procrastination followed the evolution of the roles of the participants in their lives

as well.

Procrastination as a work strategy. This code arose from the participants’ revelation of

how procrastination works in their favor. They spoke of the stages of procrastination on a project

and how they would transition from inaction to action. This code includes the role the deadline

takes to provide the impulse to go from inaction to action.

84

Universally the participants needed a looming deadline to complete the tasks they were

procrastinating on. Ruth gave a lower stakes example, explaining how she saved up her home

maintenance tasks until the end of the season, sharing, “what will happen is I know I’ll only have

10 days and I’ve got to get through this list. And it’s not written down, it’s in my head and I

don’t write the list down, but I know what needs to be done, and then I go crazy trying to get it

all done.” Mel gave a high stakes example when she spoke of her experience with

comprehensive exams thus, “But I knew that if I had started that on Friday, I would have been

second guessing the references and the resources that I was using and the way that I was

answering the questions so I literally gave myself 48 hours to do the 60 pages and it ended up

being 68 pages and the comments that I got were incredible so I couldn’t believe that I was

actually to pull that off in that amount of time.” All the other participants expressed that they had

these types of experiences as well.

When it was time to begin, many of the participants needed to complete certain rituals.

Their physical spaces needed to be arranged in a particular way. John shared, “I think, I have to,

basically, if it’s anything that involves paperwork or filing or anything that you can do at a desk I

have to get my home office ready, I have to have everything I’m going to need to accomplish the

task there and I have to sit myself down and if it’s a writing task I have to actually create a new

document on my computer and actually start working on it.” Mel spoke of needing to eliminate

visual distractions, “while I sit there at my kitchen table and I look at all of the stuff that I have

printed off and I look around and the kitchen and my living room and there’s shoes on the floor

or my husband’s socks which he takes off in the living room and never puts in the hamper I think

about all that stuff that needs to get done even though it doesn’t need to get done.” Ruth sums it

up thus, ... “if there’s a task like that I line it up. When I get ready to come up to the lake I line

everything up at the door, and living in a condo that is the hardest thing in the world to do but

85

that’s what I do. I have things all the way down to the landing. So I pile everything by the front

door. And when I was going to school I used to pile all of my books on the railing.”

Once work had begun on a project, the participants would stick with the work until it was

finished, guarding the time remaining until the deadline jealously. Kenzie shared, “There is a lot

of annoyance if I am working on something and I get interrupted.” Janice mentioned that she

cleared her agenda before beginning projects because, “Honestly I’ll probably get more short

tempered because I don’t want to be bothered or interrupted while I’m trying to get stuff done.

But I know that I’ve brought it on myself, but I do, I get short tempered with everybody.” John

shared, “Once I get started then I can get totally into it and you can’t drag me away from it.”

Most of the participants shared similar experiences.

Upon finishing with the project, there was a universal sense of relief. John said, “Once I

get into it… I actually kind of enjoy the process of doing it and there’s this huge feeling of relief

when I finish it.” So how do you feel when you’re done with all of that? “Well, I’m glad it’s

over.” In response to this question “How do you feel when you’re done? Kenzie gave a succinct

answer, “Accomplished.” However due to the participants waiting as long as they did to begin

there was still a sense of anxiety waiting for the results to come back, especially in academic

projects. “It’s a relief but it’s also some anxiety to see how it gets graded because I know

whether or not I put forth the actual level of quality of what I could put into it.”, Janice shared.

Expectations. The participants all have high expectations of themselves. Part of the

motivation to procrastinate revolves around perfectionism, self-criticism, and the need to meet or

exceed the expectations of others. When they feel they cannot meet these expectations of self or

others, they engage in dilatory behaviors. The deadline then triggers the transition from inaction

to action as a tipping point from being anxious about not meeting expectations to being anxious

about complying with obligations.

86

When asked about why they felt they procrastinated, many of the participants alluded to

their tendencies towards perfectionism. When asked about the stressors that might cause her to

procrastinate Kenzie shared, “Well I look at what I need to do and what needs to be understood

from all parties in order to execute the plan perfectly. Usually in my case it has to do with people

that are involved and the people have to understand what levers to pull in order to execute the

plan perfectly, and then they have to be reminded but if I try to do it at the last minute it doesn’t

work very well.” John made a similar statement about a complex project, “I think the major

problem was that I was afraid it wasn’t going to be good enough, and so everything had to be

perfect.” He also recognized this tendency in a coworker when he observed, “she was a

perfectionist and she was…she was making her life miserable!” While speaking of perfectionist

tendencies the sense of risk involved, putting oneself on the line was mentioned as well, “We’re

concerned with what other people think and we want to do a good job not only for ourselves but

for the people that surround us and so it’s risky. It’s a risk that we’re taking.” Janice, Brad and

Jane made similar statements.

Physical dimension of procrastination. Within the process of procrastination there was

a physical component. As noted in the section on procrastination as a wok strategy, many of the

participants the physical space in their outside environment had to be arranged in a certain

manner to signal that work was underway. This facet had an internal component as well. Many

participants also spoke of an adrenaline rush or “high” that allowed them to work through

complex projects in relatively short periods of time.

Dan was most explicit when he said, “... I’m pushing it (a task) off perhaps oftentimes,

until the last minute or relatively the last minute, but then when I sit down to do it and it “quote”

feels right and flow state is there, then it gets put together in a much more coherent and efficient

fashion.” John shared the physical experience of pressure before he starts as project as, “there’s

87

that kind of outside pressure and sometimes it also feels like there’s internal pressure like

somebody is blowing up a balloon inside me and if I don’t get the task done before the balloon

explodes I will explode with it.” Then he went on to share what happens when he begins the

project, “if I’m actually going into what I’ve been putting off and starting to do it, I’m not sure

how to describe it, it’s almost like there’s a very low grade temporary high. I feel like, “Good!

You’re finally doing what you should be doing” and once I get into it, as said even with my taxes

I actually kind of enjoy the process of doing it and there’s this huge feeling of relief when I

finish it!” Janice spoke of a "last minute adrenaline rush” that triggered her creative process and

enhanced her thinking. Brad spoke of the combined reward of relief at task completion and the

reinforcement of personal rewards like walks and special dinners when he had met his goals.

Theoretical Coding

The concreteness of the initial and focused structures came together in the previous

section. In this section on theoretical coding the focus will be on the spaces between the concrete

structures. As mentioned earlier, many of the codes fit into theory put forward in previous

research; here the focus will be on the divergent material. The codes for this last section grew

from memos and journaling over the course of the analysis, but reflect a higher level of analysis

that synthesizes the concrete and tangible words expressed by the participants into theoretical

categories grounded in the data. Charmaz (2014) considers the possibility of sensing and

understanding the presence of a concept or phenomena without being able to “capture and

crystallize” it (p. 138). In order to capture these codes more abstract theoretical codes are created

and these theoretical codes can emerge without the concepts being explicitly mentioned by the

participants; early codes can be the basis of later and more abstract ones, and that theoretical

codes emerge when looking at multiple transcripts (Charmaz, 2014, p. 146).

The following theoretical categories emerged from the collected data:

88

1. Procrastination as a work strategy-All of the participants talked about procrastination as a

process or a way of doing things that worked quite well for them, but which put them at

odds with other people in their lives, including parents, professors, bosses, and life

partners. It was at this point the data began to diverge from much of the available

literature. Without prompting, many of the participants began to talk about

procrastination as positive work strategy. At some point in each interview the tide tended

to turn away from the negative aspects of procrastination the participants perceived, like

anxiety and personal conflict. Janice, the youngest participant, was completely

comfortable with her tendency toward procrastination. She said, “it’s better to wait, you

get a better product”. This will be examined in Chapter 5.

2. Procrastination and autonomy-The conflict between “self” and “other” came out in

participants’ discussions of autonomy; the freedom to choose what to do and when. As

the participants became more autonomous, whether in terms of career or domain, they

tended to procrastinate less. They reported a great deal of procrastination in their

academic environment and pursuits; this was followed by procrastination in their

personal domains. Most of the participants had successfully pursued careers that enabled

them to have a great deal of autonomy, and they reported much less procrastination in

their career domains; especially those who had their own businesses and did not have an

authority setting deadlines.

3. Internal Clock-Many of the participants spoke of an internal clock, or of having the

innate ability to plan a project and get it in exactly on time. They spoke of growing into,

maturing, and perfecting a process that allows them to be highly engaged in their lives

and still organize, produce, and deliver well produced, complex projects in short periods

of time. Some of the participants shared that they used procrastination as an alibi for

89

work that was not up to the highest standards. This was previously examined by Milgram

and Naaman (1996). However, all the participants without exception are high performers,

not merely getting by. This did not agree with the literature, and heralded the genesis of

the theoretical coding process.

4. Procrastination as it relates to closure-Due to the prevalence of the word procrastination

to represent any delay, especially in situations where there is an “other”, some of the

participants perceived they were procrastinating on doing things that carried a heavy

emotional burden; tasks that did not have deadlines and required careful thought and

execution. These heavily laden emotional decisions shared a common trait of the

participant trying to protect themselves or others by not quickly making a definitive

decision; or by postponing the completion of a project. The pressure of the “other” in

these situations made the participants feel as if they were procrastinating or not meeting

the expectations of colleagues or loved ones, even if there was no explicit or spoken

pressure from the other. Examples from the participants include moving from a decades

old home and familiar neighborhood, to having a final meeting with a trusted health care

counselor.

Figure 1 below represents the cycle the participants’ emotions can follow when they are

pursuing a project. They have developed a process that works for them as individuals, which

goes against societal norms of getting things done quickly and immediately. From within, they

feel their processes work for them. They feel capable of compliance and success given the

parameters it is most comfortable for them to work within. When faced with opposition from

their partners, co-workers or professors, however, they second guess not only their work but their

skills to get the work done which results in disharmony. This disharmony then feeds into more

procrastination behaviors.

90

Summary

For the participants in this study, procrastination was related to anxiety and avoidance

when they first began to procrastinate. Over time it evolved into an effective work strategy for

them. They developed a strong sense of how long projects would take them to complete and

planned their activities accordingly. Once they began the production phase of a project, they

would guard their time jealously to finish on time. While procrastinating had previously been a

kind of excuse or alibi for not performing up to expectations earlier in their lives, the behavior

91

had evolved to a point where they could complete complicated projects in reduced time periods

and produce good, and often excellent, results. Chapter 5 contains a discussion and interpretation

of the results presented in this chapter.

92

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the results of the study presented in Chapter 4 in

the wider context of the literature and the field of psychology in general. A brief recapitulation of

the results will be presented, followed by an analysis of the results in the context of the previous

literature. Conclusions will follow, and broader implications based on the outcomes of the study.

An interpretation of the findings, including an examination of the limitations of the study will

then be presented. Following this section are recommendations for further research which have

been developed over the course of the analysis. Final thoughts will be offered, and the study will

come to a close.

Summary of the Results

While gathering literature for this study it was found that much of it focused on

procrastination as a problem to be solved, and framed the phenomenon as entirely negative

(Eckert, Ebert, Lehn, Sieland, & Berking, 2016; Rahimi, Hall, & Pychyl, 2016; Rozental &

Carlbring, 2014). Most of the studies were built around self-report measures, which are prone to

bias and distortion (Hoskin, 2012). Qualitative research on the phenomenon of procrastination

was suggested to help discover “behavioral, motivational and affective domains” (Cao, 2012a, p.

