PROCRASTINATION

AND
TASK AVOIDANCE
THEORY, RESEARCH, AND
TREATMENT

THE PLENUM SERIES IN

SOCIAL/CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Series Editor: C. R. Snyder
University of Kansas
Lawrence, Kansas

Current Volumes in this Series:

AGGRESSIVE DEHA VIOR
Current Perspectives
Edited by L. Rowell Huesmann
DESIRE FOR CONTROL
Personality, Social, and Clinical Perspectives
Jerry M. Burger
THE ECOLOGY OF AGGRESSION
Arnold P. Goldstein
EFFICACY, AGENCY, AND SELF-ESTEEM
Edited by Michael H. Kernis
HUMAN LEARNED HELPLESSNESS
A Coping Perspective
Mario Mikulincer
PATHOLOGICAL SELF-CRITICISM
Assessment and Treatment
Raymond M. Bergner
PROCRASTINATION AND TASK AVOIDANCE
Theory, Research, and Treatment
Joseph R. Ferrari, Judith L. Johnson, and William G. McCown
SELF-EFFICACY, ADAPTATION, AND ADJUSTMENT
Theory, Research, and Application
Edited by James E. Maddux
SELF-ESTEEM
The Puzzle of Low Self-Regard
Edited by Roy F. Baumeister
THE SELF-KNOWER
A Hero under Control
Robert A. Wicklund and Martina Eckert
A Continuation Order Plan is available for this series. A continuation order will bring delivery of each
new volume immediately upon publication. Volumes are billed only upon actual shipment. For further
information please contact the publisher.

PROCRASTINATION
AND
TASK AVOIDANCE
THEORY, RESEARCH, AND
TREATMENT
JOSEPH

R.

FERRARI

L.

JOHNSON

DePaul University
Chicago, Illinois

JUDITH

Villanova University
Villanova, Pennsylvania

WILLIAM

G. MCCOWN

Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research

Orangeburg, New York
AND ASSOCIATES

Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

On file

ISBN 978-1-4899-0229-0
ISBN 978-1-4899-0227-6 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4899-0227-6
1995 Springer Science+Business Media New York
Originally published by Plenum Press, New York in 1995
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1995

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher

To my wife Sharon and my children Catherine (Katie), Christina, and

Jonathan for their inspiration and encouragement
-Joseph R. Ferrari
To our families and students for their support and assistance
-Judith L. Johnson
-William G. McCown

ASSOCIATES

KIRK R. BLANKSTEIN, Department of Psychology, University of Toronto,

Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J lA3
GORDON L. FLETT, Department of Psychology, York University, North
York, Ontario, Canada M3J IP3
PAUL L. HEWITT, Department of Psychology, University of WInnipeg,
WInnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2
CLARRY LAY, Department of Psychology, York University, North York,
Ontario, Canada M3J IP3
THOMAS R. MARTIN, Department of Psychology, York University, North
York, Ontario, Canada M3J IP3
HENRI C. SCHOUWENBURG, Department of Student Support, University of Groningen, 9700 AB Groningen, The Netherlands

vii

FOREWORD

Procrastination is a fascinating, highly complex human phenomenon for

which the time has come for systematic theoretical and therapeutic effort.
The present volume reflects this effort. It was a labor of love to read this
scholarly, timely book-the first of its kind on the topic.
It was especially encouraging to find that its authors are remarkably
free of the phenomenon they have been investigating. One might have
expected the opposite. It has often been argued that people select topics
that trouble them and come to understand their problems better by
studying or treating them in others. This does not appear to be true of the
procrastination researchers represented in this book. I base this conclusion
on two simple observations. First, the work is replete with recent references and the book itself has reached the reader scarcely a year following
its completion. Second, when one considers the remarkable pace of programmatic research by these contributors during the past decade, it is
clear that they are at the healthy end of the procrastination continuum.
The fascinating history of the term procrastination is well documented
in this book. The term continues to conjure up contrasting, eloquent
images-especially for poets. When Edward Young wrote in 1742, "Procrastination is the Thief of Time," he was condemning the waste of the
most precious of human commodities. When more recently, in 1927,
Marquis wrote that "procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday," he regarded this human frailty with bemused tolerance. Both meanings are retained today-the former for moderate to severe forms of
indecision and delay, and the latter for less consequential transgressions.
The contributors to this volume offer the reader their personal reasons
for becoming interested in procrastination. My own interest began 10 years
ix

FOREWORD

ago when a graduate student asked me to serve as his thesis adviser on the
~opic. After reading the few published articles available at the time, I
suggested that he investigate procrastination in everyday life-the extent
to which one deals efficiently and effectively with the many minor tasks of
daily living-rather than more conventional topics, such as academic
procrastination or neurotic indecision. In retrospect, this suggestion came
out of my unique cultural experience as an American who had settled in
Israel. Hand,ling the routines of daily living is, in fact, far more difficult in
Israel than in the United States. For example, few service establishmentsfinancial, municipal, cultural, or recreational-are open at the same time
(e.g., 9-5) during the week. Banks, post offices, museums, and department stores all have different opening and closing times, as well as
different schedules for different days of the week. Furthe~ Israel is far more
bureaucratic than the United States and requires many more documents,
even for minor matters. I found the ability to deal promptly, efficiently, and
effectively with the routine tasks of daily living in Israel to be a valuable
asset, and the absence of this ability to be a debilitating stressor.
This personal awareness permitted me to make the procrastinationhassle connection when I first encountered Lazarus's work on daily hassles. In my split (American/Israeli) brain, procrastinating on the many
routine tasks of daily living becomes a proximal cause for the intense,
chronic experience of feeling hassled that leads, in turn, to adverse
psychological and physical consequences. People who engage in chronic
task avoidance, but are affectively indifferent to it, suffer only adverse
practical consequences of their dilatory behavior. People who engage in
chronic task avoidance and are upset about it suffer adverse psychological
consequences as well. Several kinds of negative appraisals may arise in the
context of chronic task avoidance associated with dysphoriC affect. These
appraisals threaten several personal characteristics that are cherished by
most people: Self-control, effeetance or control over the environment, and
self-esteem. These kinds of appraisals serve as expectancies that produce
task avoidance, or as conclusions that follow from it, or both. Interest in the
relationship of procrastinatory behavior, dysphoric affect elicited by this
behavior, and adverse expectancies is reflected in this book.
Procrastination is as much a consequence of adverse preexisting
personality characteristics and life experiences as it is an agent for bringing
about adverse consequences in its own right. This volume is well-balanced
in its emphasis on the antecedents and consequents of procrastination,
and documents the fruitful interplay between programmatic research on
both aspects. Research on the former enhances diagnosis and identification of the relevant pathological etiological factors that produce procrastination. Research on the latter ascertains the degree and kind of the

xi

FOREWORD

pathology that follows chronic procrastination. The findings from both

approaches provide the procrastination therapist with theoretical perspectives, tools to measure relevant variables before, during, and after treatment, and a wide variety of treatment techniques.
The closing chapters of the volume deal with treatment and are
fascinating for the reader and valuable for the clinician. Notwithstanding
the difficulty, the field has reached the point where systematic treatment
studies are possible. This writer would like to make a modest proposal: To
constitute a national task force to develop criteria for diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of procrastination disorders. Some years ago the
American Psychiatric Association introduced some degree of order, uniformity, reliability, and validity in dealing with psychiatric disorders and
behavioral disabilities. A similar collaboration by researchers and clinicians
today may develop for procrastination the same kind of operationally
defined criteria found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals (DSM) for
established psychiatric and behavioral disorders. There will soon be a
body of knowledge, an armamentarium of diagnostic tools, treatment
techniques, and treatment evaluation tools to justify launching such a
project with reference to procrastination. This project would be launched
with full awareness that this codified body of knowledge will undergo
modification as clinical and epidemiological studies provide new information on diagnosiS, assessment, treatment, and evaluation of treatment
effectiveness.
NORMAN

A. MILGRAM

Tel Aviv University

PREFACE

Before we proposed the idea to the series editor, C. R. Snyder, we were

unclear about the direction and potential content of the present book. One
of the authors wanted to write a theoretical book. Another wanted an
edited volume that would neatly summarize the growing amount of
research regarding procrastination. The third leaned heavily toward a
clinically oriented monograph that would appeal primarily to therapists
working with chronic procrastinators.
We were not convinced which of these directions would be most
useful, but deftnitely wanted to offer many of the major procrastination
researchers the opportunity to contribute. However, we also realized the
problems inherent in edited books, especially in an area where the research tradition is not well developed. We feared that such a format would
be repetitive and might be of little value to clinicians.
Eliot Werner at Plenum suggested a simple solution to the book's
direction. He recommended that we write the majority of the book, and
that we include speciftc invited chapters from prominent procrastination
researchers. In this manner we could combine the focus of an authored
book with the diversity of an edited volume. The present text became an
Hauthored with contributors" book. Chapters that do not include author
names have been written by us. Chapters by our associates are clearly
marked. The associate authors do not always agree with each other or, for
that matter, with us. However, we are pleased with the diversity of
theoretical sentiment expressed in this book. Respectful disagreement is a
hallmark of a progressive science, providing that those who disagree
maintain positive dialogue. Fortunately, the community of researchers in

xiii

xiv

PREFACE

the field of procrastination is small and cooperative enough that this

dialogue has been quite open, if occasionally spirited.
One criticism often voiced of both authored and edited books is that
they usually escape the peer-review process. This book is an exception. All
chapters were peer reviewed by outside reviewers. We greatly appreciate
the contributions of these all-but-anonymous scholars and have almost
always incorporated their criticisms into helpful revisions.
In addition to Eliot Werner and C. R. Snyde~ we wish to thank a
number of colleagues and friends who offered us encouragement and
helpful critiques, including-but not limited to-our reviewers: Marvin
Acklin, Robert Arkin, Sean Austin, Tamara Baker, Roy Baumeiste~ Sam
Bogoch, Hilman Boudreaux, Roberta Bowie, Margaret Brugge, Michael
Blitz, Meghan Byrne, Linda Chamberlain, Jonathan Cheek, Tom Ciprillina, Shel Cot1e~ Rebecca Curtis, Jorge Daruna, Harold Dawley, Phil
DeSimone, Oeo Dillon, John Dovidio, Larry Emmett, Robert Emmons,
Eva Feindler, Kay Fisch, Aileen Fink, Hans Eysenck, Judy Holmes, J. 1.
Lewis, Luciano L'Abate, John Lombardo, Nita Lutwak, George Nagle,
'fram Neill, Julie Norem, Mike Olivette, Nunzio Pomara, Tom Petzel,
Walter Reichman, Steve Scher, Alan Sconzert, Myrna Shure, Dan Skubick,
Crist Stevenson, Kate Szymanski, Gary Thomsen, and Dolly Weiss.
Ferrari personally thanks Leonard Jason, Herbert Muriels, Diane Tice,
Ray Wolfe, and the members of the 1993 Nags Head Invitational Conference on "Personality and Social Behavior. Johnson and McCown also
would like to add thanks to Hugh Gannon, Jenny Ornsteen, Margaret
Brugge, and Mary Ellen Johnson. We also would like to thank our
students (JRF-Tracey Clark, Barbara Effert, Bobbi Jo Nelson, Denise
Roberts, and Gail Zelinski; JLJ-Michael Bloom; WGM-Katherine Bishop,
Deni Carise, and Jennifer Posa), families, and certainly our research
participants.
Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to Daniel SchoppWyatt for creating the subject index and to rrudy Brown of Plenum for
assistance and support.
/I

JOSEPH

R.

FERRARI

1. JOHNSON
WILliAM G. MCCOWN
JUDITH

CONTENTS

Chapter 1

An Overview of Procrastination ................................ .

