Piers Steel 1

The Nature of Procrastination: A Meta-Analytic Review

Counseling the Procrastinator in Academic

Settings

Piers Steelwww.procrastinus.com

Piers Steel 2

OverviewStudy detailsProcrastination findings

Procrastination and performanceWeak correlates Strong correlates

Traits & tasksTheory of procrastinationTreatment implications

Piers Steel 4

Study DetailsAlmost 500 studies have been written that deal with procrastination directlyThese studies contain over 600 relevant correlations Key terms:

K = Number of Samples/Studies ConductedN = Total Sample Size

Correlations Effect SizeWeak .20Medium .30Large .40

Piers Steel 5

Definition of Procrastination

Three key components:1. Overwhelmingly referred to as a negative

phenomenon – often seen as irrational2. We delay voluntarily, it is our choice3. We intend to do the task, not to avoid it

entirely

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

Piers Steel 6

Table 1 The Reliability of Procrastination Scales

Name Authors Items K N Academic Procrastination Scale (APS) Milgram & Toubina, 1999 21 7 1,279 .90

Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AIP) McCown & Johnson, 1989 15 17 2,803 .81

Aitken Procrastination Inventory (API) Aitken, 1982 19 3 276 .82

Decisional Procrastination Questionnaires (DPQI, DPQII) Mann, 1982; Mann et al., 1997 5 22 7,476 .79

General Procrastination Scale (GPS) Lay, 1986 20 36 5,396 .87

Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) Solomon & Rothblum, 1984 12 3 591 .83

PASS - Frequency 6 8 1,610 .74 PASS - Problem 6 4 923 .73 Procrastination Log - Behavior Lopez & Wambach, 1982 11 4 218 .64 Procrastination Self-Statement Inventory (PSSI) Grecco, 1983 24 2 485 .83

Test Procrastination Questionnaire (TPQ)

Kalechstein, Hocevar, Zimmer, & Kalechstein, 1989 10 2 238 .94

That’s Me – That’s Not Me Tuckman, 1991, 1999 16 11 2,695 .86 Tuckman Procrastination Scale (TPS) Tuckman, 1991 35 3 300 .87

Work Procrastination Scale (WPS) Steel, 2002 9 2 360 .88

Piers Steel 7

Table 2 The Means, Standard Deviations and Intercorrelations of Procrastination Scales

Procrastination Mean Std 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 APS 2.48

(130) .48

(130)

2 AIP 2.71 (3,216)

.68 (2,874) -

3 API 2.72 (2,052)

.55 (1,960) - .60/.75

(20)

4 DPQ 2.62 (4,534)

.70 (2,142) - .46/.57

(2,288) .24/.30

(32)

5 GPS 2.81 (5,843)

.79 (5,240) - .78/.93

(732) .73/.80 (160)

.66/.79 (1,400)

6 PASS 2.93 (2,002)

.64 (1,822) - - - .26/.31

(344) .64/.75 (141)

7 PASS – Freq. 2.29 (2,006)

.64 (2,006) - - - - .60/.75

(102) -

8 PASS – Prob. 2.06 (1,677)

.61 (1,677) - - - - .47/.59

(102) - .70/.93 (403)

9 Procras. Log - - - - - - - - -

10 PSSI 1.80 (355)

.56 (355) - - - - - - -

11 TPQ

2.20 (70)

.68 (70) - - - - - - -

12 That’s Me/Not Me

3.14 (652)

.97 (652) - - - - - - -

13 TPS

2.43 (305) - - - - - - - -

Piers Steel 8

Procrastination & Performance

Over all, a weak (r=-.19, K=34, N=6,295) but consistently negative relationship with academic criteria (e.g., GPA, Exam, etc.)

Procrastination is usually harmful, sometimes harmless, but never helpful

More serious results for financial/career performance

Correlations are negative and moderate to strong in strength

Piers Steel 9

Weak CorrelatesThese relationships have long been suspected of being major causes of procrastination

Rebelliousness, Sensation-Seeking, Neuroticism, and Irrational beliefs

Results here indicate, however, that they generally either are :

Weak causes of procrastinationStrong causes only for a small percentage of people

Piers Steel 10

RebelliousnessTheory

Externally imposed schedules are more likely experienced as aversive, and thus avoided. Also, by delaying work and starting it on one’s own schedule, autonomy is reasserted.

Results (K=21, N=4,350)Almost no supportCorrelations extremely weakExcept for adolescents, few report it as a reason

Piers Steel 11

Sensation-SeekingTheory

People high in this trait are easily bored and long for excitement, and thus they may intentionally put off work to feel the tension of working close to a deadline.