57) and suggested “in-depth qualitative studies that compare and contrast such specific themes as

adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination” (Schraw, Wadkins, & Olafsun, 2007, p.

24). Qualitative studies may help researchers distinguish among multiple reasons for

procrastinating, including which reasons are most important in different circumstances. The

93

present study focused on discovering the process of procrastination and its role in the lives of the

participants from a neutral perspective.

The grounded theory method in the style of Charmaz was used to inform and execute this

study. Grounded theory uses inductive reasoning and iterative strategies (Charmaz, 2014). While

a Likert-style survey was used for screening volunteers, the data for analysis was collected via

in-depth interviews where the participant was the expert on the question at hand (Charmaz, 2014,

p. 70). The study was designed to delve more deeply into the phenomenon of the procrastination

process as it is experienced by those who procrastinate. The interview questions were formulated

to be neutral. As the interviews progressed, new paths were followed deeper into the

phenomenon, exploring different avenues of the topic through the eyes of the participants.

Participant narrative formed the data, allowing for the subject to be expanded according to what

they wished to express. The combination of grounded theory methodology and constructivist

perspective provided a space in which to compare and contrast the data. In the constructivist

tradition, hierarchical relationships and social constructs were considered as the data was

analyzed. This helped create a unique contribution to the existing literature base by providing

data about the process of procrastination, its purpose, and its effects in the lives of the

participants, offering a fuller picture of the phenomenon. The results will be useful to those who

seek to understand more about why they, or those around them, in any of their life domains,

procrastinate. In turn this will provide insight into how to leverage or modify those behaviors if

they choose to do so. This could be beneficial at personal, academic, corporate, and community

levels as the costs of procrastination in these places is high (Schraw, Wadkins, & Olafson, 2007;

Steel, 2007).

94

Discussion of the Results

The research question for the present project was “What is adults’ experience of

procrastination?” The grounded theory method allowed the participants a space to respond to this

question without judgement, and they felt motivated to share their experiences. In the early

minutes of the interviews participants’ experiences lined up with previous studies. However, at a

certain point in most of the interviews, the data began to diverge from the material in the

literature review. The participants shared stories, not of overwhelming occurrences of lost

opportunities, but opportunities gained. They told of how, by putting tasks off, they could enjoy

“the fun stuff” and an impending deadline provided an adrenaline kick that facilitated completing

complex projects in short periods of time. They spoke of impending deadlines as a source of

relief because the deadline effectively corralled the infinite possibilities of a project into a finite

space.

The results of the study indicate there is more to the phenomenon of procrastination than

time management issues, personality traits or avoidance behaviors involved in procrastination.

The synthesis of the data and literature together painted a picture of an evolving, adaptive

behavior. For participants in the study, procrastination behavior caused discomfort due to

conflicts, both internal and external, relating to the expectations of others. Common threads that

were woven through the narratives were “I don’t like procrastinating, it’s uncomfortable”. They

revealed disappointment in themselves and were self-critical based on what they were hearing

from external sources; however, on an individual level, procrastination was effective for them as

a work strategy and they had successfully evolved their strategy despite external pressures. In

spite of the discomfort, most participants had honed a workflow process involving deliberate,

planned delays while still thinking about those delays in terms of procrastination. The

95

termination of important projects would be scheduled at the last minute, and they would clear

their calendar to focus on the one thing that needed to be done.

One reason the study may have offered the results it did are the characteristics of the

participants. They self-identified as people who procrastinate, and put things off, sometimes

indefinitely. Yet with few exceptions, they all responded to the recruitment materials, made

appointments, and exchanged emails in a timely manner. Their perception of themselves as

people who procrastinate did not line up with their actions as participants in this research study.

Conclusions Based on the Results

As discussed previously, the definitions of procrastination have evolved over time and

procrastination is viewed as a troublesome phenomenon. Studies have been conducted showing

how costly procrastination is in terms of time and money. Much effort is invested in improving

efficiency and rectifying time management issues. The participants in this study have absorbed

and are impacted by the negative viewpoint society has of their tendency to procrastinate. Most

expressed a desire to have a different approach to their work, because procrastinating causes

disharmony and discomfort in their lives. Despite their efforts to change to a more socially

acceptable system of work however, the approach that they use, which involves putting the tasks

off until they are nearly due, is what works for them. This sets up an iterative conflict between

the participant and others who are stakeholders in their projects.

The results of the study would suggest that procrastination is a difference in perception

between stakeholders on when work needs to be finished. In hierarchical relationships,

procrastination is viewed askance, even when the finished product is acceptable. Procrastination

causes a level of emotional discomfort that affects stakeholders, and a lack of understanding

seems to exist on all sides. From the participants’ point of view, there was a strong sense of

wanting to please external parties and comply with expectations. They would painstakingly lay

96

the foundations to prepare a project; but without a solid deadline, they felt unable to engage in

the production phase.

Comparison of Findings with Theoretical Framework

and Previous Literature

The literature review provided a foundation against which to test emerging codes. As the

initial and focused codes were created it was found that much of the data collected fell into

categories covered in previous research. As seen in Chapters 1 and 2, there are diverse

definitions of procrastination in the literature. Definitions overlap, but do not always agree on the

particulars. From the emotional perspective, Bridges and Roig (1997) defined procrastination as

an experience of “psychological discomfort or distress as a result of failing to complete or

indefinitely postponing a task or an activity” (p. 943). From a behavioral or action perspective,

procrastination was defined by Steel, Brothen and Wambach (2001), as the discrepancy between

intention and action, and not a result of the intentional shunning of tasks. Takács (2010) set forth

the definition, “Chronic procrastination is considered the tendency to postpone in a variety of

situations that seem necessary to reach goals” (p. 51).

In general, people who procrastinate report having every intention of finishing set tasks,

but in some cases, do not follow through with their intentions (Wang, 2016). For the most part,

the participants in the present study did follow through with their intentions, although they did

cut things very close to set deadlines. Mel shared, “I really procrastinate literally on everything

in life. I mean, I always have and I don’t know why. I always manage to get stuff done, but it’s

always last minute. So I think if I have too much time on my hands to think about it, I keep

changing my mind about stuff, so I just have to wait until the very last minute and go with my

gut.”

97

Finally, Steel (2007) defined procrastination as a “voluntarily delay in an intended course

of action despite expecting to be worse off for the delay” (p. 66). Dan supported this definition

when he said, “I had sort of a ready-made excuse if it didn’t meet standards. I could say, “well,

you know I did it at the last minute.” Mel shared a similar thought when she said, “If I wait until

the last minute to do something and it doesn’t turn out how it was meant to be my excuse is that I

procrastinated and waited until the last minute. I have a huge fear of success and I don’t know

why and I’ve been working on it but I know that it has a lot to do with why I procrastinate.”

Data resulting from the interviews was compared with the literature. Cognitive

dissonance theory refers to the cognitive inconsistencies one may have when trying to hold two

competing cognitions simultaneously. In Chapter 2 of this dissertation, cognitive dissonance is

defined as, ‘‘the tension that arises when one is simultaneously aware of two inconsistent

cognitions (Murray, Wood, & Lillienfeld, 2012, p. 526). Per Festinger (1962) this dissonance is a

motivating factor to change or modify some cognitive element to regain consonance and the

individual seeks status quo. Consonance occurs when cognitions are consistent or congruent

(Festinger, 1962). Upon having two (or more) cognitions in opposition, a person will enter a state

of negative arousal and seek to reduce this sensation by reducing the inconsistency (Festinger,

1962).

The literature on cognitive dissonance tends to explore ideals and social issues like

health, race, and gender issues but for this dissertation it was used as a scaffolding to examine

psychological climate and the factors surrounding procrastination, including perceived

competence or perfectionism. When considering aversive tasks leading to procrastination, be

they mundane, labor intensive, or psychologically threatening, it is important to note each of

these tasks can be overwhelming. They can knock a person off balance and threaten their sense

of cognitive consistency or consonance. Self-beliefs may include being an intelligent and

98

organized person. When the checkbook does not balance, a person can feel frustrated and

unintelligent. One might decide their checkbook makes them feel frustrated so they might forego

careful maintenance of their finances, revising their ideals to lower their discomfort, saying such

care is not necessary.

The revision of internal attitudes to reach congruence, even at the expense of being worse

off, seemed to approach the mindset of procrastination. Baumeister (1997) suggested that

procrastination marks a limit between rational and irrational behavior. One of the definitions of

procrastination is “to voluntarily delay an intended course of action despite expecting to be

worse off for the delay” (Steel, 2007), which by any standards would seem to be irrational. Lay,

Kovacs, and Danto (1998) presented a scale of intended behaviors. At one end of the scale were

duties and obligations and at the other are ideals and wishes. Procrastination may begin with a

piece of information that causes dissonance, but it goes beyond the accommodation and revision

of thoughts. Procrastination is an action, a decision to follow through, or not, on intentions.

The data collected at the beginning of many of the interviews supported the theory of

cognitive dissonance. The participants shared their desire to not only to be considered as

intelligent and capable people by others, but considered themselves capable and intelligent as

well. When they were faced with a project or situation perceived as overwhelming they would

put it off, which would temporarily quiet the dissonance and provide consonance. There was a

sense of relief and well-being in the beginning stages of procrastination because the stimulus

causing the negative arousal had been postponed. Examples from the participants include this

from John, “and so you want it to be perfect. You want it to be as good as it can possibly be

because if you take writing seriously the writing is a reflection of you and who you are, and if

you think you’re a smart person then you want this paper to reek of intelligence, and that makes

it hard to get started.” A thought from Dan followed the cognitive dissonance pattern as well,

99

"and my comparing myself with other people, you know, probably that’s why especially in the

adolescent years when that’s really something that you do a lot of… That you see what other

people are doing and you say, “oh gosh, I wish I could do that. Oh, they’re so good at…whatever

it is that they’re good at, you know? So I think that the awareness came then, at that time and that

when I fairly severely did judge myself for procrastination.”

In Chapter 2 the American psychologist and philosopher William James was referenced

on how he explained how pleasure and pain function as “springs of action” propelling people

towards or away from certain behaviors (James, 1890/2012, loc.7903). James (1890/2014)

referred to pain as a “tremendous inhibitor”, and pleasure as a “tremendous reinforcer” (loc.

7906). Later, Freud said that the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain (psychic or physical)

is the underlying motivation for all behavior, and avoiding pain can become as great a motivator

as obtaining pleasure (Freud, 1920/2014, loc. 5835). Balanced approach-avoidance motivation is

a normal adaptive behavior which people need for survival (Krieglmeyer, De Houwer, &

Deutsch, 2013). It requires planning behaviors and strategic movement (Elliot, Eder, & Harmon-

Jones, 2013). It has been proposed that approach and avoidant tendencies are biologically based,

and that some individuals may be more sensitive and oriented towards achieving positive

outcomes while others are more sensitive toward avoiding negative ones (Elliot & Thrash, 2002;

Ferris et al., 2011).

The participants shared experiences that meshed with approach-avoidance motivation.

Mel said, “I can effectively put stuff off, but I’m still accomplishing other things so I think I can

use that as my excuse for why I have to procrastinate and wait until the last minute.” Marnie was

straightforward when she said, “Rather than vacuuming and dusting and cleaning the house, I’ll

start a project like painting the house to avoid doing things I don’t like to do.” Dan shared, “I

think that anxiety about my ability to produce quality work then also got in the way so I would

100

shove it aside, I would shove the anxiety aside and sort of get myself immersed in other things.

Diversions and just putting it off, just not thinking about it, you know?”