Procrastination Research: A Growing Endeavor ................ .

Definitions of Procrastination ................................ .
Historical Roots .......................................... .
Contemporary Definitions ................................ .
Oinical Significance of Procrastination ....................... .
Procrastination in the General Population ..................... .
Procrastination in Adult Clinical Populations ................ .
Relation of Axis II Disorders to Procrastination .............. .
Conclusion

2
3
3
5
12
15

17
18

19

Chapter 2

Procrastination Research: A Synopsis of Existing Research Perspectives

21

Preempirical Inquiry ........................................

Psychoanalytic and Psychodynamic Theories ..................
Psychoanalytic Theories ...................................
Psychodynamic Theories ..................................
Procrastination Research and the Behavioral rradition . . . . . . . . . . .
Reinforcement Theory .....................................
Procrastination and Specious Rewards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Behaviorism and Programmed Systems of Instruction ........
Critique of Behaviorism as Explanation of Procrastination

21
22
22
23
25
26
31
32
34

xv

xvi

CONTENlS

Cognitive and Cognitive-Behavioral Theories of Procrastination ..

Irrational Beliefs ..........................................
Self-Statements and Private Self-Consciousness ...............
Locus of Control and Learned Helplessness .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Irrational Perfectionism ....................................
Depression, Low Self-Esteem, and Anxiety ...................
Temperamental and Personological Explanations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Achievement Motivation and Procrastination .................
Intelligence and Ability ....................................
Impulsivity and Extraversion ...............................
Conscientiousness .........................................
Differences in Capacity for Accurate Time Perception .........
Neuropsychological and Biological Variables ...................
Conclusion .................................................

34
35
36
37
38
38
40
40
40
42
43
44
45
46

Chapter 3

Assessment of Academic and Everyday Procrastination: The Use of SelfReport Measures .........................................

47

Academic Procrastination ....................................

Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) ............
The Aitken Procrastination Inventory (API) ..................
Tuckman Procrastination Scale (TPS) ........................
Conclusions on Academic Measures ........................
Measures of Everyday Procrastination .........................
General Procrastination Scale (GP) ..........................
Decisional Procrastination (DP) Scale........................
Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AlP) ................. . . . .
The Tel-Aviv Procrastination (TAP) Inventory.................
Conclusion on Measures of Everyday Procrastination .........

48
48
52
54
55
56
56
61
63
66
69

Chapter 4

Academic Procrastination: Theoretical Notions, Measurement, and

Research ................................................

71

Henri C. Schouwenburg
Manifestations of Procrastinatory Behavior .....................
Procrastination and Irrational Thought ......................

72
72

CONTENTS

Fear of Failure and Procrastination ..........................

Procrastination and HThe Big Five" ..........................
Procrastination and Self-Worth .............................
Integration into a Working Hypothesis ......................
'freatment of Academic Procrastination ........................
Measurement: The Development of New Instruments .... . . . . . . .
The Procrastination Checklist Study Tasks (PCS) .............
The Academic Procrastination State Inventory (APSI) .........
The Study Problems Questionnaire (SPQ) ...................
Research ...................................................
Time Dependency of Academic Procrastination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prediction of Study Progress ...............................
Conclusion .................................................

xvii

73
76
80
81
83
84
84
85
87
90
90
93
95

Chapter 5

Trait Procrastination, Agitation, Dejection, and Self-Discrepancy. . . . . .

97

Clarry H. LAy
The Quasi-Independent Nature of Agitation (Anxiety) and
Dejection (Depression) ..................................
Assessing the Relations of Thait Procrastination with Agitation
and Dejection-Related Emotions (Studies 1-4) .............
Study 1 ..................................................
Study 2 ..................................................
Study 3 ..................................................
Study 4 ..................................................
General Conclusions Based on Studies 1-4 ....................
Cross-Cultural Considerations ................................
A Consideration of Some Other Theoretical Statements .........
Thait Procrastination, Affect, and Dilatory Behavior .............
Implications for the Counseling of Thait Procrastinators . . . . . . . . . .

99
100
100
102
103
105
106
107
109
110
112

Chapter 6

Dimensions of Perfectionism and Procrastination ...................

113

Gordon L. Flett, Paul L. Hewitt, and Tlwmas R. Martin

The Family Environment and its Link to Perfectionism and
Procrastination ..........................................

114

xviii

CONTENTS

History of the Perfectionism Construct ........................

Similarities between Perfectionism and Procrastination ..........
Distinguishing Features............................. .......
Procrastination and Perfectionistic Parental Expectancies ........
Perfectionism and Procrastination in Low-Threat Situations ......
Future ~earCh Issues ......................................
Summary ..................................................

116
117
118
126
130
132
136

Chapter 7
Procrastination, Negative Self-Evaluation, and Stress in Depression and
Anxiety: A Review and Preliminary Model ...................

137

Gordon L. Flett, Kirk R. Blankstein, and Thomas R. Martin

Procrastination in Anxiety and Depression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Negative Self-Concepts of Procrastinators............ ......
Procrastination, Life Stress, and Adjustment ...................
Toward a Model of Procrastination and Poor PsyChological
Adjustment ............................................
Procrastination and the Development of Self-Uncertainty ......
Procrastination, Social Comparison, and the Self .............
Procrastination and the Avoidance of Diagnostic Information ..
Optimistic versus Pessimistic Procrastination in Personal
Adjustment ............................................
Coping with Procrastination and PsyChological Distress .......
Summary and Future ~earCh Directions .....................

138
143
148
156
158
160
161
163
164
166

Chapter 8
The Role of Personality Disorders and Characterological Tendencies in
Procrastination ...........................................

169

The Role of Anxiety and Fear -................................

Procrastination and Personality Disorders......................
Procrastination and Passive-Aggressiveness ....................
Procrastination and Obsessive-Compulsive Tendencies .........
Study 1 ..................................................
Study 2 ..................................................
Study 3 ..................................................
General Conclusion .........................................

170
171
171
173
173
178
183
185

CONTENTS

xix

Chapter 9
Treatment of Academic Procrastination in College Students

187

Meta-Analysis and the Ethics of Intervention ..................

How Theoretical Accounts of Procrastination Influence rreatment
Strategies ..............................................
The rreatment of College-Student Procrastination: An Overview
Referral Typologies ........................................
Assessment and Obtaining a History of the College-Student
Procrastinator ...........................................
General rreatment Philosophy Regarding College-Student
Procrastination ..........................................
Changing Cognitive Misconceptions: A Key Treatment Strategy
for all Types of Procrastination ...........................
Modifying Cognitive Distortions and the Anxious Procrastinator
Cognitive Interventions for the Low-Conscientious Procrastinator
Group Therapy for Academic Procrastinators: The 10-Session
Structured Model .......................................
Individual Therapy for Procrastination ........................
A Two-Session Intervention ..................................

187
189
190
191
194
196
197
199
201
204
208
209

Chapter 10
Treating Adult and Atypical Procrastination .......................

211

Relevant Theoretical Orientation ..............................

"Typical" and '~typical" Adult Procrastination: The Critical
Distinction .............................................
Group Treatment ............................................
The Length of rreatment for "Typical" Adult Procrastination .....
Case Study: A Treatment Plan for Typical Adult Procrastination
Integrating the rreatment of Typical Procrastination into General
Psychotherapy ..........................................
Psychopharmacology and Procrastination? .....................
Assessment: The Need for a Full History ......................
Stress and Procrastination: An Often Overlooked Link ..........
'~ddiction" to Procrastination and Concurrent Substance Abuse
Atypical Procrastination .....................................
Psychodynamic rreatment for Atypical Procrastination ........
Family rreatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion .................................................

212
212
215
216
217
218
219
221
224
225
226
228
232
233

xx

CONTENTS

Chapter 11

Epilogue as Prologue

235

Considerations for Future Research .......................... .

Specific Areas of Future Interest ............................. .
Neuroscience and Biopsychology .......................... .
Developmental and Educational Research ................... .
Industrial/Organizational Psychology ...................... .
Personality Psychology ................................... .
Social Psychology ........................................ .
Clinical/Counseling Psychology ........................... .
Experimental Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology:
The Need for a Return to Basic Research ................. .
Conclusion

235
236
236
237
239
240

241
242
243

245

References .................................................. .

247

Index ...................................................... .

265

CHAPTER

AN OVERVIEW OF
PROCRASTINATION
Sloth is equal in nefariousness to greed, lust, theft, and murder . . .
HENRY WYKLIFFE,

1142

Procrastination is not merely a curious human aberration, one of the

many instances in which people failed to pursue their interest in an
efficient and productive manner. It represents a dysfunction of human
abilities that are important, if not essential, for coping with the myriad
tasks, major or minor, that accumulate daily on our desks, in our memo
books, or in our minds .... When we procrastinate we waste time,
miss opportunities, and do not live authentic lives ...
NORMAN MILGRAM,

1991

Chronic procrastination and task-avoidant behavior are extraordinarily

common problems. As we will suggest later in this chapter and throughout this book, procrastination is often related to a variety of psychiatric
syndromes. Moreover, as it will be hypothesized in Chapter 7, procrastinatory behavior may constitute a causal stress that contributes to psychological dysfunctions and maladaptive behavior patterns.
Given the potential role of procrastination as both a contributor and
outcome of psychiatric conditions, it is surprising that so little serious
scientific attention has been directed toward this behavior. With the
exception of several publications in the educational psychology literature,
many over two decades old, the present volume is the first primarily
scientific book on this topic.
Admittedly, one reason that procrastination generally has not been the
focus of serious theoretical and empirical inquiry is because it seems, to
some observers at least, too flippant a topic to be granted much scientific
credence. Everyone procrastinates, at least occasionally. Additionally, pro1

CHAPTER!

crastination is often viewed as humorous, and it is rare that a scholarly

discussion on the topic does not include an audience member's reference
to an amusing anecdote involving task avoidance. The behavior of intentional inactivity is so common that it hardly seems problematic or worthy
of significant scrutiny by the dignified behavioral researcher. Finally,
chronic procrastination is usually viewed by punctual and efficient persons as an annoying and illogical action (Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ellis &
Knaus, 1977; Knaus, 1973). Since most people who perform behavioralscience research are probably highly conscientious and punctual individuals, it is often difficult for the majority of such researchers to show
interest in or empathy for the plight of people who are constantly unable to
meet deadlines.
Chronic procrastinators are often labeled as lazy, indolent, and unambitious, words that are pejorative in an achlevement-oriented society (Knaus,
1973). People whose behavior is well within traditional moral boundaries,
save for their lack of punctuality, are frequently stigmatized by procrastination (Burka & Yuen, 1983). For example, individuals who fail to file
their income taxes on time are often punished with criminal sanctions and
their reputations may be seriously affected. Even minor task avoidance,
such as not purchasing an anniversary present in a timely manner, may
frequently be interpreted as showing negative intentions, lack of consideration, or poor motivation.