Results (K=9, N=1,810)Almost no supportCorrelations extremely weakFew endorse it as a reason

Piers Steel 12

Neuroticism: AnxietyTheory

People procrastinate on tasks because they are more susceptible to experiencing stress and thus find them more stressful

Results (K=44, N=8,540)Little supportCorrelations mostly weak and where strong, due to impulsivenessProcrastination seems to cause anxiety, not vice-versa

Piers Steel 13

Irrational BeliefsTheory

Acts similarly to neuroticism. These beliefs create anxiety and thus make certain tasks unpleasant.

Results (K=65, N=12,072)Little supportCorrelations mostly weak, except for general irrational beliefs where it may be moderate

Fear of failure and perfectionism are extremely lowSelf-perfectionists actually may be less likely to procrastinate

Piers Steel 15

Strong CorrelatesThese relationships are generally more recently seen as major causes of procrastination

Traits: Self-Efficacy, Energy, Impulsiveness & Self-Discipline, Achievement MotivationTask Characteristics: Aversiveness, Delay

Results here indicate they either describe or cause procrastination

Piers Steel 16

Low Self-Efficacy & Self-Esteem

TheoryRelated to irrational beliefs in that people may doubt their ability to do well

Results (K=26, N=4,217; K=33, N=5,846)Good supportFor self-efficacy, strong correlations. Helps to explain the moderate relationship sometimes seen with irrational belief inventories.For self-esteem, moderate to weak correlations

Piers Steel 17

Depression & EnergyTheory

Related to irrational beliefs and low self-efficacy. Burka and Yuen (1983) also discuss how it is harder to initiate tasks when we are tired.

Results (K=53, N=10,233)Moderate supportDepressed people are more pessimistic about outcomes.They are lethargic and thus more likely to find energy-intensive tasks unpleasant.

Piers Steel 18

Impulsiveness & Self-Discipline

TheoryImpulsive people may be more likely to procrastinate as they are beset with desires of the moment and focus their attention upon them.

Results (K=17, N=3,190; K=18, N=3,877)Very strong supportProcrastinators tend to show an intention-action gap, indicating an impulsive shift in motivationThey tend to choose short-term benefits over long-term gains, reflecting a core component of poor self-regulation

Piers Steel 19

Need for AchievementTheory

Those high in achievement motivation set more difficult goals for themselves, find work to be intrinsically engaging and thus necessarily less aversive.

Results (K=38, N=6,136)Strong supportLarge (approximately .50) correlations

Piers Steel 20

Task Aversiveness: Trait & State

TheoryWe seek to avoid aversive stimuli, and consequently, the more aversive the situation, the more likely we are to avoid it (e.g., procrastinate).

Results (K=10, N=1,069; K=8, N=938)Very strong support for both state and trait types:

Aversive tasks tend to be procrastinated. People who find tasks aversive, tend to be procrastinators

Researched with a variety of methodologiesEspecially susceptible for boring or frustrating jobs

Piers Steel 21

Task DelayTheory

The further away an event is temporally, the less impact it has upon our decisions

Results (not correlational)Very strong support from a variety of fields (e.g., economics, behaviorism)Students indicate that they would be less likely to procrastinate as a deadline approaches

Piers Steel 22

Theory of ProcrastinationBig findings

Impulsiveness, Self-Discipline, Task delay

Indicates time a factorEnergy, Need for Achievement, Task Aversiveness

Indicates value/valence a factorSelf-Efficacy, Self-Confidence

Indicates expectancy a factor

Piers Steel 23

Theory of Procrastination

Any one of these variables can exacerbate procrastination This includes having an alternative course of action nearby that is evaluated more favorable

Expectancy ValueUtilityDelay

Piers Steel 24

0102030405060708090

15-Sep 8-Oct 31-Oct 23-Nov 16-Dec

Time

Utility

Socializing

Essay Writing

December 3rd

Expectancy ValueUtilityDelay

Piers Steel 25

TreatmentNeed for a diagnostic procedure.

There are many possible causes of procrastination and then many different supporting factors

It may be expectancy, impulsiveness, task aversiveness, or some combination

For any specific factor, we need to learn whyFor example, if task aversiveness is driving the procrastination for one individual, we still need to learn why he or she finds it unpleasantFor some, though not many, it will be because they are rebellious or have specific irrational beliefs

Piers Steel 26

General Treatment Goals1. Reduce the aversiveness of the

task2. Increase competence with the task3. Improve self-regulatory skills (e.g.,

organization, planning) to decrease impulsiveness

4. Distance temptations

Piers Steel 27

TreatmentsTechniques that likely will be broadly successful are:

Energy RegulationGoal Setting

Specific, Proximal, ChallengingStimulus ControlRoutine Building

Piers Steel 28

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Time

UtilityBackground TemptationsNo Goal SettingGoal Setting

Piers Steel 29

Final Thought: Procrastination Rising

We have been formally measuring procrastination since 1978

It has been significantly rising over the last 25 years, as has debt, obesity and other impulse related issuesThe need for effective treatments has never been greater than now