These shared experiences support the literature on procrastination as a mechanism of

avoidance. It has been described as a behavior to protect self-concept and the ego from situations

perceived as threatening where one feels vulnerable, as in academics or the workplace

(Baumeister, 1997; Helmke & van Aken,1995; Skaalvik, 1997). When examining academic

procrastination problem avoidance is a key factor (Bridges & Roig, 1997); People who are

highly anxious have been found to be more likely to procrastinate because it is more reinforcing

to avoid current anxiety about the task at hand than receive later (and not necessarily guaranteed)

benefits for completing the task. Elliot and Thrash (2002) explored approach and avoidance

motivation as differences in valence, or the intrinsic attractiveness or aversiveness of an event or

situation. Approach motivation is also linked to the concepts of appetition, reward and incentive;

while avoidance is linked to threat, aversion or punishment (Elliot, Eder, & Harmon-Jones,

2013). Dan reported, “The process of just shoving it into a box. Then as the deadline would

approach, the anxiety would start to become greater again, of course because I was aware of the

deadline for whatever it is, whatever the project or the task was, and I would, it would reach a

point where the anxiety about not meeting the deadline would be greater than the anxiety about

doing the task and so then I would do the task.”

In addition to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, there is also a polarity when discussing

outcomes, even positive ones. A nexus forms here of being motivated to do something, or being

motivated to avoid something. Even the same goal can be approached from opposing points on

the scale. Ferris et al. (2011) define approach behaviors as the desire to procure positive

outcomes. Those who are oriented toward approach behaviors are sensitive to the situations in

which positive cognitions are perceived. On the other side of the spectrum a person who exhibits

101

avoidance motivation designs behaviors to try to prevent negative outcomes. Even when goals

and the results are the same, there is evidence to support that avoidance motivation has negative

effects on desirable outcomes (Elliot, 2006). If not balanced properly with appropriate

motivation, avoidance motivation can lead to prolonged feelings of guilt (i.e. I should have done

more. I could have done better.)

Approach-avoidance motivation and cognitive dissonance explicated the beginning stages

of procrastination, but did not reach the adaptive facet procrastination represented for the

participants. At the beginning of the interviews there was a sense that the data being collected fit

very well into what was already known about the phenomenon. Once the interviews got further

underway however, there was a subtle shift in perspective. Over time, while the participants were

still experiencing discomfort, it was not because of an irrational delay, but the response to what

they, or others around them, thought they should be doing. The growing sense of autonomy

created an environment of resentment at having to meet deadlines that were perceived as

arbitrary (Johnson & Bloom, 1995; Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995).

As reported in Chapter 2 Temporal motivation theory (TMT) integrates aspects of

expectancy theory, need theory (Steel & König, 2006), and hyperbolic discounting (the tendency

to choose smaller but more immediate rewards over larger rewards over the long term). Time is

considered as a motivating factor. Temporal discounting, wherein the value of rewards available

at a delay are discounted relative to the value of rewards available in the short-term, is

considered the main facet in the pattern of procrastination. Someone prone to procrastination

may delay efforts for completion of a long-term goal with large consequences to partake in an

activity that offers immediately available, but smaller, rewards. John shared, “Because you got to

do the fun stuff, and all the grinds were busy at their books, and you got as good a grade as they

did so… why not do it my way?” Dan explained how the process would move from delay into

102

action thus, “The process of just shoving it into a box. Then as the deadline would approach, the

anxiety would start to become greater again, of course because I was aware of the deadline for

whatever it is, whatever the project or the task was, and I would, it would reach a point where the

anxiety about not meeting the deadline would be greater than the anxiety about doing the task.”

In recent literature procrastination has its proponents. There are research studies

discussing procrastination as an advantageous behavior, noting that the decision to set projects

aside to develop while completing other worthwhile tasks is beneficial (Chun Chu & Choi, 2005;

Steel, 2007). The researchers explicate that sometimes putting things off is beneficial, because

new information may come to light which could positively affect outcomes; therefore, in certain

situations, procrastination might be an advantage in the cost benefit analysis of the work. Some

people deliberately wait for deadlines because they work better under pressure, purposely

delaying their work in hopes a looming deadline will provide an adrenaline rush to boost

performance (Ferrari, O'Callaghan, Newbegin, & Freeman, 2005). John gave an example of this

when he said, “Once I get started then I can get totally into it and you can’t drag me away from

it.” Mel also expressed that she guarded the final period before her projects jealously, saying,

“There is a lot of annoyance if I am working on something and I get interrupted.”

Dan talked about the state of mind that accompanies working on a short deadline thus, “... I’m

pushing it off perhaps oftentimes, until the last minute or relatively the last minute, but then

when I sit down to do it and it “quote” feels right and flow state is there, then it gets put together

in a much more coherent and efficient fashion”

Another link associated with procrastination is perfectionism. Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt,

and Koledin (1992) studied the correlation between procrastination and perfectionism. Self-

oriented perfectionism was associated with fear of failure and the necessity of continual success

(Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). The perception of task capability can contribute to

103

an elevated level of perceived task aversiveness if one feels unprepared to meet the task and

relates to procrastination in terms of ego protection and perfectionism (Robinson, Zabelina,

Boyd, Bresin, & Ode, 2014). If one does not feel capable of meeting certain demands (at work or

in an assignment) there is an increased likelihood of procrastination (Walsh & Ugumba-

Agwunobi, 2002; Wäschle, Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles 2014). Sometimes self-

handicapping in this manner can take the form of using procrastination as an alibi for low quality

work. This serves the purpose of shifting the focus of poor-quality work onto the time spent

completing the project versus the person’s abilities. For those who procrastinate, an additional

advantage to this type of thinking is less emotional involvement in the project, which buffers

criticism (Milgram & Naaman, 1996). It has been demonstrated that when procrastination is

related to perfectionism and trait anxiety it can lead to increased stress (Walsh & Ugumba-

Agwunobi, 2002), and breakdowns in self-esteem (Baumeister, 1997). Self-handicapping also

becomes a greater issue when related with trait anxiety and perfectionism (Howell, 2009; Murray

& Warden, 1992).

When situational determinants are combined with personality factors the probability of

procrastination increases (Baumeister, 1997; Milgram & Dangour, 1992; Senécal, Lavoie, &

Koestner, 1997) Adding additional anxiety about evaluation in a situation where the person

perceives themselves as vulnerable and an extremely complicated situation is created (Walsh &

Ugumba-Agwanobi, 2002). Two of the participants shared that they had begun to procrastinate

much later in life than the rest of the participants. Mel started to procrastinate as she was

finishing high school, after she overheard a comment she perceived as hurtful between two

people who were important influences on her. This comment punctuated her procrastination

tendencies into a before and after. Before the incident, she had always turned things in on time or

even before deadlines. She was disliked by her classmates for this quality. Then at an assembly

104

when her qualities as an excellent student were enumerated before her name was give, her

mother turned to Mel’s boyfriend and said, “whoever this is, she does not have a life” based on

the quantity of activities she was involved in. Due to this, she started second guessing herself and

began to prefer to put things off in order to meet her mother’s lower expectations.

Marnie was the other participant who started procrastinating later in life. She spent much

of her career working in high-pressure non-profit environments. This career meant she was

working against her natural introversion, and once the pressure was off to perform the duties, she

felt she was able to put off doing tasks that she perceived as smaller or lower priority. She stated,

“I have always had to look after myself, and so once I didn’t work in that area anymore it was

nice to be able to put things off”

Another aspect that aligned with an article from the literature review involved busyness

and engagement. Schraw, Wadkins, and Olafsun (2007) found that perceived procrastination can

be a difference in perspective on prioritization. As a whole, the participants were busy people,

active at work and in their communities. They rarely felt they were doing what would be

considered to be “nothing”. They were always busy and impending deadlines served to prioritize

their schedules. Using procrastination deliberately helped relieve their anxiety, provided a cap

for infinite possibilities, and stimulated creativity. Mel stated, “I think that I take so much on in

my life, and being so busy, and I can’t concentrate on everything so I wind up having to

procrastinate with stuff.”

Academic and workplace procrastination have particularly complex sets of factors

involved (Aremu, Williams, & Adesina, 2011; Nguyen, Steel, & Ferrari, 2013). Not only are

personality factors in play, but task aversiveness, self-protection and resentment at having to

meet deadlines are part of the phenomenon as well. (Bridges & Roig, 1997; Johnson & Bloom,

1995; Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995). Ingrained habits and behaviors that occur as

105

responses to arousal can be reversed with training (Lee & Orsillo, 2014). It would be interesting

to see if this would apply to procrastination behaviors. Some of the questions approached in the

literature emerged over the course of the study, but they were not fully answered. They include

the following:

• Is one putting off a task due to worry about receiving criticism and therefore engaging in

self-handicapping (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992; Murray & Warden,

1992)?

• Is the contemplated task perceived as too boring or too difficult, and therefore aversive

(Senécal, Lavoie, & Koestner, 1997; Steel, 2007)?

• Or is one predisposed by biology and personality traits to engage in dilatory behavior

(Lay & Silverman, 1996; Milgram & Naaman, 1997)?

• When perfectionism is involved does it precede anxiety? Perhaps the person has set

unreasonable goals for themselves, or feels that unreasonable demands have been set?

• Or perhaps procrastination a conditioned response set off by an anxious amygdala

(Denny et al., 2015; Milgram & Naaman, 1996)?

• Milgram and Naaman (1995) presented the argument that if procrastination is the

consequence of escape or avoidant conditioning then anxiety is the discriminative cue (p.

679) while Duvarci and Pare (2014) approached the subject from a neuropsychological

standpoint, looking at the function of the amygdala in fear and anxiety.

Interpretation of the Findings

The literature reviewed presented partial snapshots of procrastination. The nine

participants interviewed shared experiences that meshed very well with the existing literature.

However, the data collected for the present study suggests there is a greater scope to the

106

phenomenon of procrastination than one might have suspected. For the participants,

procrastination is a double-edged sword. On the societal, or side of the other, their feelings about

being a person who procrastinates, and the conflict that procrastinating generates in their

surroundings causes them to feel badly about their delayed actions on tasks and projects. Their

inner compass, however, helps them plan, prepare and align their work in a manner that, while

appearing inefficient to outsiders, for them is very effective. They are possessed of an innate

clock, refined over time, that helps them gauge how long different phases of a project will take.

Then they take each phase in its own time. The final phase of a project, often a production phase,

will be planned as close to the deadline as possible to take advantage of the adrenaline kick that

enables them to work long hours without tiring or getting distracted. While they did report

misses with this system, for the most part as they perfected their system they could complete

complicated production phases in very short periods of time.

When they spoke of their procrastination tendencies as related to their academic

outcomes, they were candid about their inner turmoil about waiting to complete projects until the

last minute to have an alibi for work that did not meet expectations. However, this tendency also

evolved, and they could reconcile their anxiety about the project and its outcome with their

desire to do well on projects along with their need to work on the projects close to the deadline.

The participants’ adaptation of the behavior over time reflected independent thinking and

a desire for autonomy on their part to pursue projects in a manner that suited them most

advantageously. The participants self-identified as procrastinators. They pointed out that their

partners and family members identified them as procrastinators as well. Most of the participants

had started procrastinating at an early age, and they suffered the typical consequences of

procrastination, including missed opportunities and lower grades than desired. During this time,

they fit the definition of being worse off for the delay. As they developed in academics, they

107

started adapting this behavior, using it, and developing an internal clock. Furthermore, they had

developed a way to leverage this tendency, and it calmed their anxiety and sparked their

creativity.