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH: A GROWING ENDEAVOR

Many of these factors have coalesced to discourage would-be researchers from regarding procrastination as a topic for significant empirical inquiry. Graduate students, the lifeblood of behavioral-science research, may be particularly dissuaded. However, in recent years many
psychologists and other behavioral scientists have begun to recognize the
importance of scientific investigation into the causes and correlates of
procrastination. Part of this change may have been sparked by interest
generated in the popular press, where articles regarding procrastination
are not uncommon and writers search out scientists who can address
problems that are frequent among their readers or, in the case of electronic
media, their listeners. The clinical experiences of practicing psychologists
may have also served to sensitize clinician/researchers to the topic.
Other empirically oriented researchers became interested in the topic
from observation within varying settings. Regardless of where or how the
impetus arose, however, behavioral scientists are finally beginning to
formulate a sentiment that clinicians have held for years: Procrastination
is a complex, often chronic, behavioral pattern that sometimes defies

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

straightforward causal explanation. For the clinician and client, procrastination constitutes a frustrating and ultimately self-defeating pattern that
is often intractable, unless professional intervention is provided. Thus,
greater knowledge regarding theoretically based treatments with demonstrated efficacy are needed. Unfortunately, we are a long way from this
goal, perhaps because of the complexity of this behavior. Accordingly,
professionals who scan this book with the hope of finding a clinician's
practical manual for the treatment of procrastination may be disappointed.
Although in Chapters 9 and 10 we discuss the clinical therapy of procrastination, much of the material from these chapters is anecdotal or based
upon outcome data collected on small samples. Much work remains to be
done before a treatment techtwlogy for procrastination can be developed.
The principal reason for this concerns the lack of an adequate knowledge base. This can be seen in the paucity of procrastination articles
relative to other topics in the clinical- or behavioral-science literature. For
example, in 1993 there were approximately one-thousand times as many
research articles on depression as there were on procrastination, and 960
times more about schizophrenia. As the size of this volume attests, we
don't know nearly as much as we would like regarding etiology, prevention, or treatment of procrastination. Controlled clinical studies of therapeutic outcome are woefully lacking. There is almost no literature comparing treatment methods in diverse populations, especially groups of
nonstudents. Consequently, although this book will prove valuable to the
clinician who works with procrastinators, we hope its greatest value will be
in highlighting areas of inquiry where additional work is needed and
where findings could be fruitfully integrated into clinical practice.
Our sincere hope is that the field of procrastination research progresses so rapidly that this volume becomes quickly obsolete. For this to
occur, there must be an increase in research. An additional reason that
clinical interest has surpassed research efforts may be that is difficult to
agree upon a satisfactory definition of procrastination. In this chapter we
review the problems associated with various definitions and furnish what
we believe to be useful suggestions. Following this we briefly discuss the
clinical significance of procrastination, arguing that it is an appropriate
area of concern for psychologists and other behavioral scientists.

DEFINITIONS OF PROCRASTINATION
HISTORICAL

Roars

Milgram (1992) emphasized that procrastination is essentially a modern malady, noting that its occurrence is only relevant in countries where
technology is advanced and schedule adherence is important. There is

CHAPTER!

substantial truth to this assertion. The more industrialized a society, the

more salient the construct of procrastination becomes. DeSimone (1993)
noted that many preindustrialized societies do not have words comparable
to our notion of procrastination. The ancient Egyptians, for example,
possessed two verbs that have been translated as meaning procrastinate.
One denoted the useful habit of avoiding unnecessary work and impulsive
effort, while the other denoted the harmful habits of laziness in completing a task necessary for subsistence, such as tilling the fields at the
appropriate time of year in the Nile flood cycle.
While we agree with Milgram that procrastination may be much more
conspicuous in industrial societies, we must qualify the assertion that
procrastination is purely a modem phenomena. Similar words or constructs have existed throughout history, although with different, and
usually less negative, connotations. The term procrastination comes directly
from the Latin verb procrastinare, meaning quite literally, to put off or
postpone until another day (DeSimone, 1993). This itself is a compilation of
two words-pro, a common adverb implying forward motion, and
crastinus, meaning Nbelonging to tomorrow." The combined word is used
numerous times in Latin texts, not surprisingly, given the military emphasis of Roman culture. Roman use of this term seemed to reflect the
notion that deferred judgment may be necessary and wise, such as when it
is best to wait the enemy out and demonstrate patience in military conflict.
Perhaps to the ancients, procrastination involved a sophisticated decision
regarding when not to act, an opposite tendency from impulsiveness and
acting without adequate forethought.
The Oxford English Dictionary (OEQ 1952) lists the earliest known
English usage of the word procrastination as occurring in 1548 in Edward
Hall's Chronicle: The Union of Two Noble and Illustrious Families of Lancestre and
Yorke. The OED notes that the term is used several times in this work and
apparently without pejorative connotation, reflecting more of the concept
of Ninformed delay" or Nwisely chosen restraint" popular in Roman accounts. According to the OEQ the word procrastination was in relatively
common usage by the early 16oos. The negative connotations of the term
did not seem to emerge until the mid-18th century, at approximately the
time of the Industrial Revolution.
How procrastination came to acquire its negative moral connotations is
speculative. It is well known that in agrarian societies substantial contempt is reserved for persons demonstrating sloth-a term connoting
physical inactivity that etymologically and philosophically was initially
separate from the concept of procrastination. According to the OED definition, sloth was an Old English term widely used in the late Middle Ages.
Sloth implies not only personal avoidance, but also active manipulation to
get another to do the work necessary for one's own subsistence. This term

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

was much more relevant to the lives of persons who lived in an agriculturally based social milieu. In today's industrial society the term has
mostly vanished from contemporary use, although perhaps the concept of
getting over, expressed by working persons when they shirk responsibilities onto other people, is a close approximation.
Regardless, Milgram (1992) is undoubtedly correct when he asserts
that the importance attached to punctuality is greater in industrialized
countries. The distinction between sagacious delay and immoral laziness
has seemed to blur in contemporary Western language and social thought
where economic emphasis is on more immediate activity. An interesting
study for the industrial psychologist working in conjunction with a linguist and an economist would be to correlate linguistic changes in the
concepts of task delay with indices of economic growth. We would predict
that as economies become larger and more complex, the concept of sloth
becomes less important and words related to the concept of task avoidance
become more negatively imbued with meaning.
CONTEMPORARY DEFINITIONS

A major difficulty in studying, understanding, and treating procrastination may involve variations in its subjective definitions. Unlike depression or anxiety, where meaning is more intuitive and likely to result in
substantial agreement, one person's feelings of putting off a task might be
someone else's version of punctuality (Silver, 1974). This is easily seen in
family or couples therapy when people fight over differing basic expectations regarding when family responsibilities should be executed. It is very
common, for example, to have one partner accuse the other of being a
procrastinator, while the second partner states that he or she is "normal"
and that the other partner is "rigid," "obsessed," or other adjectives.
Therefore, it would be useful to both researchers and clinicians to
attempt an adequate definition that is both inclusive and likely to be
widely accepted. However, this task may prove more difficult than it
initially seems. There are a variety of present-day definitions, each with
different denotations. Because of this we have asked each of the guest
authors in subsequent chapters to specify how they have defmed procrastination. It may also be useful to keep in mind some strengths and
limitations of different classes of definitions that are common to different
laboratories and investigators.
Definitions with Temporal Emphasis
Silver (1974) has emphasized the temporal component as the central
defining concept of procrastination. He believes that the sine qua non of

CHAPTER!

this behavior is that the procrastinator forfeits the likelihood that a task will
be completed successfully and optimally. Procrastination, he argues, is not
simply the act of task avoidance, which may under certain circumstances
be a highly logical decision. Silver argues that individuals who procrastinate do not intend to ignore or elude the task they are delaying. Instead,
they simply put the task off past the optimal time it should be initiated to
guarantee the maximal likelihood of its successful completion.
Attempting to determine the most appropriate time for a specific
action occurring under uncertain conditions (e.g., selling a particular
stock) has fostered a sophisticated branch of applied-decision theory
(Swets, 1991). There is substantial evidence that humans do not perform
these types of activities well and, instead of examining options in an
optimal fashion, rely on simplified internal rules or heuristics to guide
their behaviors (Kahnemann, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982). It is also clear that
people can vastly improve this skill through simple problem-solving
training that emphasizes construction of a costlbenefits analysis regarding
the outcomes of their behavioral choices (Baron & Brown, 1991).
Perhaps a problem with Silver's definition is that it ignores the
importance of the specific task and probable payoffs associated with task
completion. In real life, some things get done first because the remote
possibility associated with their incompletion may be quite disastrous.
Other events are postponed because there is little likelihood that less-thanprompt attention will have a significant impact. An example of this is
demonstrated by hospital emergency rooms in the form of emergency
triage. An individual with severe chest pains and a family history of heart
disease gets immediate attention; there is no procrastination by the hospital staff whatsoever. The odds that the patient's condition will tum out to
be rather benign are actually quite high. However, the consequences of the
unlikely outcome are quite serious.
On the other hand, the patient with a toothache gets a low priority
because the chances that he or she will need immediate care are extremely
low, based on prior probabilities. Staff might make such a patient wait
through their break periods before seeing the unfortunate tooth sufferer.
They "procrastinate" caring for him or her because the condition is of
apparently low priority. Occasionally there are terrible exceptions to the
retrospective wisdom in such a course of action, for example when a
"toothache pain" is actually a symptom of an intracranial hemorrhage.
However, the usually less serious needs of this patient will be balanced
against the necessity of completing other tasks first. The statistical theory
of expected values has found a nice application in a relatively new field
known as risk management, which assesses the costs of a possible outcome
as well as the likelihood of its occurrence (froyer & Salman, 1986).

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

Irrationality
Another set of definitions has emphasized the irrational aspects of
procrastination. As we will show in Chapter 2, the paradoxical notion of
procrastination as irrational behavior was almost a natural attraction to
cognitively oriented psychotherapists. For example, Ellis and Knaus
(1977), in a layperson's self-help book, provide one of the first quasiempirically oriented treatments of procrastination. They liken the behavior
to neurosis and believe its illogicalness is its salient feature. Ellis and
Knaus find it very curious, therefore, that few psychologists have attempted an empirically based treatment of such an obviously dysfunctional behavior. 1 In lamenting the amount of empirical research conducted
on this topic they state:
Does no one care? Will no one lift a finger to help rid the world of this
destructive aspect of slothfulness? Fortunately, we do and will. For we don't
like procrastination. It adds little to and it subtracts a lot from joyous autonomous living. We don't see it as the worst emotional plague imaginable, but we
view it as a dangerous disadvantage. Part of the human condition-yes-but a
nasty, unattractive part. And one that merits extirpation. (pp. 1-2)

A similar sentiment regarding irrationality as the major feature of

procrastination was expressed by Silver and Sabini (1981). These authors
argued that by definition all procrastination is self-defeating. Unlike behavior directed at the mere avoidance of a task, procrastination is inherently goal-undermining. Burka and Yuen (1983), in their popular and
useful self-help book, also reiterate the irrational nature of procrastination.
Other researchers have challenged the universality of the irrationality
of procrastination. Ferrari (1993b, 1994) argued that, although procrastination may often be self-defeating, this behavior may also be in one's own
self-interest and therefore quite logical. Ferrari (1993a,b, 1994; Ferrari &
Emmons, 1994, in press) has further drawn an intuitive distinction between functional and dysfunctional procrastination. For example, it may
make sense to avoid paying United States income taxes for as long as possible prior to the due date of April 15. Or, it may make sense to postpone
a task past an optimal starting time for completion when the task may be
reassigned to a coworker if it is not already started. Such behavior becomes dysfunctional only when there are penalties imposed on the procrastinator.
1A

dissertation by McKean (1990) notes, however, that despite the fact that Ellis and Knaus
loudly lament the lack of empirical research regarding procrastination, they then proceed to
fiJI the next 100 pages of their popular psychology book with c1inical conjectures and
speculations. No empirically derived data is presented, only anecdotal accounts from the
authors' private-practice experiences.