By adulthood, even though they were still calling themselves procrastinators, they no

longer fit the definition. While they expressed a tendency to finish their work right at the

deadline, they made it more often than they missed it. Beyond that, by their accounts, they made

good grades and their work was well received. They were no longer worse off for the delay. So

the behavior of procrastination had been adapted to fill the need of calming anxiety, while being

finely calibrated enough to not miss deadlines. This would seem to move the behavior out of the

realm of irrational behavior. However, as is often the case with labels, they stick even when they

are no longer indicative of reality. The label of procrastinator stuck for them and the people

around them.

The results of this study show procrastination as a behavior that has evolved from a reflex

reaction for the participants to protect themselves when they are in situations that make them feel

vulnerable, to an adaptive behavior purposely developed to tackle tasks in a way that considers

the individuals’ traits and needs. Procrastinating helps them overcome feelings of vulnerability

and being overwhelmed.

Limitations

The sheer volume of data was hard to conquer. A transcription service would have been a

good investment for two reasons. The first was time. I am a fairly experienced transcriptionist,

but by the third transcription there were so many codes it was very distracting and confusing

trying to concentrate solely on the transcription without coding or taking notes. The

transcriptions took far too long due to these distractions and the process was fatiguing. Having

108

someone else transcribe would have saved a month of days, even though transcribing a one hour

interview only takes between four and five hours.

A research study always has certain limitations. This study used the grounded theory

method, and therefore purposeful sampling was used to obtain the best participants and a small

sample was gathered. The sample was unevenly distributed between males (n=3) and females

(n=6). Although counterintuitive, another limitation would be the high level of awareness the

participants had in terms of their procrastination tendencies. The simple acts of answering an

email, setting and keeping an appointment and returning member checking email speaks to a

certain level of responsibility and awareness which, in a Catch-22 like fashion, narrows the

applicability of the results. This created a situation in which the results of the research relate

exclusively to the participants involved in the study; the results are not generalizable beyond the

participants (Patton, 2014). Additionally, these results are based upon the researcher’s

interpretation of the data. According to Lincoln and Guba (2013), the researcher must distinguish

between their own experience and the experience of the participants, to analyze data effectively.

They also recognize that the researcher can never be truly removed from the work, and that in

research objectivity is elusive, thus a certain amount of bias will remain. This bias can enter

unnoticed throughout the research process, including during recruiting, interviews and analysis.

an unequal distribution of gender.

While the interviews were designed to encourage the participants to share their

experiences freely, they may have withheld details of their experience for various reasons.

Charmaz (2014) highlights the interaction between the researcher and the participant, and how

this interaction will influence the flow of information throughout the interview. Participants may

be reticent to share certain aspects of their experience, and as the interviews were relatively brief

with an unfamiliar researcher it might have affected the flow of data. Stern (2007) explains that

109

inexperienced researchers can become overwhelmed and confused which can result in data that

lack clarity and focus. In the present study, inexperience in this type of research including data

collection and data analysis with software may have influenced the analysis and findings as well.

Another facet beyond the scope of the study was individual personality types. For the purposes

of this study it was impossible to ascertain the personality type of each participant beyond an

anecdotal question, personal reference, or supposition during analysis. Therefore, it is not

possible in the present study, to match personality types with types of procrastination.

The purpose of this study was to produce theory about the process of procrastination,

from the perspective of the participants. Over the course of the data collection phase they offered

material that was rich in detail, not only providing description of their experiences with

procrastination but offering insight as to how it permeated different domains in their lives. As

this was the intent of the study, the limitations of the design did not outweigh the strengths and a

good balance was achieved.

Implications for Practice

One of the goals of this study was to provide expanded information on the process of

procrastination and the role it plays in the lives of individuals who procrastinate. This

information will advance the knowledge base by gaining a better understanding of the process of

procrastination through participants’ input about their own experiences. Through this new

understanding the vocabulary surrounding procrastination can be clarified, as precision in use of

the term is lacking in the literature (Klingsieck, 2013a, Krause & Freund, 2014). This study is

also geared toward continuing research to continue identifying and defining concepts more

clearly.

As discussed in Chapter 2, the possibility of modifying procrastination behaviors by

teaching time management and goal setting strategies (Farrington, 2012), or using commitment

110

devices (Wang, 2016), is explored. Another strategy outlined is replacing specific irrational

thoughts about time management with specific rational thoughts, to help curb procrastination

(Dryden, 2012). These approaches can only be effective if the person who procrastinates fits the

profiles where these strategies would be advantageous. Studies by both Bridges and Roig (1997)

and Wang (2016) have pointed out that for some who procrastinate, the behavior is not a time-

management problem. Milgram and Naaman (1996) have suggested procrastination is an escape

or avoidant behavior, triggered by anxiety. For the most part “procrastination” is applied as a

blanket term, so individuals who do not fit the profile for interventions will not respond

positively. Information from this study could help professionals in psychology and other

disciplines to understand the multifaceted nature of procrastination and team with stakeholders to

leverage its positive aspects.

Another implication of this study in psychology is the confirmation of the prevalence of

research based on self-report surveys. As discussed previously the surveys are often very brief,

and do not capture the fullness of the phenomenon. A concept like procrastination is difficult to

develop in a short survey, and participants are not able to express their ideas completely through

them (Hoskin, 2012). The Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS), has only nine questions (Steel,

2010) while the Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students (PASS) is somewhat more

comprehensive, with 44 questions divided into 7 sections (Steel, 2010). Longer surveys that

might capture more of the phenomenon still suffer from the pressure participants sometimes feel

to respond in a socially acceptable manner, which can have a significant effect on results (Fan et

al., 2006). Adding qualitative research to the data pool could help clarify the definitions

surrounding procrastination, and their applications.

Procrastination is a widely recognized phenomenon. Many people relate the action of

procrastination, and recognize that they sometimes decide not to do what they need to do. Many

111

of the participants in the study shared their experiences of being prepared to sit down with a

project, and then not following through. Sometimes the decision is made so quickly that it seems

to be a reflex. For individuals, finding a way to delay reflex emotional responses to stimuli that

are perceived as negative, and lead to procrastination could be advantageous. It would offer a

space for metacognition, the awareness of the cognitive processes involved in assessing

situations, at this nexus, creating a greater sense of awareness of what is happening internally

(Frewen et al., 2010; Sadeghi, Hajloo, Babayi, & Shahri, 2014). Learning to choose the most

appropriate response to the stimuli could open a decision-making opportunity, rather than just

trigger a reflex response. For stakeholders who are affected by people who procrastinate,

understanding the phenomenon more completely could help to establish strategies for finding

common ground between individuals’ workflow strategies to diminish tension and allow them to

leverage or modify the behavior if they choose to do so. This will be useful at a personal,

corporate and community level where the costs of procrastination have been shown to be high

(Schraw, Wadkins, & Olafson, 2007; Steel, 2007).

Recommendations for Further Research

The results of this study provided new information on adults’ process of procrastination.

It was found that the participants had developed a system through which they were comfortable

and able to cope with projects they perceived as overwhelming. To pursue the question further

from a qualitative perspective one could ask how the tendency to procrastinate could be

leveraged; ask people how their tendency to procrastinate could be used advantageously in their

environment. To pursue the topic further from a quantitative standpoint one might add a section

to the PASS scale to explore whether people are applying the term procrastination too liberally

and try to make a distinction between true procrastination, or being worse off for the delay, and

strategic delay.

112

Milgram and Naaman (1995) presented the argument that if procrastination is the

consequence of escape or avoidant conditioning then anxiety is the discriminative cue (p. 679)

while Duvarci and Pare (2014) approached the subject from a neuropsychological standpoint,

looking at the function of the amygdala in fear and anxiety. Ingrained habits and behaviors that

occur as responses to arousal can be reversed with training. It would be interesting to see if this

would apply to procrastination behaviors.

Conclusion

The goal of this study was to explore the phenomenon of procrastination from the

perspective of those who procrastinate. The participants provided information on many facets of

their procrastination process, including their feelings surrounding the topic. They presented a

plethora of information which formed the basis of the study. Using the grounded theory method

to approach the research question allowed for a great deal of flexibility in pursuing different

avenues and allowed the researcher to develop a theory about procrastination as an evolved and

adaptive behavior. This study began with a strong foundation in the literature, incorporating the

theories of cognitive dissonance, approach-avoidance motivation and TMT. Throughout the

study emerging information was compared against the data, and considered emotional aspects,

physical spaces, and relationship hierarchies and dynamics. The findings of the present study are

significant. The data lines up with previous literature, but shows a significant departure in terms

of procrastination as an exclusively negative behavior. The behavior of procrastination is

advantageous from the point of view of the participants, even though they suffer emotional

consequences due to the social dynamics involved. It would be advantageous to seek to be more

precise when using the term “procrastinate” and recognize that it is a viable work flow process

for some. This could assist managers, teachers, and parents to allow individuals to work in a

fashion that is advantageous to them while guiding them toward positive outcomes. It is hoped

113

the present study will prove to be a valuable addition to the current literature, as well as

providing insight for future research.

114

References

Achtziger, A., & Bayer, U. C. (2013). Self-control mediates the link between perfectionism and

stress. Motivation and Emotion, 37(3), 413-423. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-

012-9321-6

Adams, P. J., & Buetow, S. (2014). The place of theory in assembling the central argument for a

thesis or dissertation. Theory & Psychology, 24(1), 93–110. doi:

10.1177/0959354313517523

Amato, C., Pierro, A., Chirumbolo, A., & Pica, G. (2014). Regulatory modes and time

management: How locomotors and assessors plan and perceive time. International

Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 192-199. doi:10.1002/ijop.12047

American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of

conduct. The American Psychologist, 57(12), 1060-1073. doi:10.1037/0003-

066X.57.12.1060

Aremu, A. O., Williams, T. M., & Adesina, F. T. (2011). Influence of academic procrastination

and personality types on academic achievement and efficacy of in-school adolescents in

Ibadan. Ife Psychologia, 19(1), 93. doi:10.4314/ifep.v19i1.64591

Azure, J. A. (2011). Correlates of course anxiety and academic procrastination in higher

education. Global Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 55-65. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/892728718?accountid=27965

Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown, and emotional distress as

factors in self-defeating behavior. Review of General Psychology, 1(2), 145-174.

doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.2.145

Blanc, J., Boyer, L., Le Coz, P., & Auquier, P. (2014). Metacognition: Towards a new approach

to quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 23(2), 467-75.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0485-7

Brehm, J.W., & Cohen, A.R. (1962). Explorations in cognitive dissonance. Hoboken, NJ, US:

John Wiley & Sons Inc. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11622-000

Breslavs, G. M. (2013). Moral emotions, conscience, and cognitive dissonance. Psychology in

Russia, 6(4), 65-72. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.11621/pir.2013.0405

Bridges, K. R., & Roig, M. (1997). Academic procrastination and irrational thinking: A re-

examination with context controlled. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(6), 941-

944. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00273-5

Cao, L. (2012a). Differences in procrastination and motivation between undergraduate and

graduate students. The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(2), 39-64.

Retrieved from http://josotl.indiana.edu/article/view/2018

115

Cao, L. (2012b). Examining ‘active’ procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective,

Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational

Psychology, doi:10.1080/01443410.2012.663722

Carlson, J. (2010). Avoiding traps in member checking. The Qualitative Report, 15(5), 1102-

1113 Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-5/carlson.pdf

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory. SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.

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. doi:10.3200/SOCP.145.3.245-264

Creswell, J.W. (2012). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five

approaches. SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2008). Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. 3rd Ed. Thousand Oaks,

CA. Sage Publications. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/strategies-of-

qualitative-inquiry/book237871

Díaz-Morales, J.F., Cohen, J. R., & Ferrari, J. R. (2008). An integrated view of personality styles

related to avoidant procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(6), 554–

558. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.018

Dryden, W. (2012). Dealing with procrastination: The REBT approach and a demonstration

session. Journal of Rational - Emotive & Cognitive - Behavior Therapy, 30(4), 264-281.

Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10942-012-0152-x

Duvarci, S., & Pare, D. (2014). Amygdala Microcircuits Controlling Learned Fear. Neuron,

82(5), 966–980. doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.04.042

Eckert, M., Ebert, D., Lehr, D., Sieland, B., & Berking, M. (2016). Overcome procrastination:

Enhancing emotion regulation skills reduce procrastination. Learning and Individual

Differences, 52, 10–18. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.10.001

Elliot, A.J. (2006). The hierarchical model of approach-avoidance motivation. Motiv Emot,

30(2), 111–116. doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9028-7

Elliot, A. J., Eder, A. B., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2013). Approach–avoidance motivation and

emotion: Convergence and divergence. Emotion Review, 5(3), 308-311. doi:

10.1177/1754073913477517

Elliot, A.J., & Thrash, T.M. (2002). Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: Approach

and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

82(5), 804–818. Retrieved from http://qglw.personality-

project.org/revelle/syllabi/classreadings/psp825804.pdf

116

Fan, X., Miller, B. C., Park, K., Winward, B. W., Christensen, M., Grotevant, H. D., et al.

(2006). An exploratory study about inaccuracy and invalidity in adolescent self-report

surveys. Field Methods,18, 223–244. Retrieved from:

http://fmx.sagepub.com/content/18/3/223.short

Farrington, J. (2012). Procrastination-Not all it’s put off to be. Performance Improvement

Quarterly, 24(4), 11–16. doi:10.1002/piq.20121

Ferrari, J. R. (1992). Psychometric validation of two procrastination inventories for adults:

Arousal and avoidance measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral

Assessment, 14, 97–110. doi:10.1007/BF00965170

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. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/197980168?accountid=27965

Ferris, D.L., Rosen, C.R., Johnson, R.E., Brown, D.J., Risavy, S.D., & Heller, D. (2011).

Approach or avoidance (or both?): Integrating core self-evaluations within an

approach/avoidance framework. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 137-161.

doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01204.x

Festinger, L. (1962). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford University Press.

Fisher, C. B. (2012). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists. SAGE

Publications. Kindle Edition.

Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., Hewitt, P. L., & Koledin, S. (1992). Components of perfectionism

and procrastination in college students. Social Behavior and Personality: An

International Journal, 20(2), 85-94. doi:10.2224/sbp.1992.20.2.85

Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating

qualitative research. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(6), 717–732.

doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01100.x

Freeman, E. K., Cox-Fuenzalida, L., & Stoltenberg, I. (2011). Extraversion and arousal

procrastination: Waiting for the kicks. Current Psychology, 30(4), 375-382.

doi:10.1007/s12144-011-9123-0

Freud, S. (1920/2014). Sigmund Freud 7 Book Premium Collection. Business and Leadership

Publishing. [Kindle Edition].

Frewen, P. A., Dozois, D..,Neufeld, R., Lane, R. D., Densmore, M., Stevens, T. K., & Lanius, R.

A. (2010). Individual differences in trait mindfulness predict dorsomedial prefrontal and

amygdala response during emotional imagery: An fMRI study. Personality and

Individual Differences, 49(5), 479–484.doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.008

117

Gawronski, B. (2012). Back to the future of dissonance theory: Cognitive consistency as a core

motive. Social Cognition, 30(6), 652-668. doi:http://dx.doi.org/101521soco2012306652

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for

qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Retrieved from

http://www.sxf.uevora.pt/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Glaser_1967.pdf

Glenn, J. (2010). Handbook of research methods. Jaipur, India: Oxford Book Co. Retrieved from

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/lib/capella/detail.action?docID=583

877

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. doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002

Gupta, R., Hershey, D. A., & Gaur, J. (2012). Time perspective and procrastination in the

workplace: An empirical investigation. Current Psychology, 31(2), 195-211. Retrieved

from http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1007/s12144-012-9136-3

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. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1178–1188. doi:

10.1177/0956797614526260

Haghbin, M., Mccaffrey, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2012). The complexity of the relation between

fear of failure and procrastination. Journal of Rational Emotive & Cognitive Behavior

Therapy, 30(4), 249-263. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10942-012-0153-9

Heilbronn, R., & Foreman-Peck, L. (2015). Philosophical Perspectives on Teacher Education.

Journal of Philosophy of Education. Wiley. [Kindle Edition].

Helmke, A., & van Aken, M. G. (1995). The causal ordering of academic achievement and self-

concept of ability during elementary school: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 87(4), 624-637. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.4.624

Higginbottom, G., & Lauridsen, E. I. (2014). The roots and development of constructivist

grounded theory. Nurse Researcher, 21(5), 8-13. doi:10.7748/nr.21.5.8.e1208

Hoskin, R. (2012). The dangers of self-report. Science Brain Waves. Retrieved from

http://www.sciencebrainwaves.com/the-dangers-of-self-report/

Howell, A.J. (2009). Flourishing: Achievement-related correlates of students’ well-being. The

Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(1), 1–13. doi:10.1080/17439760802043459

Howell, A. J., & Buro, K. (2011). Relations among mindfulness, achievement-related self-

regulation, and achievement emotions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(6), 1007-1022.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9241-7

118

James, W. (1890/2012). The Principles of Psychology, Vol. 2. Dover Publications. [Kindle

Edition].

Johnson, J. L., & Bloom, A. M. (1995). An analysis of the contribution of the five factors of

personality to variance in academic procrastination. Personality and Individual

Differences, 18(1), 127-133. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)00109-6

Kenny, M., & Fourie, R. (2014). Tracing the history of grounded theory methodology: From

formation to fragmentation. The Qualitative Report, 19(52), 1-9. Retrieved from

https://library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docvie

w/1644634961?accountid=27965

Klingsieck, K. B. (2013a). Procrastination in different life-domains: Is procrastination domain

specific? Current Psychology, 32(2), 175-185. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-013-

9171-8

Klingsieck, K. B. (2013b). Procrastination: When good things don’t come to those who wait.

European Psychologist, 18(1), 24-34. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000138

Krause, K., & Freund, A. M. (2014). Delay or procrastination – A comparison of self-report and

behavioral measures of procrastination and their impact on affective well-being.

Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 75–80. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.050

Krieglmeyer, R., De Houwer, J., & Deutsch, R. (2013). On the nature of automatically triggered

approach–avoidance behavior. Emotion Review, 5(3), 280-284. doi:

10.1177/1754073913477501

Lay, C., Kovacs, A., & Danto, D. (1998). The relation of trait procrastination to the big-five

factor conscientiousness: An assessment with primary-junior school children based on

self-report scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 187-193.

doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00005-1

Lay, C., & Silverman, S. (1996). Trait procrastination, anxiety, and dilatory behavior.

Personality and Individual Differences, 21(1), 61-67. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00038-4

Lee, J.K., & Orsillo, S.M. (2014). Investigating cognitive flexibility as a potential mechanism of

mindfulness in Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Journal of Behavior Therapy and

Experimental Psychiatry, 45(1), 208–216.doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2013.10.008

Leedy, P. D. (2012). Practical Research: Planning and Design, 10/e Vitalsource XML ebook for

Capella University [VitalSource Bookshelf version].

Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design, 8th Ed. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

119

LeVasseur, J. J. (2003). The problem of bracketing in phenomenology. Qualitative Health

Research, 13(3), 408–420.doi:10.1177/1049732302250337

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2013). Constructivist Credo. Walnut Creek, CA, USA: Left Coast

Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

Lyons, M., & Rice, H. (2014). Thieves of time? Procrastination and the dark triad of personality.

Personality and Individual Differences, 61(62), 34-37. doi:

doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.002

McCallin, A. (2006). Grappling with the literature in a grounded theory study. The Grounded

Theory Review 5 (2/3), 1542-1556. Retrieved from

http://groundedtheoryreview.com/2006/06/30/1425/

McCrea, S. M., Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Sherman, S. J. (2008). Construal level and

procrastination. Psychological Science), 19(12), 1308-1314. doi:10.1111/j.1467-

9280.2008.02240.x

Milgram, N. A., & Dangour, W. (1992). Situational and personal determinants of academic

procrastination. Journal Of General Psychology, 119(2), 123. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct

=true&db=bth&AN=9208312734&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Milgram, N., Marshevsky, S., & Sadeh, C. (1995). Correlates of academic procrastination:

Discomfort, task aversiveness, and task capability. The Journal of Psychology, 129(2),

145-155. doi:10.1080/00223980.1995.9914954

Milgram, N., & Naaman, N. (1996). Typology in procrastination. Personality and Individual

Differences, 20(6), 679-683. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00018-9

Murray, A. A., Wood, J. M., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2012). Psychopathic personality traits and

cognitive dissonance: Individual differences in attitude change. Journal of Research in

Personality, 46(5), 525–536. doi:doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.05.011

Murray, C. B., & Warden, M. R. (1992). Implications of self-handicapping strategies for

academic achievement: A reconceptualization. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132(1),

23-37. doi:10.1080/00224545.1992.9924685

Nguyen, B., Steel, P., & Ferrari, J. R. (2013). Procrastination's impact in the workplace and the

workplace's impact on procrastination. International Journal of Selection & Assessment,

21(4), 388-399. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12048

Owens, S.G., Bowman, C.G., & Dill, C.A. (2008). Overcoming procrastination: The effect of

implementation intentions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38(2), 366–384.

doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00309.x

120

Patrzek, J., Grunschel, C., & Fries, S. (2012). Academic procrastination: The perspective of

university counsellors. International Journal for the Advancement of Counseling, 34(3),

185-201. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10447-012-9150-z

Patton, M.Q. (1999). Enhancing the Quality and Credibility of Qualitative Analysis. Health

Services Research. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1089059/

Patton, M.Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and

practice. SAGE Publications. [Kindle Edition].

Peak, K., Dayberry, W., Martin, C., & Simpson, S. (2016). Discovering motivational behaviors

with the dayberry equation for exercise adherence. Research Quarterly for Exercise and

Sport, 87, 1. Retrieved from

https://library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docvie

w/1817494527?accountid=27965

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and

prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408

Rahimi, S., Hall, N. C., & Pychyl, T. A. (2016). Attributions of responsibility and blame for

procrastination behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1179.

http://doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01179

Rahmani, S., Talepasand, S., & Ghanbary-Motlagh, A. (2014). Comparison of effectiveness of

the metacognition treatment and the mindfulness-based stress reduction treatment on

global and specific life quality of women with breast cancer. Iranian Journal of Cancer

Prevention, 7(4), 184–196. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628839

Reichardt, C. S. (2009). Quasi-experimental design. In R. E. Millsap & A. Maydeu-Olivares

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (p. 46–72). Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Rice, K. G., Neimeyer, G. J., & Taylor, J. M. (2011). Efficacy of coherence therapy in the

treatment of procrastination and perfectionism. Counseling Outcome Research and

Evaluation, 2(2), 126–136. doi: 10.1177/2150137811417975

Robinson, M., Zabelina, D., Boyd, R., Bresin, K., & Ode, S. (2014). The self’s symbolic role in

implicit approach/avoidance: Movement time evidence. Journal of Social Psychology,

154(4), 311-322. doi:10.1080/00224545.2014.896774

Rogers, B. (1995). Critically evaluating research studies. AAOHN Journal, 43(1), 54-55.