CHAPI'ERI

The Moral Dimension in Definitions

The Webster New Collegiate Dictionary (1992) makes a typical attempt to
define procrastination. According to this source, the verb procrastinate
means "to put off intentionally and usually reprehensibly the doing of
something that should be done [italics ours]." According to this definition,
procrastination denotes undesirable behavior and a choice or sequencing
of activities that also implies a moral dimension. Questions concerning the
utility or functionality of procrastination are therefore oxymoronic. With
this definition, procrastination represents behavior that is inauspicious
and self-defeating by its very nature.
McKean (1990) notes the implicit moral tone of Ellis and Knaus's work
and is critical of much of a similar attitude found in popular and semipopular writings regarding procrastination. The perspective of other selfhelp works is equally negative. Bliss (1983), in an otherwise client-friendly
and uSeful book, equates procrastination with laziness and indifference,
certainly negative attributes in Western culture. Other popular accounts
by Lakein (1973) and Sherman (1981) are only slightly more tolerant of the
behaviors of procrastinators, often emphasizing the self-defeating aspects
of these people.
A problem with insisting on a definition that emphasizes the selfdefeating aspects of procrastinating behavior is that it often tends to assume that the moral dimension is the principal area of interest for inquiry.
DeSimone (1993) has discussed the manner in which frameworks of
scientific inquiry regarding specific psychological constructs are shaped
by the cultural templates through which they were filtered. A well-known
example concerns the concept of knowledge (knosis), emphasized in Christian scripture. According to DeSimone, because of the religious and
spiritual implications in antiquity, the idea of searching for knowledge has
attained spiritual overtones, even for secular knowledge.
DeSimone (1993) discusses how the present concept of procrastination
has been shaped by the cultural context of Greco-Roman civilization.
Specifically, the Latin (literally, "forward motion tomorrow") is connotatively shaped by Greek notions of progress and its antithesis, namely a
"missing of the mark." This latter concept in Greek has frequently been
translated variously into Western literature. Its most noticeable influence
has been through the New Testament, where it is translated as the word
sin. In other words, procrastination has become somewhat inadvertently
linked with the English word for sin and this coupling was very influential
to Medieval and Reformation philosophers and theologians. It is not
surprising, then, that it is very difficult to free this term from a Greco-

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

Roman heritage, binding it to the concept of some type of morally reprehensible behavior.
From our perspective we believe that it is of little use to link procrastination with personal morality. Depression, anxiety, and even schizophrenia were once believed to have a major moral component. It was only
when this dimension was deemphasized that scientific progress regarding
treatment was possible. Presently, similar controversies are evident in the
field of substance abuse Oohnson & McCown, 1992), where data seem to
suggest that a de-moralization of the behavior in question results in more
effective treatment, as well as increased scientific knowledge.
N

Operational Definitions
Perhaps to avoid the moral dimensions, some researchers involved in
procrastination prefer to avoid a formal definition of the behavior and
instead emphasize operational definitions. Kantor's (1969) classic text
regarding the progression of psychology argued that operational definitions are often necessary in the early stages of any scientific construct's
history. It is only when the construct becomes better understood that
operationalism is no longer necessary.
Operational definitions may involve either behavioral indices or may
derive from psychometric classifications. As an example of behavioral
indices, in a typical research project regarding procrastination, college
students who do not turn in a percentage of assignments or who show up
late to class a specific number of times are operationally defined as
procrastinators. Changes in lateness regarding specific and necessary but
often avoided tasks can also be used as an indication of consumer or client
satisfaction (Spoth & Molgaard, 1993). Specific-task items leading to lateness can be analyzed with techniques such as conjoint analysis (Green &
Wmd, 1975), which allows an estimation of the relative importance or
utility an individual attaches to each possible feature of a product, service,
or process when these features are considered jointly, rather than one at a
time (R. Johnson, 1987). In conjoint analysis, specific attributes associated
with consumer preference can usually be isolated, suggesting a role for
this and similar techniques in program evaluation as well as business
(Spoth, 1989). Behaviorally anchored operational definitions lend themselves quite well to applied community research (Stecher & Davis, 1987),
since criteria measures-such as percentages of people who file income
taxes late or who put off annual medical checkups-are comparatively
easy and inexpensive to obtain and replicate.
Behaviorally anchored operational definitions of specific undesirable

10

CHAPTERl

behaviors are usually easily obtainable and may be amenable to conjoint

analysis. For example, one of the authors was asked to perform a program
evaluation to determine why municipality residents failed to perform the
legally required behavior of paying borough taxes by a specific date. The
accountants who had designed the recent municipality surtax were confused, since they had identically followed a very successful process of
revenue collection implemented by a nearby municipality. However, in
practice, a large minority of citizens forgot or deliberately ignored these
new taxes. (In other words, they procrastinated.) A conjoint analysis
conducted among persons who failed to pay their taxes determined that
the largest "undesirability" of the new tax program was the quarterly
payments that were required to be fIled by law. Average wage earners had
diffIculty keeping up with the requirement for quarterly fIlings and were
more comfortable with an additional withholding tax.
A comparison with the municipality where the quarterly payment
had been successful indicated that this town had a higher number of
small-business people and self-employed professionals who were accustomed to the pattern of quarterly fIling. Although a quarterly payment
may have been slightly more economically rational, since it allowed the
earner to keep her or his money for a longer period of time, no actual
desirability was perceived for this advantage. Interestingly, the accounting
fIrm hired to construct the tax levy could not believe that such a small
inconvenience as quarterly filing could account for the substantial delay in
paying taxes. However, once the law was changed to allow people the
option of withholding or quarterly payments, late payments and noncompliance fell substantially.
More common than behavioral criteria in psychological research is the
use of questionnaires to operationally defIne persons as procrastinators
(e.g., Chapter 2; Aitken, 1982; McCown, Petzel, & Rupert, 1987). For example, students who score in the extreme portion of an inventory designed to
detect procrastination may be operationally defIned as either procrastinators or highly punctual persons, depending upon the direction of the
scores. Usually these "cutoff scores" involve quartiles or median splits. An
advantage of this procedure is that it produces quasi-experimental groups
that can generate the type of data that is amenable to hypothesis testing
with the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and its related family of techniques. For example, trends analysis can be easily performed to determine
whether linear 01" curvilinear relationships exist between procrastination
and various dependent measures.
Unfortunately, operational defInitions have potential liability. In the
initial period of any scientifIc endeavor, such defInitions provide a convenient manner of circumventing theoretical disputes. They enable the

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

11

researcher to remain flexible about attributes of the construct under

investigation. However, they are at best a "stopgap measure." Ultimately,
considerable scientific energy is expended on arguing about the nuances
generated by operational implications and too often scientific progress is
stifled rather than fostered. This is because comparisons of empirical
relationships across populations become much more difficult when different operational definitions are commonplace. Researchers too often spend
time arguing about the "real nature" of the construct, as if operational
definitions possessed a higher degree of reification than they were intended.
Multidimensional Definitions
A broad and systematic definition of procrastination is offered by
Milgram (1991), who has emphasized four components as necessary for
procrastination. They note that procrastination is primarily (1) a behavior
sequence of postponement; (2) resulting in a substandard behavioral
product; (3) involving a task that is perceived by the procrastinator as being
important to perform; and (4) resulting in a state of emotional upset.
While this definition provides an excellent description of many of the
aspects of the syndrome of procrastinating behavior, some may disagree
with its universality. Milgram's definition may seem more of an ideal
typology, in the sense used by Max Weber (1926) to describe core aspects of
a behavior. Procrastination does not always result in inefficiency or substandard behaviors. As we will see in later chapters, procrastination is
often a deliberate self-motivating strategy for persons who are in need of
intense levels of stimulation in order to be adequately motivated. In fact,
some persons can work efficiently only after procrastinating. Some persons work extremely well under the pressure of self-manipulated deadlines and perform quite well.
Other people are not particularly distressed regarding their behavioral or purported behavioral decrements following procrastination. Procrastination may sometimes be viewed as a method of self-handicapping
and may be used as an excuse to avoid ego-dystonic cognitions (Ferrari,
1991b, 1992c). As Snyder and Higgins (1988) have noted, people engage in
a variety of excuses to negotiate a more pleasant outcome for their behaviors. Procrastination is often an excellent excuse for poor performance.
Clinical interviews with procrastinators often find that they are emotionally unfazed regarding their inefficiencies or delays, and in fact may
be quite pleased with poor performance that was accomplished by merely
a frantic last-minute effort.
Another attempt at a multifocused definition has been proposed by

12

0IAPI'ER1

McCown and Roberts (1994). Based on Ferrari's (1993b) distinctions discussed earlier, these authors argue that dysfunctional procrastination can
actually be defined as the time past the optimal beginning point for completion

of an important task that has a high probability of needing completion and that does
not have unreasonable demands of personal costs associated with attempted
completion. Rational or functional procrastination, on the other hand, is
defined as similar behavior evoked for actions that have a low probability of
needing completion or have excessively high costs associated with personal completion at their optimal time. The authors have attempted to standardize these

definitions through mathematical formulae, although the utility of these

efforts over simple verbal descriptions has not been demonstrated.
Regardless, researchers have used varying definitions of procrastination, which might have broader implications for provoking future disagreement. We, therefore, have asked contributors to this volume to
explicitly state the definitions of procrastination that they are using.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF PROCRASTINATION

Until now we have asserted that procrastination is of sufficient re-quency and clinical interest to justify systematic research efforts. However,
this is true only if (a) its occurrence is relatively widespread, and (b) pr0crastination results in at least some degree of unhappiness, symptomatology, or psychological dysfunction.
Regarding prevalence, it is useful to, separate procrastination that
occurs in academic matters from that in other spheres. Not surprisingly,
because of their convenience in sampling by academics, but also because of
the purported significance of procrastination in this group, college students have been first and most widely studied. Hill, Hill, Chabot, and
Barrall (1976) conducted one of the earliest surveys attempting to determine rates of procrastination in college students. Five hundred students at
five different campuses were asked to rate their own procrastination on
academic tasks. Ratings were made on a 5-point Likert-type scale. The
type of school students attended failed to correlate with the amount of
procrastination they reported. The authors also failed to find differences in
self-rated procrastination between students at different campuses, which
r~ged from a community college to an Ivy League school. Furthermore,
these authors also failed to find differences in procrastination among
college majors. Regardless of campus or major, approximately 10%of
students rated themselves as lIusual procrastinators." Another 17% labeled
themselves as "frequent" procrastinators, and another 23% stated that they
procrastinated"about half of the time:' In other words, approximately 50%

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

13

of the students sampled listed themselves as procrastinating about half

of the time or more on academic tasks.
Interestingly, these authors found a significant trend toward increased
procrastination throughout the undergraduate careers of students. More
than 66% of all freshmen reported themselves as seldom or rarely procrastinating. Only 43% of seniors claimed to procrastinate infrequently. This
freshmen-to-senior change represents an increase of approximately 50%
in procrastination over the course of 3 years, a statistically highly significant linear trend the authors regard with some dismay.
Briordy (1980) constructed one of the first psychometrically oriented
questionnaires to measure academic procrastination in college students.
This measure was a simple self-report, constructed without a substantial
attempt to validate it against external criteria. However, despite criterion
validity issues, the instrument appears useful and certainly generated
some provocative findings. Briordy, for instance, found that 20% of students reported themselves as "problem procrastinators," indicating that
their tendency to put things off interfered with both their grades and their
enjoyment of life. Future research would substantiate Briordy's 20% figure
by indicating that procrastination is a substantial, self-perceived problem
for between 20-30% of college students.
Aitken (1982) constructed a more extensive and perhaps a more carefully
validated questionnaire designed to measure college-student procrastination. She validated the questionnaire against specific behavioral indices
hypothesized to occur more often in chronic procrastinators. These included
delays in beginning to study for an exam, the number of incomplete
grades received during the school year, and the frequency of incurring
overdue books at the library. Her study included approximately 120 undergraduates at two state universities. Despite the fact that Aitken apparently
never published her inventory in peer-reviewed chapters or as a journal
article, it remains a popular instrument for procrastination research.
Aitken found that the scores on her procrastination inventory were
approximately normally distributed. Very little item analysis was necessary to generate a normal distribution of procrastination scores, suggesting that procrastination represents a genuine normally distributed trait.
Students who scored approximately 1.0 standard deviation or more above
the mean reported experiencing significant discomfort associated with the
persistent tendency to put school assignments off until the last minute.
Aitken concluded that procrastination is a problem for up to 25% of college
students, a number that she believes concurs with that obtained by Briordy
(1980).