Retrieved from

https://library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docvie

w/1012764606?accountid=27965

121

Rothblum, E. D. (2015). Scoring guide for PASS assessment. Retrieved from rothblum.sdsu.edu

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. doi:10.1037//0022-0167.33.4.387

Rozental, A., & Carlbring, P. (2014). Understanding and treating procrastination: A review of a

common self-regulatory failure. PSYCH, 05(13), 1488–1502.

doi:10.4236/psych.2014.513160

Rozental, A., Forsell, E., Svensson, A., Andersson, G., & Carlbring, P. (2015). Internet-based

cognitive behavior therapy for procrastination: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of

Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 83(4), 808-824. doi:10.1037/ccp0000023

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. doi:

10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.12

Sadeghi, H., Hajloo, N., Babayi, K., & Shahri, M. (2014). The relationship between

metacognition and obsessive beliefs, and procrastination in students of Tabriz and

Mohaghegh Ardabili universities, Iran. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral

Sciences, 8(1), 42. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078692/

Schouwenburg, H. C. (1992). Procrastinators and fear of failure: An exploration of reasons for

procrastination. European Journal of Personality, 6(3), 225-236.

doi:10.1002/per.2410060305

Schouwenburg, H. C., & Lay, C. H. (1995). Trait procrastination and the big-five factors of

personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(4), 481-490. doi:10.1016/0191-

8869(94)00176-S

Senécal, C., Lavoie, K., & Koestner, R. (1997). Trait and situational factors in procrastination:

An interactional model. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(4), 889. doi:

10.4236/psych.2012.31003

Seo, E. H. (2009). The relationship of procrastination with a mastery goal versus an avoidance

goal. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(7), 911-919. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/209932255?accountid=27965

Seo, E. H. (2011). The relationships among procrastination, flow, and academic achievement.

Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(2), 209-217.

doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.2.209

122

Simpson, W. K., & Pychyl, T. A. (2009). In search of the arousal procrastinator: Investigating

the relation between procrastination, arousal-based personality traits and beliefs about

procrastination motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(8), 906–911. doi:

10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.013

Sirois, F. M., & Tosti, N. (2012). Lost in the moment? An investigation of procrastination,

mindfulness, and well-being. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior

Therapy, 30(4), 237–248. doi:10.1007/s10942-012-0151-y

Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task

and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 89(1), 71-81. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.71

Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-

behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503-509. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.31.4.503

Steel, P. (2010). Arousal, avoidant and decisional procrastinators: Do they exist? Personality and

Individual Differences, 48(8), 926–934. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.025

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of

quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65-94.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65

Steel, P., Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2001). Procrastination and personality, performance, and

mood. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(1), 95-106. doi:10.1016/S0191-

8869(00)00013-1

Steel, P., & Ferrari, J. (2013). Sex, education and procrastination: An epidemiological study of

procrastinators' characteristics from a global sample. European Journal of Personality,

27(1), 51-58. doi:10.1002/per.1851

Steel, P., & König, C. J. (2006). Integrating theories of motivation. Academy of Management

Review, 31, 889–913. Retrieved from

http://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Motivation/Steel_%26_K

onig_2006_Integrating_theories_of_motivation.pdf

Stern, P. (2007). On Solid Ground: Essential Properties for Growing Grounded Theory. In A.

Bryant, & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. (pp. 114-127).

London, England: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:

http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.4135/9781848607941.n5

Stöber, J., & Joorman, J. (2001). Worry, procrastination, and perfectionism: Differentiating

amount of worry, pathological worry, anxiety, and depression. Cognitive Therapy and

Research, 25(1), 49–60. doi: 10.1023/A:1026474715384

123

Strand, K. H. (2009). Behavioral effects of consideration of future consequences and time

perspective on self-regulation and procrastination in mastery and performance-oriented

college students (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/859251341?accountid=27965

Svartdal, F. (2015). Measuring procrastination: Psychometric properties of the Norwegian

versions of the Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS) and the Pure Procrastination Scale

(PPS). Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. doi:

10.1080/00313831.2015.1066439

Takács, I. (2010). The reasons of overextended studies: Relationship between temperament,

character and procrastination. Periodica Polytechnica. Social and Management Sciences,

18(2), 51. doi:10.3311/pp.so.2010-2.01

Teasdale, J. D. (1999). Metacognition, mindfulness and the modification of mood disorders.

Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 6(2), 146-155. Retrieved from:

http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct

=true&db=a2h&AN=11820266&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Thornberg, R., (2012). Informed grounded theory. Scandinavian Journal of Educational

Research, 56(3), 243-17. doi:10.1080/00313831.2011.581686

Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). The qualitative debate. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved

from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualdeb.php

Trusty, J. (2011). Quantitative articles: Developing studies for publication in counseling journals.

Journal of Counseling and Development, 89(3), 261-267. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/873032562?accountid=27965

Uzun Ozer, B., O'Callaghan, J., Bokszczanin, A., Ederer, E., & Essau, C. (2014). Dynamic

interplay of depression, perfectionism and self-regulation on procrastination. British

Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 42(3), 309-319. doi:10.1080/03069885.2014.89645

Walsh, J. J., & Ugumba-Agwunobi, G. (2002). Individual differences in statistics anxiety: The

roles of perfectionism, procrastination and trait anxiety. Personality and Individual

Differences, 33(2), 239-251. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00148-9

Wang, A. Z. (2016). Procrastination POLO Overview. Retrieved from

http://hilt.harvard.edu/files/hilt/files/procrastination.pdf

Warner, R. M. (2012). Applied statistics: From Bivariate Through Multivariate Techniques, 2nd

Edition [VitalSource Bookshelf version]. Retrieved from

https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781452268705

Wäschle, K., Allgaier, A., Lachner, A., Fink, S., & Nückles, M. (2014). Procrastination and self-

efficacy: Tracing vicious and virtuous circles in self-regulated learning. Learning and

Instruction, 29, 103–114. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.005

124

Watson, D. C. (2001). Procrastination and the five-factor model: A facet level analysis.

Personality and Individual Differences, 30(1), 149-158. doi:10.1016/S0191-

8869(00)00019-2

Weinstein, D. (2010). In search of a transtheoretical model and directed thinking interaction to

reduce procrastination. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/756267673?accountid=27965

Wilk, R. (1999). When theory is everything, scholarship suffers. The Chronicle of Higher

Education, 45(44), 1. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.library.capella.edu/docview/214726090?accountid=27965

125

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for the

integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion postings,

assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.

Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy,

definition of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary

consequences of academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that learners

will follow APA rules for citing another person’s ideas or works.

The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in the

Policy:

Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the

authorship of others’ work through proper citation and reference. Use of another person’s

ideas, including another learner’s, without proper reference or citation constitutes

plagiarism and academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)

Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting someone

else’s ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying verbatim or

rephrasing ideas without properly acknowledging the source by author, date, and

publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella University’s Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for

research integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:

Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication, plagiarism,

misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly

accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reviewing

research, or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not limited

to dismissal or revocation of the degree.

126

Statement of Original Work and Signature

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01)

and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including Policy Statements, Rationale, and

Definitions.

I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the ideas or

words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following the guidelines

set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name and date Elizabeth Ann Parker, May 14, 2017

127

APPENDIX A. SCREENING SURVEY

Screening Survey

A modified combination of the Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS) and the Procrastination

Assessment Scale for Students (PASS).

Scale Range-Very seldom or not true of me, Seldom true of me, Sometimes true of me, Often

true of me, Very often true, or true of me

1. I delay tasks beyond what is reasonable.

2. I do everything when I believe it needs to be done.

3. I often regret not getting to tasks sooner.

4. There are aspects of my life that I put off, though I know I shouldn’t.

5. If there is something I should do, I get to it before attending lesser tasks.

6. I put things off so long that my well-being or efficiency unnecessarily suffers.

7. At the end of the day, I know I could have spent the time better.

8. I spend my time wisely.

9. When I should do one thing, I will do another.

The following are general questions about your work or academic studies.

Scale Range-Never, Almost never, Sometimes, Nearly always, Always

1. Writing term papers or creating projects for work. To what degree is procrastination on this

task a problem for you?

2. Studying for exams or preparing for meetings. To what degree is procrastination on this task

a problem for you?

3. Keeping up with weekly reading, or paying bills. To what degree is procrastination on this

task a problem for you?

128

4. Administrative tasks, filling out forms, registering for workshops, driver’s license, insurance

cards etc. To what degree is procrastination on this task a problem for you?

Reasons for procrastination. Think of the last time the following situation occurred. It’s near the

end of the semester. The term paper you were assigned at the beginning of the semester is due

very soon. You have not begun work on this paper. There are reasons why you have been

procrastinating on this task.

AND/OR

You were assigned a project at work a month ago. It needs to be presented very soon. You have

not begun work on this project. There are reasons why you have been procrastinating on this

task.

Check as many of the following that apply as reasons for procrastinating on the task.

• You were concerned your professor or boss would not like your work.

• You waited until a classmate or co-worker did his or hers, so they could give you advice.

• You had a hard time knowing what to include or not to include in your project.

• You had too many other things to do.

• There was some information you needed to ask the professor or your boss, but you felt

uncomfortable approaching her.

• You were worried you would get a bad grade or be criticized for your work.

• You resented having to do things assigned by others.

• You didn’t think you knew enough to complete the project.

• You disliked the project in and of itself.

• You felt overwhelmed by the task.

• You had difficulty requesting information from other people.

• You looked forward to the excitement of doing this task at the last minute.

129

• You had difficulty narrowing down the topic or volume of information.

• You were concerned that if you did well, you would be resented by your peers.

• You didn’t trust yourself to do a good job.

• You didn’t have enough energy to begin the task.

• You felt the project was going to take too long.

• You liked the challenge of waiting until the deadline.

• You knew that your peers were not prepared yet either.

• You resented people setting deadlines for you.

• You were concerned you wouldn’t meet your won expectation.

• You were concerned that if you did well on the project, people would have higher

expectations of you in the future.

• You waited to see if there was more information forthcoming about the project.

• You set very high standards for yourself and you worried that you wouldn’t be able to meet

those standards.

• You just felt too lazy to work on the project.

• You felt pressured by friends/family/others to do other things.

130

APPENDIX B. INITIAL CODING TABLE

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Positive perceptions of

procrastination (7)

“Positive in a sense, because it serves a purpose. Keeps second

guessing and overthinking at bay.”

“Procrastinating is a personal choice to push something back

and wait until there is just enough time to comply with the

work.”

“I think I don’t think about it as a negative…really, because I

think of how I use it. And I think that I use it more in a

negative way than in a positive way because if I did do things

as they’re supposed to or putting a lot of time and effort into it

then I think the stuff would be really good. But on the other

hand then I would have too much time on my hands to question

what I’ve done and go back and start all over and change it.”

“Procrastination serves a more subtle need or process for

me…and that is that there are time when it just doesn’t feel

right to, and that’s the way I put it, does not feel right, to be

trying to do the project at a particular given time… “

“It’s a normal thing that is done, but it can be a serious

problem.”

“Because you got to do the fun stuff, and all the grinds were

busy at their books, and you

got as good a grade as they did so… why not do it my way?”

Negative perceptions of

procrastination (17)

“No, no it was not external, well an external source only in the

sense that the societal sanctions against procrastination came to

my awareness and my comparing myself with other people,

Negative because of the perspective that she should be working

up to par, taking more time and isn’t.

131

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“Negative, it ticks me off that I don’t get up and just do it and

get it over with. I mean these aren’t big jobs, you know? I’ve

got the brush. Why aren’t I just doing it?”

“More negative than it was positive obviously, at some

unconscious level anyway.”

“Yes, universally negatively, and universally people who

accept a task and do it right away and get it done are invariably

viewed quite positively.”

“Well I think that if procrastination… the word itself has a

negative connotation. if you’re a procrastinator everybody,

most of society would agree that that’s not a good thing.”

Conflicts with others due

to procrastination (10)

“My mom sometimes went a little bit nuts because she knew

that I had a project due and hadn’t seen about it yet and she

was always afraid that I just wasn’t going to finish it and…she

was…both my parents were actually I guess, opposite of me in

that if there was something that had to be done, there was, “do

it now, get it over with, and once it’s done it’s off your mind

and you can really enjoy the fun stuff.”

“Yeah, I procrastinate on things and it makes my mom crazy.”

“I don’t know! I put everything off. I drive my husband

absolutely insane.”

“My partner thinks I do it out of disrespect, but I don’t, I just

have different priorities. Some things can wait; they’re not

going anywhere.”

132

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Conflicts due to lack of

autonomy (17)

“I got into publishing and publishing is all about deadlines and

I was, I could still procrastinate but I didn’t miss deadlines and

I actually finally worked my way up to becoming a managing

editor in magazines, and a managing editor’s job is to make the

trains run on time, to make sure that everything happens and

happens on time. And I was pretty good at doing that.”

“Yes, and I was also the manager of the practice I was at, so I

was in charge of setting the deadlines.”

“Well, I guess it depends on who it is. I would bet if someone

told me I should do or shouldn’t do something I would react in

the opposite way.”

“Well I got older! I find it easier and easier to put off doing

things that i don’t like to do…

because I have a choice.”

“I don’t want to do that today; it will be there tomorrow”

Internal conflict due to

changing life roles (9)

“I think sometimes probably when I have to write a letter to

someone that I don’t use the computer for but I need to write a

letter then I’ll procrastinate on doing that. I think I put off

making phone calls, but I ‘m not sure if that’s procrastination

as much as it is I don’t like to make phone calls. I was on the

phone my whole life; I think I just don’t like it anymore. I’m

not sure if that fits into procrastination or if it’s just “I don’t

want to do it anymore”

“I think that’s why my husband has been really supportive of

me, because he knows from the past that I haven’t always been

a procrastinator and I think that’s why it drives him nuts.”

“Well, and throughout my career, I had such a people intensive

job…you know

working with volunteers and raising money, and evening

meetings…I just love now that I can

crawl in a little hole and I don’t have to…It’s hard to

explain…it’s kind of nice to walk away from some of that”

133

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“I made the phone calls to a lot of people and now I’m like it’s

time to stop, if they want to talk to me, let them call.”

Feeling anxiety (21) “There is relief at first, but then anxiety”

“Feeling overwhelmed also then plugged in to my anxiety”

“I feel anxiety-maybe this time I’m not going to get it in on

time, I may have miscalculated”

“I don’t want them to do the same things that I do because I do

think it causes more anxiety and it doesn’t just affect the

person. It affects everybody else that’s around you, you

know?”

“Tremendous anxiety about the quality of the product.”

“The process of just shoving it into a box. Then as the deadline

would approach,

the anxiety would start to become greater again, of course

because I was aware of the deadline for whatever it is,

whatever the project or the task was, and I would, it would

reach a point where the anxiety about not meeting the deadline

would be greater than the anxiety about doing the task and so

then I would do the task.”

“Some anxiety to see how it gets graded because I know

whether or not I put forth the actual level of quality of what I

could put into it.”

“I need to do that so that I feel like I’ve done the right thing,

and I haven’t.”

Feeling overwhelmed (20) “I think that early on in my life particularly around academics

that, and this is as early as grade school and high school, I had

a tendency to, when there was an assignment of some size or

complexity like a term paper or something along those lines

and it certainly happened in college and post graduate work as

well that the initial experience was feeling overwhelmed.”

134

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“If I tell myself that I’m going to get done with something

earlier then it’s really hard for me to focus and find direction. If

I think about it for a little while but then I don’t actually sit

down and apply any of my thoughts of any ideas that I might

have then it becomes a lot easier if it’s down to a timeline and I

have to have it done. The deadline creates a comfortable

space.”

“My arch nemesis! When I procrastinate it adds stress to

everything and if you don’t plan it perfectly it doesn’t give you

control. You’re feel like you’re reacting instead of being

proactive.”

“You know I really ventured way out on this one and I had no

idea what I was doing and it was difficult! There was certainly

a lack of comfort level.”

Reinforcement (12) “How do you feel when you’re done? “Accomplished.””

“You can only know what was and what is and if you get,

essentially, as in high school, rewarded for procrastinating, put

things off until the last minute so you got to do the fun stuff,

waited for the last minute to study for the test and you still got

an A or a B on it, so that’s a reward in a way….”

“There are positive elements of procrastination, there are some

rewards in it…oftentimes is more information that becomes

available that is related to the task…sometimes if you wait long

enough, the need to do the project disappears”

Annoyance (5) “There is a lot of annoyance if I am working on something and

I get interrupted.”

“Honestly I’ll probably get more short tempered because I

don’t want to be bothered or interrupted while I’m trying to get

stuff done. But I know that I’ve brought it on myself, but I do, I

get short tempered with everybody.”

“Once I get started then I can get totally into it and you can’t

drag me away from it.”

135

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Relief (17) “Relief at first, pushing something off, then anxiety and

pressure.”

So how do you feel when you’re done with all of that? “Well,

I’m glad it’s over.”

“There is relief at first, but then anxiety”

“Once I get into it… I actually kind of enjoy the process of

doing it and there’s this huge feeling of relief when I finish it.”

“Probably when it’s done I’ll be happy. I know I’ll be happy

because I’ll have finished it.”

Avoidance (30) “I would know I did it at the last minute so you know it just

wasn’t up to my best effort so, that’s the reason I got the B+

rather than the A-. So I had a built in alibi for not producing the

work of my own expectations, or the highest expectations. “

“If I wait until the last minute to do something and it doesn’t

turn out how it was meant to be my excuse is that I

procrastinated and waited until the last minute. I have a huge

fear of success and I don’t know why and I’ve been working on

it but I know that it has a lot to do with why I procrastinate.”

“I had sort of a ready-made excuse if it didn’t meet standards. I

could say, “well, you

know I did it at the last minute.”

“I think that anxiety about my ability to produce quality work

then also got in the

way so I would shove it aside, I would shove the anxiety aside

and sort of get myself immersed in other things, diversions, and

just putting it off, just not thinking about it you know?”

Vulnerability (8) “We’re concerned with what other people think and we want to

do a good job not only

for ourselves but for the people that surround us and so it’s

risky. It’s a risk that we’re taking”

136

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“I taught a lot of classes and made a lot of money doing it and

when I got to the

point where I started being able to get out of my comfort zone

and teach [CLOSER TO] where I live and branch out… I

didn’t”

Tipping point (25) “There came a moment when it suddenly shifted to “I’ve got to

approach this” and I had a strategy, through much of my life in

terms of taking on tasks, particularly academic tasks of really

the last minute adrenaline rush allowed me to really focus and

to be able to attack the task with a fair amount of intensity and

in a reasonably short period of time, whatever that was,

depending on the size of the task, a few hours to a few, you

know, 2 or 3 days, be able to complete the task and complete

it…sometimes quite well.”

“So I think that the awareness came then, at that time and that

when I fairly severely did judge myself for procrastination. But

it was the way I worked and I got to be fairly efficient at it and

it did work for me so I got into the habit, in high school and

then in college to operate in that way.”

“But I knew that if I had started that on Friday, I would have

been second guessing the references and the resources that I

was using and the way that I was answering the questions so I

literally gave myself 48 hours to do the 60 pages and it ended

up being 68 pages and the comments that I got were incredible

so I couldn’t believe that I was actually to pull that off in that

amount of time.”

“It’s better to wait. This creates pressure, and under pressure a

better product is created and delivered.”

“So if I know that I absolutely have to get it done then I can put

stuff back on the back burner but I feel like I have a problem

prioritizing things to be done if I have too much time to

prioritize. Then I just put if off and I say, “Oh, I know I’m

going to have time to do this, I know I’m going to have time

later to do this” and I just, I end up not doing anything.”

137

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Activities pursued while

procrastinating (13)

“So I can effectively put stuff off, but I’m still accomplishing

other things so I think I can use

that as my excuse for why I have to procrastinate and wait until

the last minute.”

“You get diverted because there is something more interesting,

or there’s more information that is coming in, or I pick up one

of the magazines and say, “oh!

This is a really interesting article, I really wanted to get to

that...”

Well, that’s what I’ve also come to is that’s the intention of

getting it organized so I can go

through it in a more systematic fashion or at least get to some

of those things that I know I’ve

been wanting to get to so…actually it feels better doing that

than it does just purely doing the

organizing…”

Making lists (8) “Large tasks are broken down into smaller pieces and time is

scheduled. This is done within the smallest possible time

period.”

“I do make a list, I do.”

“I know I’ll only have 10 days and I’ve got to get through this

list. And it’s not written down, it’s in my head and I don’t write

the list down, but I know what needs to be done.”

“Usually at the last minute I’ll write down a to do list and then

I’ll cross stuff off.”

“Last night actually before I went to bed for all of the stuff I

have to get done today and it was literally a full page of stuff

but it’s stuff that I could have done beforehand but I just waited

because I knew that I was going to have yesterday and today

off work so I would be able to get more of the stuff done

without being interrupted and putting it off even more because

I know it has to be done before we leave. And I do that with

pretty much everything.”

138

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Organization of projects

(10)

“So it’s literally like having your ducks in a row, you’ve gone

from thinking about doing something to doing it and you

literally line up all of the moving pieces to do it? Yeah... if

there’s a task like that I line it up. When I get ready to come up

to the lake I line everything up at the door, and living in a

condo that is the hardest thing in the world to do but that’s

what I do. I have things all the way down to the landing. So I

pile everything by the front door. And when I was going to

school I used to pile all of my books on the railing.”

“I have to, basically, if it’s anything that involves paperwork or

filing or anything that you can do at a desk I have to get my

home office ready, I have to have everything I’m going to need

to accomplish the task there and I have to sit myself down and

if it’s a writing task I have to actually create a new document

on my computer and actually start working on it.”

“I think the thinking process for me oftentimes is sort of going

on a subliminal basis. I really am sorting all this stuff out in my

head and I will find myself thinking about how it’s going to

come together and how it bounces to the foreground.”

“I put my earphones in to music I can sing along to, and

hopefully no one is within earshot of me singing and I drown

everybody out and I just immerse myself in what I’m doing.”

Planned procrastination

(13)

“So I think in that instance, and certainly in these smaller tasks

now it is percolating and I

am feeling that happening…I’m feeling something pregnant,

it’s there, it’s starting to form into something concrete and then

I think when it hits a particular critical mass of quote

“concreteness” of firming up then the action can begin, and I’m

ready to pay it and the energy is there and the motivation is

there for it so, because I’ve had the feeling, I’m like, ok

something is happening with this, something… it’s coming, it’s

coming forth.”