Solomon and Rothblum (1984) examined procrastination in 342 college

students. One-half of the students admitted that procrastination was a

14

CHAPTER!

moderate or more severe problem for them. Approximately one-fourth of

the students believed that their tendency to procrastinate significantly
interfered with their grade point averages and the quality of their lives.
Students who procrastinated believed that their continued inability to
meet deadlines resulted in substantially increased stress.
McCown (1986), and McCown, Johnson, and Petzel (1989b) used
Aitken's measure and found that procrastination scores were normally
distributed in several different student populations. McCown (1986) compared 80 individuals who scored high and 80 who scored low on the
procrastination inventory to determine whether sododemographic variables that might require additional time demands influenced scores. His
hypothesis was that although procrastination scores might be related to the
tendency to postpone tasks, they may also relate to time demands imposed by economic factors, such as impediments due to students' lack of
fmances, sodal class, ethnidty, and race. For example, working-class individuals who provide the bulk of their academic tuition payment through
part- or full-time work would have less free time than middle-class students, and therefore should appear to procrastinate more.
As expected, McCown (1986) found that procrastinators spent less
time studying. However, the hypothesis that this was due to factors such as
longer commutes for students, outside employment obligations, ethnidty,
and family obligations was not supported. Persons with more external time
commitments, such as child care or other family care, hobbies, employment commitments, and the like actually reported less procrastination and
slightly higher grade point averages. One reason for these findings might
be that the external demands imposed on students with limited resources
punish them more severely for procrastination, thus extinguishing this
behavior more frequently than in students with more economic and time
assets. Another explanation is that there may be a greater attrition of procrastinating students among those with less means and increased family
demands, thus skewing the findings. Regardless, and as in previous
studies, procrastination correlated with lower grade point averages and
also with higher perceived subjective distress and dissatisfaction with
college life.
The largest study regarding procrastination frequency was conducted
by McCown and Roberts (1994), who examined the frequency of procrastination with the Aitken measure and with behavioral and self-report
assessments in 1,543 college students (785 female). Nineteen percent of
freshmen, 22% of sophomores, 27% of juniors, and 31% of seniors endorsed three or more Likert-type items indicating that procrastination was
a significant source of personal stress. Twenty-three percent of freshmen,
27% of sophomores, 32% of juniors, and 37% of seniors endorsed three or

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

15

more Likert-type items indicating a belief that personal procrastination

tendencies tended to hurt their academic achievement.
In conclusion, results from several studies indicate that procrastination is a common, self-perceived problem for college students. Chapters 4
through 7 highlight whether academic procrastination is related to emotional discomfort and maladjustment.

PROCRASTINATION IN THE GENERAL POPULATION

Only a few studies have examined the prevalence of procrastination in
the general nonstudent population. For example, McCown and Johnson
(1989a) surveyed 146 subjects in their validation of an instrument to
measure procrastination (the Adult Inventory of Procrastination, or AlP,
discussed in Chapter 3). They found that over 25% of subjects stated that
procrastination was a "significant problem" in their lives (5 or more on a
7-point Likert-type scale) and that these subjects scored substantially
higher on an inventory designed to measure adult procrastination. Almost
40% of subjects stated that procrastination had personally caused them
financial loss during the past year. Furthermore, the amount of money
subjects stated that procrastination had cost them significantly (and very
highly) correlated (r = .54) with AlP scores.
Ferrari has conducted several studies regarding procrastination with
working adults. For instance, in one study that was widely reported in the
popular press, shoppers in a mall were asked to complete procrastination
scales and a set of attribution measures during the Christmas-holiday
season (Ferrari, 1993a). Higher procrastination scores correlated with de'lays in beginning to shop, and high (compared to low) procrastinators were
more likely to delay the redemption of a mall gift certificate.
Working adults in business settings also participated in a study
examining social comparisons and evaluations of procrastinators in the
workplace (Ferrari, 1992a). In addition, nontraditional-age college students
in an evening/summer college course participated in a study focused on
validating the psychometric properties of two procrastination scales (Ferrari, 1992c). Results suggest that procrastination is a self-perceived problem for many adults.
McCown and Roberts (1994) performed a telephone survey of 360
persons selected at random, aged 18 through 77. Individuals were administered an oral version of the AlP (McCown & Johnson, 1989c), an inventory designed to measure dysfunctional procrastination (see Chapter 3).
Figure 1-1 illustrates the results of this study.

16

CHAPTER 1

55
53

51

w 49
a:
0

~ 47
z

z~

8a:
~

45
43

41
39
37
35
20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

AGE
N = 360.

. . Females

"""" Males

FIGURE 1-1. Disbibution of procrastination scores across age and gender.

Procrastination scores for men, as measured by the AIp, reach a peak

for persons in their middle-to-Iate 20s. Scores decline until approximately
age 60, when they rise abruptly. For women, scores decline from a high
point in early adulthood and continue to decline until the same period, at
which time they show a sharper rise than with men. The increase in scores
for persons in their 60s may be related to retirement or to health limitations
in this age group. The effects also could be due to cohort factors, such as
the experience of specific age groups with the Great Depression or World
War ll. In any case, age-related difficulties in procrastination remain an
intriguing source for future research.

17

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASI'INATION
PROCRASTINATION IN ADULT CUNICAL POPULATIONS

Recently, attention has been focused on procrastination tendencies

among clinical populations (see the next section for several sets of projects
involving clinical samples evaluated for procrastination frequencies). McCown and Roberts (1994) performed two studies regarding the relationship between procrastination and psychiatric symptomatology. In the first
study, 128 intakes to an outpatient-psychiatric clinic completed the AlP.
Diagnoses were made by unanimous consensus of a treatment team composed of at least one licensed psychologist and psychiatrist. The patients
were composed of eight different clinical groups. The study included outpatients with the following Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-Third EditionRevised (DSM-ID-R) diagnoses: unipolar depression (25), general anxiety
disorder (18), substance abuse (25), schizophrenia (21), post-traumatic
stress disorder (PI'SD) (12), anorexia/bulimia (15), and simple phobia (14).
A group of nonpatients who did not differ significantly from the patient
groups on the variables of race, sex, or age was also included in the study.
Table 1-1 shows the scores of each clinical group.
Tukey's HSD tests with significance level set at .05 indicated that
substance abusers differed significantly from the other diagnostic categories, with substance abusers demonstrating higher procrastination scores.
Perhaps some of the much-discussed NdenialNof this group could be due
to chronic procrastination in a variety of personal areas, as well as their
addictive behavior.
More surprising was the relationship between PTSD and procrastination, which was significantly higher than the nonpatient mean and than
other diagnostic groups. The reasons for this remain unclear and deserve
replication in a larger study. Perhaps a foreshortened sense of the future,
Relation of Diagnosis
to Procrastination Scores from
Adult Inventory of Procrastination

TABLE 1-1.

Diagnosis

Score

sd

Alcohol/substance abuse
PI'SD
Depression
Anxiety
Nonpatients
Eating disorder
Phobia
Schizophrenia

60.4
53.2
51.9
46.5
44.1
42.2
41.8
40.3

8.8
6.8
6.6
7.5
6.0
6.8
4.5
6.6

18

CHAPTER!

which is common among persons with PTSD (van der KoIk, 1987), contributes to dilatory behavior.
What was unexpected in this study was the lack of relationship
between phobias, anxiety, and depression and procrastination. These
findings, in combination with the elevated procrastination found in persons with PTSQ suggest that it is not neuroticism or anxiety per se that
correlates with procrastination, but instead a synergistic combination of
traits. Presently, projects are underway in the authors' laboratories to
determine the causal relation of procrastination and psychopathology.
Despite the fact that causality between various forms of psychopathology and procrastination remains unclea~ an additional role has been
suggested for the capacity of procrastination to foster psychological symptom severity in vulnerable individuals. Johnson (1992) hypothesized that
trait procrastination should correlate positively with psychological symptom severity for persons experiencing initial psychotherapy sessions. Her
reasoning was that procrastinators would probably have delayed seeking
treatment for longer intervals than nonprocrastinators and, consequently,
their symptoms would have become more severe by the time they sought
treatment.
Using the Symptom Survey 77, an instrument designed to measure
the severity of multiple psychological symptoms, Johnson surveyed 160
psychiatric outpatients at the time of their first clinic appointment. She
found significant and positive correlations between the Adult Inventory of
Procrastination Scores and symptom severity in the following areas: anxiety (.34), depression (.32), obsessive compulsive tendencies (.26), phobias
(.21), and substance abuse (.41). Furthermore, there was a positive correlation (.38) between the log function of days between the time clients first
thought about treatment and actually went for help and an aggregate
function of symptom severity. Data was aptly summarized by the comments of one client with severe anxiety: "I meant to get help for my nerves,
but I just never got around to it until it got real bad ... I guess if I didn't
put things off all the time, I might have come in (for treatment) sooner."
Notably, Johnson found only a slight reduction of procrastination
accompanying symptom improvement. This suggests that procrastination
is a stable trait, even in persons with severe psychological symptoms. It
also may indicate that procrastination is a risk factor for more severe
relapse, since clients who reexperience difficulties may not return to
treatment until their lives are substantially disrupted.
RELATION OF

AxIs II

DISORDERS TO PROCRASTINATION

Research regarding personality disorders and their correlation with

variables associated with normal personality have been hampered by

AN OVERVIEW OF PROCRASTINATION

19

diagnostic difficulty with personality-disorder assessment (Costa & Widiger,1994). The "gold standard" for personality-disorder research remains
structured clinical interviews based upon the current psychiatric Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (such as DSM-IV), which produce binary, categorical data. The use of categorical diagnoses for what are in many cases continuous phenomena has been criticized in many publications and is
beyond the scope of this chapter. Until this dispute is resolved, our position is that it is appropriate to investigate the relationship between procrastination and personality disorders, both from categorical and continuousvariable perspectives.
Only one study has used categorical diagnoses to ascertain personality disorders and their relation to procrastination. McCown (1994) has
used the Structured Clinical Interview of the Diagnosis (SCIDS), along
with a supplemental questionnaire, to ascertain personality-disorder diagnoses. This author compared procrastination scores in four groups of
subjects: borderlines, antisocials, schizoids, schizotypals, and normal
subjects. Results indicate that the borderline- and antisocial-personality
disorders had equally high procrastination scores, which were significantly different from persons who were schizoid, schizotypal, or who had
no personality disorders. A second study examined the relationship between narcissistic personality and procrastination. Persons with narcissisticpersonality disorders were significantly elevated on the Alp, compared
with normal subjects or persons with other personality disorders.
McCown et al. (1994) also used a multivariate, continuous data approach to classification of personality disorders, the Personality Disorders
Questionnaire, Revised (PDQ-R; Hyler & Reide~ 1993). The correlation of
the various PDQ-R scales and AlP scores is illustrated in Table 1-2.
These studies provide data suggesting that procrastination is related
to a wide variety of AHS II clinical disorders, including histrionic, narcissistic, borderline, and antisocial personality disorders. Procrastination is
also negatively related to paranoid and dependent personality disorders as
measured by the PDQ-R. The relation between obsessive-compulsive and
passive-aggressive personality disorders and procrastination are more
complex and will be discussed further in Chapter 8.

CONCLUSION
To date, research regarding the .direction of causality in procrastination and negative psychological states has been largely correlational and
not longitudinal. This is unfortunate, inasmuch as data do not allow a clear
understanding of whether procrastination causes psychological dysfunction or whether such dysfunction causes procrastination. Chapter 7, by

20

CHAPTER 1

Adult Inventory
of Procrastination Scores
Correlation with Personality
Disorders Questionnaire, Revised
TABLE 1-2.

PDR Scale
Schizoid
Schizotypal
Paranoid
Avoidant
Dependant
Obsessive-compulsive
Passive-aggressive
Self-defeating
Hisbionic
Narcissistic
Borderline
Antisocial
n = 165 outpatient subjects

.05
.11
-.04
.21

- .2'7"
- .11
.41"
.10
.26
.32

.39"
.36"

'p (two-tailed) < .05

"p (two-tailed) < .01

Flett, Blankstein, and Martin, presents a preliminary model suggesting

how early parental experiences cause procrastination, which in tum contributes to additional psychological dysfunction. Additional data are
needed to test their interesting hypotheses. How~ present data indicates that procrastination is a pervasive phenomenon throughout the adult
life span, although a problem that is more pronounced for both the young
and the old. Moreover, it appears related to a number of psychiatric syndromes and therefore is a topic warrantirig additional research.

CHAPrER2

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH
A SYNOPSIS OF EXISTING
RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES

Despite the lack of a singular definition of the key term and, until recently,
a relative lack of interest displayed toward this topic by the scientific
community, there have been several forays into research regarding procrastination. This chapter reviews empirical research, highlighting areas warranting further inquiry, with emphasis on contrasting the past and potential contributions of various theoretical orientations. Later chapters will
focus on specific, novel theories or new data that are presently unavailable.

PREEMPIRICAL INQUIRY
Augustine's commentary regarding sloth as one of the seven deadly
sins is well known. As we have indicated in Chapter I, Augustine's beliefs
were part of the tradition that has significantly shaped the way most
people view procrastinators (DeSimone, 1993). Howevex; the notion of sloth
implies getting someone else to do one's personal work, tasks that are
necessary for personal survival. This concept differs from procrastination
because the former involves a shirking of responsibility at someone else's
direct expense. Augustine never addressed the morality of putting off
until tomorrow behavior that was in one's own objective self-interest to
defer. Explanations of a lack of punctuality also occur in the work of many
of the prescientific moral philosophers, who attempted to understand

21

22

CHAPTER 2

individual differences. Many of these are reviewed in McCown and

DeSimone (1993).

PSYCHOANALYTIC AND PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORIES

PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORIES

In many areas of psychology, psychoanalytic theories have formed

some of the earliest comprehensive explanations of behavior (Brown, 1936).
Procrastination is no exception. The concept of avoidance, particularly
regarding specific tasks, was discussed by Freud (1953b,c), and later at
greater length by a number of his followers (e.g., Alexander, 1933; Rodo,
1933). The role of anxiety in avoidance behavior was best explicated by
Freud in the monograph Inhibitians, Symptoms, and Anxiety (1953a). Freud
believed that anxiety was a warning signal to the ego of repressed unconscious material that could be disruptive. Once it detects anxiety, the ego
institutes a wide variety of defenses. The Freudian notions of dynamic
defenses and task avoidance postulates that tasks that are not completed
are avoided primarily because they are threatening to the ego.
The obvious problem with psychoanalytic theories of procrastination,
as with most psychoanalytic formulations, is that they are extraordinarily
difficult to test empirically (Kantor, 1953), and as some more vociferous
critics have long noted (e.g., Eysenck, 1953), may be scientifically impossible to correct. As is well known, Eysenck and other neobehaviorists have
been particularly critical of the ability of psychoanalysis to explain everything and the inability of the paradigm to allow key experiments to test the
usefulness of major constructs. However, some of the first experimental
research regarding procrastination was conducted by theorists operating
from a psychoanalytic perspective and this research deserves discussion,
despite its potential ambiguity in interpretation.
Using the time period that it takes undergraduate students to fulfill
their course requirements as an operational definition, Blatt and Quinlan
(1967) studied a group of high and low procrastinators. The two groups
were compared on a number of variables. No significant differences were
found between groups on any of the following: college grade point
averages, vocabulary or information subtest-scale scores of the Wechsler
Adult Intelligence Test (WAIS), areas of academic major, number of extracurricular activities, or total scores from the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT).
However, significant differences were found between groups in a measure
relating to the perception of time. The procrastinating students had a lower
score on the picture-arrangement subtest of the WAIS, suggesting to Blatt
and Quinlan that they had a diminished ability to anticipate future events.
Furthermore, when presented with projective testlike story stems, the

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

23

procrastinating students told significantly more "present oriented" narratives than punctual students.
While a number of alternative interpretations of this data are pOSSible,
(e.g., procrastinators might be more impulsive and situation-bound by
present stimuli), Blatt and Quinlan (1967) noted that the story stems of
procrastinators produce more themes concerning death. They interpret all
of these results from an analytic view, which argues that chronic lateness is
related to an unconscious fear of death. They believe procrastination to be
an unconscious attempt to stave off mortality by showing a contempt for
constraints of the clock and calendar.
Psychoanalytic theories regarding procrastination have remained
popular, especially among psychiatrists (e.g., Anderson, 1987; Giovacchni, 1975; Jones, 1975; Salizman, 1979; Widseth, 1987). The popularity
of this perspective, despite the absence of substantial experimental support, remains perplexing to empirically oriented behavioral science researchers. On the other hand, to those who endorse the psychoanalytic
paradigm uncritically, the insistence of confirming empirical data for
processes that are most certainly difficult, if not impossible, to measure is
scientifically unreasonable. Unfortunately, the gap between psychoanalytically oriented theorists and other members of the behavioral science
community may be as wide as ever.
PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORIES

Psychodynamic theorists generally reject the rigid structure of Freudian tenets but usually endorse other aspects of the dynamic model of
human behavior championed by Freud and his followers (Levy, 1963).
Generally paramount among psychodynamic thinkers is the belief of the
primacy of early childhood on future personality development and the
belief that emotions from one period may be symbolically expressed
through methods other than direct expression. Not surprisingly then,
psychodynamic theorists frequently emphasize the symbolic aspects of
procrastination as it relates to previous childhood experiences, especially
childhood traumas (van der Kolk, 1987). They may also stress the manner
in which early childhood experiences shape the cognitive processes of
adults.
Missildine (1964), a popular writer approaching child development
from a psychodynamic perspective, is typical of a number of preempirical
authors who attempt an explanation of procrastination. He identified what
he terms a chronic procrastination syndrome. He believed that "slow, daydreaming paralysis" regarding task achievement is the final manifestation
of this syndrome, and that this syndrome is caused by faulty childrearing
practices. Missildine asserted that the procrastinating adult is plagued by

24

CHAPTER 2

parents who Novercoerced" achievement, setting unrealistic goals for their

child, and linking the attainment of these goals to parental love and
approval. Such a child raised in this environment becomes anxious and
feels worthless when he or she fails to achieve.
Later in life, when the adult child is confronted with a task that
involves an evaluation of his or her personal worth or abilities, Missildine
(1964) believed that he or she tends to reexperience and reenact these early
feelings. For example, the adult may begin dawdling and stalling rather
than attempting to meet the imposed demands. The result is a tendency to
procrastinate that baffles the previously well-functioning adult.
MacIntyre (1964), another writer in the psychodynamic tradition, also
asserted that faulty childrearing can result in procrastinating adults.
MacIntyre believed that either of two parental extremes can cause this
problem. The parent who is too permissive is likely to produce a "nervous
underachieve~ who simply becomes too anxious to meet future selfimposed deadlines. The parent who is too stem, or authoritarian, is liable
to produce an angry underachiever who touts his or her independence
from parental figures by habitual disregard for the authority of the clock.
Interestingly, these two typologies bear resemblance to those empirically
discovered by Lay (1987), McCown, Johnson, and Petzel (1989b), and
Ferrari and Olivette (1993, 1994).
A popular psychodynamic interpretation of procrastination was presented by Spock (1971) while writing for a popular magazine. Spock
postulated that unconscious feelings of parental anger express themselves
when children fail at parentally imposed tasks. Children unconsciously
respond to this anger by demonstrating a delay of future goal-oriented
behavior. When adults raised under these conditions encounter a task
requiring a significant degree of achievement, they unconsciously recall
the parental conflict. They respond to this unconscious memory and
subsequent resentment by attempting to thwart the wishes of the parental
figure who is imposing the achievement-oriented task. The result is that
they find themselves chronically unable to finish any task that is reminiscent of the early childhood conflicts between themselves and their parents. They become chronic procrastinators, with no insight into their
behavior.
The psychodynamic tradition remains very popular in self-help
books. Burka and Yuen's (1983) useful layperson's guide contains psychologically sound advice and remains popular almost 15 years after it was
written. This book highlights common fears of success and failure, as well
as anger at authority as major contributors to procrastination. The psychodynamic influence is also evident in popular articles (Gagliardi, 1984).
In critically evaluating the utility of the psychodynamic perspective

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

25

we are faced with similar problems as in evaluating psychoanalytic theory.

However, while psychodynamic constructs are often difficult to operationalize, researchers have had more success with these than with psychoanalytic theories. For example, evidence for the relation between the
general psychodynamic orientation of childhood trauma relating to pr0crastination was furnished by a study from McCown, Carise, and Johnson
(1991), who found that adult children of alcoholics were more likely to
report higher procrastination scores than other college students. In a presently unpublished study, these authors have extended these findings to
adult incest survivors, who were found to score highly on two measures of
procrastination and reported a number of difficulties regarding finishing
tasks in a timely fashion.
Research evidence also supports the role of authoritarian parenting in
the development of procrastinators. This is important inasmuch as psychodynamic theorists emphasize the importance of parenting in psychological development. Ferrari and Olivette (1994) asked 84 young women to
identify their parents' authority styles. Procrastination scores among these
women were significantly related to their father's authoritarian parenting
style. Furthermore, these women reported high rates of suppressed anger,
and they had mothers who were indecisive. In other words, female procrastinators claimed to be raised by authoritarian fathers and indecisive
mothers, and they seemed to use procrastination as a passive-aggressive
strategy to cope with this home environment. In psychodynamic terms, it
would appear that procrastination may be a way to redirect suppressed
anger at a dominating father into a socially acceptable behavior pattern.
Psychodynamic thinking has become so commonplace in our culture
that psychodynamic explanations appear to be commonplace explanations. However, we presently lack sufficient empirical research to answer
the question of the usefulness of the psychodynamic paradigm for procrastination research. Fortunately, serious scientific interest in psychodynamics has reemerged, sparked in part by an expanded methodology
furnished by nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory, which challenge
traditional notions of linear causality (Blitz, Chamberlain, & McCown,
1995). Our hope is that this research tradition can be expanded to include
the topic of procrastination.