“it is just self-reinforcing in that sense…sometimes it doesn’t

make sense to do it until the last minute”

139

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“Having had so much experience with procrastination I’m

rarely surprised. Sometimes I’m surprised at the degree of

procrastination, how long I put something off but, for

the most part no. I know I can look at something and say, “ok, I

know, I know I’m going to procrastinate on this one” and so I

figure out when it has to be due and I just know I’m going to

put it off until the last minute and so I devote, maybe stick it on

my calendar and

devote a day, the last day, to doing that and ignore it until then

because I know I will anyway. So it saves me some mental

energy.”

“I mean my first response to that is that it simply is a feeling

state. I don’t know what the internal signal is about that but

there is sort of an internal signal as in “oh, I don’t know…now

is a good time to get that done but if I sit down with the

specific intention and say “this is what I’m going to do” it’s

more of a mental set, more than it is any kind of process or

ritual”

“It’s always been, it was hard for me to schedule anything out,

it seems like life always happens so I feel like I get more

accomplished if I don’t have stuff written down, or if I don’t

have a set schedule because if I don’t meet the goals that I’ve

set for myself today, for that day, then it makes it more difficult

for me to want to try and reach my goals the next day.”

Deadlines (9) “So the deadline, having a deadline is important? It is, yeah,

and it works best if someone else has set the deadline, too. If I

impose deadlines on myself I figure that I set them so I can

break them.”

“I can’t work without deadlines and they need to be set by an

authority.”

“Then as the deadline would approach, the anxiety would start

to become greater again, of course because I was aware of the

deadline for whatever it is, whatever the project or the task

was, and I would, it would reach a point where the anxiety

about not meeting the deadline would be greater than the

anxiety about doing the task.”

140

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“Obviously in the magazine business there’s external pressures

that come from the nature of deadlines, and from, if you’re a

managing editor there’s an editor in chief who’s your boss, and

sometimes they tend to get worried if things aren’t happening

on what they consider to be a reasonable schedule and that adds

a little pressure.”

Internal clock (8) “The clock is a gift, and a combination of the gift and

experience”

“You know it’s like there’s a clock. I’ve noticed that my son,

for instance, and I both have a

clock in our heads. We can look at a project and there’s some

sort of an innate thing that says,

“it’s going to take this long”

“ok, so you have, it’s almost like you have an internal clock

that says “ok it’s time” …

my brain is ready and I’m just ready to go at it, hammer and

tongs until it’s finished.”

“and I’m pushing it off perhaps oftentimes, until the last minute

or relatively the last minute,

but then when I sit down to do it and it “quote” feels right and

flow state is there, then it gets put together in a much more

coherent and efficient fashion”

“it’s been sort of a greater, for want of a better word, sort of a

greater inner wisdom about

what to do when and to get it done”

Personal Performance (12) “I have always gotten good grades.”

“My grades have always been high. A’s and B’s”

“I won’t sacrifice my grade or my work performance.”

“I always did well, a few misses, but overall really well.”

141

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

Types of tasks that trigger

procrastination (21)

“There is almost nothing that I find disagreeable to do that I

can’t find a reason not to do until tomorrow, or the next

day…or next week or sometime. And sometimes it’s things

that aren’t disagreeable, but I just don’t get around to them.

Sooner or later most of the things I procrastinate on do get

done at some point and sometimes they even get done on time

or by a deadline but if things get done on time it’s always at the

last minute.”

“I really procrastinate literally on everything in life. I mean, I

always have and I don’t know why. I always manage to get

stuff done, but it’s always last minute. So I think if I have too

much time on my hands to think about it, I keep changing my

mind about stuff, so I just have to wait until the very last

minute and go with my gut.”

Overwhelmingly boring

(5)

“Boring tasks are done more immediately than challenging

ones just to get them out of the way. Still procrastinate on them

though.”

“Cleaning the house is really tedious. I’d rather go and paint

the outside.”

“It’s just the tasks are never done. And they don’t matter! Who

cares?”

“Some things were just so boring and pointless it seemed a

waste of time to do them.”

Overwhelmingly complex

(12)

“Working on an independent study paper and it had to be a

long paper because it was the only thing on which the grade

was based and I can remember learning to play some kind of a

game of solitaire and every time I would get stuck writing this

paper I would pick up the deck of cards and play a game of

solitaire and sometimes it would turn in to 2 or 3 or 4 and why

I didn’t just get on with writing the paper and be done with it

I’m not sure, but I remember procrastinating long enough so

that I actually turned in the paper on the morning of

commencement and the professor had to read it before

commencement to get my grade in to the registrar so I could

graduate…”

142

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“I have a way of looking at the big picture and looking at all

the potential avenues there are in a given task and I can quickly

just swamp myself with the data and the possibilities for what it

is I have at hand. ”

“I’ll do challenging tasks before boring ones because they are

more interesting, but I’ll only give myself just enough time to

finish.”

Emotionally

overwhelming (5)

“I knew that it was in some ways a hopeless venture, and I

almost felt guilty about taking the guy’s money, because he

was trying to have a book published and because of the…he

was a first time novelist and due to the length of the book and

his refusal to let me shorten it much and various other issues

related to the manuscript I knew that he was going to have

problems.”

“I know it’s time for us to give up this house, but we’ve been

here for 47 years. Our grown children are pulling us in one

direction, and we have a house in the other direction.”

“So, she deserves to have a really good hug goodbye and thank

you and I need to do that so that I feel like I’ve done the right

thing, and I haven’t. I’m not sure if it’s because I don’t want to

end our relationship or it’s been two years now, or more, and I

just haven’t done it, and I think about it a LOT. And I just

never do it, and when I say I owe her my life. I mean it. I owe

her my life. That’s like real.”

“My dissertation took me nine years. The first topic fell

through not enough people responded. I just didn’t know if I

could put myself through it again. Of course I had a lot going

on, working full time, having 2 kids in college, but I just didn’t

know if I could crank myself up to do it again.”

Self-criticism (21) “But early on I would do a lot of self judgement about my

procrastination and envy those who were so extraordinarily

efficient and were able to get things done.”

143

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“Well, I kind of mumble at myself, “you know you really

should be doing this or that” but I’m also at an age where I

want to do the things I want to do…”

“And I think, oh, I’m lazy, but I’m not a lazy person, at least I

don’t think I am.”

“If I know I’m procrastinating something there’s always a

component of guilt

about it, always a sense that I should be doing what I’m putting

off and I’m not.”

“thinking about the whole process of procrastinating and the

one thing I

realized is common to every single instance of procrastinating

with me is that there’s a feeling of either, a vague feeling of

either guilt or disappointment in myself”

“If it were just viewed as some people do things right away,

and other people put them off

until they actually have to do them…but that’s just the way

they are and it’s no big deal either way, yeah I certainly think

there would be less guilt involved in it. Less negative self-

criticism”

Perfectionism (11) “I think the major problem was that I was afraid it wasn’t going

to be good enough, and so everything had to be perfect in the

paper.”

“When I procrastinate it adds stress to everything and if you

don’t plan it perfectly it doesn’t give you control. You’re feel

like you’re reacting instead of being proactive.”

“Well I look at what I need to do and what needs to be

understood from all parties in order to execute the plan

perfectly. Usually in my case it has to do with people that are

involved and the people have to understand what levers to pull

in order to execute the plan perfectly, and then they have to be

reminded but if I try to do it at the last minute it doesn’t work

very well.”

144

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“she was a perfectionist and she was…she was making her life

miserable.”

“So I had a built in alibi for not producing the work of my own

expectations, or the highest expectations.”

Expectations of others (24) “Because I don’t want others to have high expectations of me

and then I can’t meet those expectations so if I set the bar a

little lower for myself then I don’t have to worry about

somebody saying “well I know you can do a lot better.”

“That you see what other people are doing and you say, “oh

gosh, I wish I could do that. Oh, they’re so good at…”

whatever it is that they’re good at, you know? So I think that

the awareness came then, at that time and that when I fairly

severely did judge myself for procrastination.”

“The major problem was that I was afraid it wasn’t going to be

good enough, and so everything had to be perfect if I didn’t I

was going to disappoint myself and the professor and

everybody else and I didn’t want to do that.”

“So I think that the reason that I don’t put all of my effort in,

and I wait until the last minute is so that I can kind of meet my

mom’s expectations that I do fail…I mean, it’s not always

conscious, a conscious thought but I think that really has a lot

to do with it… my mom has a lot lower expectations.”

“I don’t know if it’s from that need to always please your

parents, but to know that I’m exceeding past what their

expectations were you would think that they would be

supportive of that, but they’re not.”

Home and personal life

(12)

“I won’t sacrifice my grade or my work performance. The only

thing I ever see myself sacrificing is my personal life.”

“I never put things off at work. I probably overworked and

over did rather than put something off when I worked, but in

my personal life I probably put things off more. Of course no

one pays me to do the windowsills.”

145

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“I mean, it’s like sitting down to balance my checkbook, I

should do it, and I know I should do it, but on an emotional

level I don’t want to do it because it’s boring and tedious, and

it might be a lot of work as well because sometimes it doesn’t

balance and I’m compulsive enough to want it to balance down

to the penny.”

“Cleaning, laundry, yard work, everything, housework.”

Work (9) “I got into publishing and publishing is all about deadlines and

I was, I could still procrastinate but I didn’t miss deadlines.”

“I don't think I started realizing that I did it until I started going

into practice and I realized that last minute calls and last minute

accumulations and reminders and, I mean my taxes in at the

last minute and waiting until my sheets were done I wouldn’t

leave my house until they were dry and sometimes I would

have to call people and tell them that I was late.”

Academics (30) “I think that early on in my life particularly around academics

that, and this is as early as grade school and high school, I had

a tendency to, when there was an assignment of some size or

complexity like a term paper or something along those lines

and it certainly happened in college and post graduate work as

well that the initial experience was feeling overwhelmed.”

“I was busy writing it while all of my classmates were out in

the bald spot playing softball or over in the golf course playing

golf and everybody was having fun and I was still slugging

away at this paper and it dawned on me that perhaps this time I

had deprived myself by procrastinating. ”

Physical sensation (25) "last minute adrenaline rush”

“there’s that kind of outside pressure and sometimes it also

feels like there’s internal pressure like somebody is blowing up

a balloon inside me and if I don’t get the task done before the

balloon explodes I will explode with it.”

146

Initial Codes ( Frequency) Descriptive Examples from Interview Data

“If I’m actually going into what I’ve been putting off and

starting to do it, I’m not sure how to describe it, it’s almost like

there’s a very low grade temporary high. I feel like, “Good!

You’re finally doing what you should be doing” and once I get

into it, as said even with my taxes I actually kind of enjoy the

process of doing it and there’s this huge feeling of relief when I

finish it!”

Physical spaces (20) “Before we lived in a smaller house and I used to go down to

our basement and go in the corner of our basement where no

one ever came because everybody thought it was dark and dank

and dreary and whatever, and I had a desk down there and that

is where I did all of my homework. So now while I sit there at

my kitchen table and I look at all of the stuff that I have printed

off and I look around and the kitchen and my living room and

there’s shoes on the floor or my husband’s socks which he

takes off in the living room and never puts in the hamper I

think about all that stuff that needs to get done even though it

doesn’t need to get done.”

“I have to get my home office ready”

“I would literally line my books up on the bannister before

going to school.”