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH AND

THE BEHAVIORAL TRADmON
Scientific attempts to understand procrastination were probably stifled by the behavioral paradigms dominant in North American and, to a

26

CHAPTER 2

lesser extent, British psychology from the 1920s to the 196Os. Procrastination usually appears to involve cognitive variables that were of little
interest to, or perhaps were even provocative for, behaviorists. Furthermore, the question of why people would put off tasks which they could
clearly be punished for failing to complete is somewhat problematic from a
behavioral perspective. Not surprisingly, then, behaviorists did little to
advance knowledge of procrastination. However, many behavioral constructs are very useful for attempting an explanation of procrastination.
Ironically, one major type of behaviorism, advocated by B. E Skinner,
generated a fairly substantial body of empirical research relevant to task
delays in academic settings.
REINFORCEMENT THEORY

The linchpin of behaviorism involves theories regarding the reinforcement of behaviors. A maxim of any of the variety of reinforcement theories
is simple: Behavior exists because it has been reinforced (Skinner, 1953).
Consequently, according to behavioral theory, students who procrastinate
probably have a history of having been successful procrastinators, or at
least of finding more reinforcing tasks than studying (Bijou, Morris, &
Parsons, 1976).
Oassical learning theory has emphasized both punishments and
rewards. Therefore, according to learning theory, procrastination should
occur most frequently in students who have either been rewarded for such
behavior or who have not been punished sufficiently for it. McCown and
Ferrari (1995b) tested this hypothesis directly. They asked a group of
college-student academic procrastinators and nonprocrastinators, as assessed by Aitken's Procrastination Inventory (API; described in Chapter
3), to recall how many times they had successfully "pulled off' a lastminute deadline. This involved completing a task with little time to spare.
Participants also were asked to recall how many times they had failed to
perform this last-minute activity successfully. Not surprisingly, and as
predicted by reinforcement theory, procrastinators could recall significantly more incidences of successful performance at last-minute deadlines
and significantly fewer incidences of being punished by external agencies
for not being punctual. Whether these results suggest differences in actual
reinforcement history, or simply differences in self-perception or recall, is a
question for further research.
Regarding the rewards of procrastination, McCown and Johnson
(1991) indirectly tested the tenets of reinforcement theory by examining
what students do when they avoid studying. Not surprisingly, students
engaged in a variety of activities that they found more reinforcing than

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

27

studying. Extraverted students tended to associate with larger numbers of

people, while introverted students tended to prefer more isolated settings.
Regardless, students tended to perform activities that were seen as more
enjoyable than studying, suggesting the utility of the reinforcement paradigm for deciphering causality of procrastination.
Regarding punishment (another important topic for behaviorists),
Solomon and Rothblum (1984) studied academic procrastination in 342
college students. They factor analyzed the reasons given by students for
individual incidences of procrastination. A general factor of "task unpleasantness" emerged from the matrix, which accounted for about one-fourth
of the variance. Students procrastinated tasks that they found unpleasant.
The belief is that many people simply do not complete tasks that are aversive, thus adding to the utility of a behavioral account of procrastination.
One hypothesis, deductible from learning theory, is that people are
likely to procrastinate actions that have more distant consequences than
those with immediate consequences (Ferrari & Emmons, in press). We
recently tested this directly in work from our laboratories. Students. were
given two brief reading tests to perform, labeled the "red" test and the
"blue" test. They were then told that these tasks could be completed in
about 30 seconds each and were quite easy. However, if students did not
complete them, they would receive mild shocks and would not get paid for
completion of the experiment. They would be shocked once and lose half
their money for failing to perform the red test and be shocked another time
and lose half their money for failing to complete the blue test. (In reality, no
students were shocked for any lack of performance and all students were
paid.)
A "sample test" which was "passed" by 100% of the students was
completed by each participant and students were told that the level of
difficulty of the red and blue tests would be "almost identical" to the
sample test. This sample test involved predicting an extremely simple
numeric sequence and selecting the choice of answers from a potential list
of responses which included only one alternative with any possibility of
being valid.
Students were randomly assigned to two groups, each receiving a
different set of instructions. The first group was told that they would be
shocked and lose half of their money 5 minutes after the experiment began
if they did not complete the blue test, and again at 10 minutes after the
experiment if they did not complete the red test. A second group was told
that they would be shocked after a 5-minute interval and lose half of their
money if they did not complete the red test, and again at 10 minutes if they
did not complete the blue test.
Students were then given an additional trial of an extraordinarily easy

28

CHAPTER 2

sample-test item and reminded that the level of difficulty of the actual red
and blue tests would be "exactly the same as the sample." The dependent
measure was the"color" of the test the students chose to solve first. In the
first condition, a significantly greater number of subjects chose the red
over the blue test to solve first; in the second condition, the results were
reversed. This is true despite the fact that, logically, it should have made
no difference which test was solved first because subjects had experience
with items and knew that they had ample time to complete both tests well
within the time limits imposed by the experimenter. Post hoc credibility
checks, which removed subjects from the analysis who believed that the
experimenter intended to deceive them with harder problems, did not
change the results. These findings support the hypothesis that tasks are
less likely to be procrastinated if there is the likelihood of punishment in
the near future, as compared to at a distant time.
Escape and Avoidance Conditioning
Contemporary learning theory is much more sophisticated than a
simple analysis of rewards and punishments. Such theory also emphasizes active and passive behaviors responsible for avoidance. The notion of
avoiding or escaping the noxious stimuli of studying seems to be an intuitive aspect relevant to an explanation for procrastination. Indeed, procrastination is seen by some writers as a means of avoiding or escaping
responsibilities (Ferrari & Emmons, in press). Parallels with learning
theory are intuitive, obvious, and warrant further exploration (Barton &
Ascione,1978).
Escape conditioning may be a useful starting point for this exploration. Escape conditioning occurs when a response terminates an aversive
stimulus after the stimulus has appeared. Strong generalization effects
appear during the initial exposure to escape situations; however, the
gradual development of discriminative properties by the aversive stimulus
narrows the performance, and low intensity of the aversive stimulus may
eventually maintain an operant escape performance that requires a more
intense aversive stimulus to establish (Mazur, 1990). It also should be
recalled that extinction of an operant escape response occurs rapidly when
presentation of the aversive stimulus is discontinued, or occurs more
slowly and erratically if the occurrence of the operant is reinforced by
withdrawal of the recurring aversive stimulus.
Avoidance conditioning is defined by the occurrence of an operant
response that postpones an aversive stimulus (Mazur, 1990). Avoidance
performances may be established and maintained in the presence or

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

29

absence of a warning stimulus preceding the aversive stimulus. When an

exteroceptive warning stimulus precedes the aversive stimulus, respondent conditioning effects operate to endow the warning stimulus with
aversive properties (Tharp & Wetzel, 1969). The termination of the warning
stimulus, following the operant avoidance response, probably combines
with the continued absence of the aversive stimulus to act as a reinforcer.
The complexity of the avoidance process is suggested by the functionally
simultaneous properties acquired by the conditioned aversive warning
stimulus as (1) an eliciting environmental event for respondent behaviors;
(2) a conditioned aversive punishe~ withdrawal of which strengthens the
operant avoidance performance; and (3) a discriminative stimulus, which
presents the occasion for operant avoidance (Skinner, 1969).
Procrastination may be seen as either escape or avoidance behavior. It
represents escape conditioning when a person begins to perform a task
and then aborts it and the task remains incomplete (Honig, 1966). Silver
(1974) described a similar phenomenon as "maintaining the procrastinating
field," in which a person engages in behaviors that are but an incomplete
and preliminary part of the entire task that needs to be accomplished. Procrastination may represent avoidance conditioning when the behavior in
question is never undertaken and is completely avoided. This is especially
true when an external stimulus serves as a stimulus for the avoidance.
What is the discriminative stimulus for procrastination? Writers as
diverse as Burka and Yuen (1983), who write out of the psychodynamic
orientation, and Solomon and Rothblum (1984), who work in the behavioral and cognitive-behavioral tradition, argue that a discriminative cue is
anxiety. Students who have extreme anxiety are most likely to procrastinate because it is more reinforcing to avoid the anxiety assodated with
studying than it is to study.
McCown and Johnson (1989a, b) expanded on this concept of anxiety
and task avoidance by a repeated measure involving daily assessment of
anxious students who were also procrastinators. Students were assessed
twice a day for 14 days. Figure 2-1 illustrates the pattern of anxiety reported
by these students and its relation to the number of hours spent studying.
Anxiety peaks early for these students and then dissipates. Studying
follows a similar pattern. Howeve~ as the exam period nears, anxiety
increases. Apparently, at a point near the exam period, anxiety rises
abruptly so that students are no longer able to avoid it by postponement of
studying. At this point comes the frantic last-minute studying that is the
hallmark of many chronic academic procrastinators. We will return to the
role of anxiety in the chapter regarding the treatment of procrastination
and also later in this chapter.

30

CHAPTER 2

100

r--------------------------------------,

10

80

60

z
>=

til

c(

w
~
~

(!)

C/)

IX:

40

:>

:L

EXAM

20

______________________________________

14

10

DAYS UNTIL EXAM

N = 56 students

1_

Anxiety

Hours studying

FIGURE 2-1. State anxiety and hours spent studying in a group of procrastinating students.

Phobias
Because phobias are assumed to have a learned component, they are
frequently included under discussions regarding behaviorism. There is a
substantial behavioral literature regarding phobic task avoidance (Gray,
1987; Marks, 1969), and occasionally procrastination seems to mask genuine phobic behaviors. For example, some people with physician and

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

31

medically related phobias avoid preventative medical care, and some

patients with generalized anxiety disorders avoid a large variety of activities. Clinically, one of the authors has treated a woman with medical
procrastination who constantly put off seeing physicians and dentists. This
woman actually had a blood phobia and fainted at the sight of other
people's blood. She was treated successfully with a combination of in vivo
therapy and the technique of Ost and Sterner (1987), which teaches clients
who are blood phobic to flex muscles in response to conditioned faintness.
In some cases, procrastination may be a simple phobia and may be rather
easily treated.
On the other hand, we doubt that the dynamics of procrastination can
be accounted for by the simple phobia model. Phobias and other major
fears traditionally assumed to be "neurotic" are invariably described by the
person experiencing them as generating a high degree of emotionality and
an awareness of the phobic stimulus. Avoidance of phobic stimuli becomes
quite "rational" insomuch as the emotional cost of performing an activity
involving the phobia can easily be recognized as being extraordinarily
high. Procrastinators, on the other hand, often have difficulty knowing
what they are avoiding. It is much harder for them to indicate a specific
event that they are avoiding in order to reduce fear.
Because of this high level of fear, phobic patients are usually quite
motivated to seek treatment, whereas chronic procrastinators may not be.
Recent unpublished work from our lab attempted to highlight the differential features of procrastination. In a laboratory analogue experiment, we
found that phobic patients would pay more than eight times as much
money to avoid a phobic stimulus as procrastinators would to avoid
performing a previously evaded task. This dramatic difference (in conjunction with the preliminary data presented in Chapter 1 showing that
phobics displayed average procrastination) suggests that procrastination
and phobias are not on a continuum, but represent categorically different
behaviors. Further research will need to determine whether the phobia
model can contribute substantially to an understanding of procrastination.
PROCRASTINATION AND SPEOOUS REWARDS

From learning theory the question arises regarding the ultimate

aversiveness of punishments regarding procrastination. If a procrastinator
is ultimately punished for his or her behavior-for example, by having to
stay up all night to meet the deadline imposed by the Internal Revenue
Service-isn't this a punishment that will eventually extinguish procrastination? Not necessarily. Basic laws of learning stress the necessity of

32

CHAPrER2

temporal connection between a behavior and its consequences in order for

consequences to have a significant effect. These are discussed under the
concept of specious rewards, one of a number of terms used to indicate the
human proclivity to choose a short-term but lesser good over a delayed
and longer-term outcome with a higher hedonic value.
Ainslie's (1975, 1992) theory of specious rewards is a positivereinforcement variation of avoidance conditioning that might shed further
light on the application of principles of learning to the understanding of
procrastination. Ainslie stated that there is a strong human tendency to
choose the short-term reward over the long-term goal, providing that the
short-term goal is immediately pleasurable. The application of this to the
procrastination theory is immediately evident: For the procrastinator, this
tendency is said to have developed into a habit. As a result, an unfortunate
feedback loop has developed. The completion of a goal is short-circuited
by the demands for leisure, increasing the anxiety associated with the task
at hand. Such anxiety tends to increase avoidance. A direct test of Ainslie's
theory as it relates to procrastination would be to place people under
conditions in which they would receive a minimal positive reward versus a
larger, but more delayed, positive reward. To date, this experiment has not
been performed. However, additional hypotheses generated from Ainslie's
theory are discussed in Chapter 4.
BEHAVIORISM AND PRoGRAMMED SYSTEMS OF INSTRUCTION

Behaviorism has been associated with one additional line of productive procrastination research. A group of behaviorists attempted to apply
Skinner's (1953) notion of personalized module-based teaching packages,
popular in the 60s and 70s. A personalized system of instruction (or PSI) is a
small unit-based module of academic material administered to a student at
his or her own pace. The concept of PSI is a direct application of Skinnerian
principles of reinforcement to the classroom (Morris, Surber, & Bijou,
1978). Typically, module packages in such systems are accompanied by
frequent feedback and positive reinforcement rather than by punishment
or negative reinforcement.
Initially, PSI curriculum held great promise for increasing school
achievement in an egalitarian fashion. In theory, students can be taught at
their own individual paces (Lloyd & Zylla, 1981). Intelligence, prior learning, sociocultural experiences, and other individual differences that might
affect traditional learning in a larger classroom could be minimized. PSI
was seen, quite legitimately, as a great tool for democratic education, one of
the first truly revolutionary restructurings of learning experiences since
the practices of John Dewey (Nelson & Scott, 1972).

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

33

However, Brooke and Ruthen (1984) noted a gradual abandonment of

the hope that programmed systems of instruction may be viable classroom
alternatives to ordinary instruction. A major barrier to utilization of this
educational tool is the tendency of many students to procrastinate completion of PSI modules. In a PSI course, students are responsible for completing a certain number of such modules, proceeding at their own pace. The
advantage of PSI is that it allows students of varying skills to obtain total
mastery of course material by spending as much or as little time as is
necessary for anyone portion of the course (Kulik, Fulik, & Carmichael,
1974). Naturally, the feasibility of such a program is dependent upon
cooperation and adequate study habits of students. Rigid deadlines requiring module completion by a particular time destroy the system's
flexibility for students having problems with particular areas and for slow
learners. On the other hand, the absence of deadlines encourages at least
some students to put off module assignments until the very last possible
minute. Such a strategy causes undue stress and a decrease in mastery and
retention of academic materials. Consequently, the successful prediction
of which students will procrastinate in a PSI class and to what extent this
procrastination will impact upon learning has been of considerable interest
to advocates of PSI.
Nelson and Scott (1972) examined the impact that academic procrastination has on PSI curriculum. They found that approximately half of the
students in one such course fell two or more units (weeks) behind during
the semester. This resulted in last-minute cramming and academic inefficiency that defeated the purpose of PSI. Lu (1976) found even more
startling results. As many as 90% of students fell behind course guidelines
at some time during a typical semester when a professor utilized a PSI
format.
Semb and Glick (1979), in a brief literature review of personalized
systems of instruction with a psychology curriculum, found that as many
as 44% of students engaged in a "beat it to the wire" strategy in such
courses, performing over half of their course work during the last week of
the course. As many as 20% of the students in such courses were found to
have sustained incompletes or to have made other arrangements to carry
the class workload over into the next semester or quarter. Additionally, the
attrition rate for PSI courses was almost twice as high as that for traditional
lecture-based courses.
Brooke and Ruthen (1984) were pessimistic about the prospects of PSI
being used constructively, despite its potentially numerous advantages.
Procrastinators in such a system circumvent its advantages, leading to
frequent course withdrawal. The authors suggested that more research is
necessary to establish personality correlates of students who do procrasti-

34

CHAPTER 2

nate in such a system, in order to generate early intervention strategies to

arrest this behavior. To date, attempts to discover personality or demographic variables predictive of procrastination in personalized systems of
instruction have not been particularly successful. Newman, Ball, Young,
Smith, and Purtle (1974), for example, failed to delineate any personality or
attitudinal differences in procrastinating students using a PSI curriculum.
However, they did find a consistent"core group" of 20-30% of otherwise
unremarkable students who tend to procrastinate regardless of the type of
curriculum. Despite these studies, there is little useful information that
teachers can surmise to differentiate potential procrastinators from other
students in the PSI curriculum (see Ferrari, Parker, & Ware, 1992).
CRITIQUE OF BEHAVIORISM AS EXPLANATION OF PROCRASTINATION

It is easy to postulate that procrastination represents a form of avoidance or escape conditioning, or that it largely can be predicted solely from
a person's reinforcement history. However, behavioral learning theory is
less effective in explaining and predicting individual differences in procrastinating behavior. Escape and avoidance conditioning are powerful forms
of conditioning and, theoretically, should exist each time an aversive task is
capable of being procrastinated. But this clearly is not the case: Some
people procrastinate much of the time; most others do not. Some people
with previous histories of punctuality procrastinate obstinately when
faced with a particular type of new task, such as a doctoral dissertation. It
is probably necessary to go beyond mere reinforcement history and look
for individual factors of the person that explain these differences.
During the last two decades in psychology it has become common to
discuss a person-environment fit perspective as necessary for causation
(Endler & Magnusson, 1976). Other authors have suggested that the
concept of person not only includes reinforcement histories, but also
temperamental or other difficult-to-change individual-differences variables.

COGNITIVE AND COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL

THEORIES OF PROCRASTINATION
Cognitive-behavioral theories of procrastination have a brief but
promising history. The distinction between cognitive and personologically
oriented theories is often one of degree. As Cattell (1983) argued, it is
frequently difficult to classify individual differences as being part of
"personality," "cognition," or "temperament." We will use the classifica-

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

35

tion schema advocated by Zuckerman (1991), who suggested that variables

with a substantial known biological underpinning be labeled as temperament and that other variables be labeled as cognition. Furthermore, the
distinctions between subtypes of cognitive schema that are hypothesized
to differentiate procrastinators from others are often arbitrary taxonomy.
Therefore, the distinctions between the purported types of cognitive
distortions outlined in the next section may be mainly heuristic.
IRRATIONAL BELIEFS

Ellis and Knaus (1977) popularized the first cognitive-behavioral

explanation of procrastination, based largely on earlier speculation by
Knaus (1973). They stated that their clinical experiences related procrastination to irrational fears and self-criticism. Procrastinators, they argued,
are frequently unsure of their ability to complete a task. Consequently,
they delay starting the task in question.
At the heart of such irrational fear for procrastinators is an inappropriate concept of what constitutes an adequately accomplished task. Failure is
inevitable; standards are simply too high. To circumvent the emotional
consequence of this failure, procrastinators delay beginning a task until it
cannot be completed satisfactorily. The payoff for the procrastinator is that
his or her avoidant behavior furnishes a convenient excuse for the inevitable failure caused by this avoidance. A task done poorly by the procrastinator can be blamed on time limitation or even laziness, rather than
inability. In this manner, procrastination serves as an ego-defensive function, not unlike that postulated in psychoanalytic theory. Furthermore, its
occurrence is perpetuated because of this reason, despite the anxiety it
seems to create in the frantic last-minute efforts of the procrastinator.
Evidence offers at least partial support for the Ellis and Knaus (1977)
theory that procrastination is related to the irrational cognitive process of
procrastinators. Solomon and Rothblum (1984), discussed previously,
studied the frequency of academic procrastination in 342 college students.
They factor analyzed the results of a questionnaire designed to detect the
reasons for student procrastination (called the PASS and discussed in
Chapter 3). They found a second general factor, again accounting for onefourth of the total variance, relating to fear of failure. Simply put, students
avoided doing assignments that they perceived could not be completed
adequately. Unfortunately, there was no attempt to ascertain to what
degree the students' beliefs were actually correct, as compared to irrational. It may simply be that students avoided tasks that they had no
ability to perform, in which case the avoidance behavior would have been
highly rational indeed.

36

CHAPTER 2

Ferrari, Parker, and Ware (1992) attempted to expand the study of

academic procrastination and cognitive beliefs using the PASS and several
personality measures. Fear-of-failure scores were significantly related to
general self-efficacy scores but not to academic locus of control. In a related
study, Ferrari (199lc) found that when given a chance to create projects
they might work on, procrastinators chose easy tasks, characterized by
being of little diagnostic ability. Nonprocrastinators chose diagnostically relevant items, presumably to gain additional information on selfrelevant variables. Procrastinators avoided such diagnostic information,
perhaps out of fear of failure. Avoiding diagnostic information would
lower the probability that self-confirmation would indicate lack of ability.
Therefore, procrastinating behavior was protective in the sense the individual is shielded from self-knowledge regarding lack of ability or competence.
SELF-STATEMENTS AND PRIvATE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS

Greco (1985) developed a self-statement inventory of cognitions associated with procrastination. He reported data suggesting that procrastinators are more likely to engage in negative self-talk, especially regarding
excuse making. This inventory was designed to be used both as an
assessment tool and as a treatment strategy. Individuals in treatment begin
by monitoring their self-statements regarding completion of specific tasks
that have caused them difficulty in the past. Once the client becomes aware
of the pattern of cognitions associated with procrastination, the general
direction of these cognitions serve as impetus for monitoring undesirable
behavioral correlates frequently found to follow these thoughts.
On the other hand, research is not universal regarding the importance
of cognitive self-statements. Rothblum, Solomon, and Murakami (1986)
noted that'~ . . high procrastinators do not differ from low procrastinators
in their study behavior or even on negative cognitions" (i.e., selfstatements) "nearly as much as they differ on anxiety" (p. 394). Furthermore, as in much of the cognitive self-statement literature, it is impossible
to determine whether negative self-statements are a cause or an effect of
procrastination. The use of self-talk and other f9rms of self-monitoring will
be discussed more extensively in Chapter 10 regarding treatment.
Since 1975, there have been approximately 200 studies on dispositional tendencies to engage in private self-awareness. A consensus of the
literature is that low self-consciousness people are more likely to avoid or
be less aware of unpleasant psychological states. It has been suggested
that private self-consciousness is related to two factors: a desire to have
more information about the self, and a desire to avoid negative information

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

37

about oneself. Ferrari (1989b) found that private self-consciousness was

significantly related to self-reported procrastination frequency, but the
magnitude of the coefficient was small (.19). No direct assessment exists,
however, on which of the two motives for private self-consciousness may
be operating with chronic procrastinators. Future research with these
variables may be fruitful.

Locus OF CONTROL AND LEARNED HELPLESSNESS

Taylor (1979) suggested that the cognitive variable of locus of control
might provide fertile ground for future research on procrastination. To
date, results with this variable have been mixed. Briordy (1980) found no
relation between self-reported procrastination and three different locus of
control scales. Ferrari et al. (1992) also reported no significant relationship
between academic procrastination (assessed on the PASS) and academic
locus of control. Aitken (1982) found a nonsignificant correlation between
her procrastination measure and Rotter's Locus of Control Scale. Howeve~
Powers (1985) found that internal locus of control was higher in nonprocrastinators. Although a relationship between procrastination and
locus of control seems intuitively logical, the current set of data suggests a
compl~ relation at best. Clearly, further research is needed. 1iice and
Milton (1987) further suggested that generalized locus of control may not
be as useful in predicting academic procrastination as an academic-specific
measure, such as the one constructed by the authors for their study.
Locus of control likely has a relation to causal attributions (explanations) regarding task success or failure. Learned helplessness, a construct
related to locus of control, has remained one of the more popular topics in
the cognitive-psychopathology literature. The so-called "reformulation" of
the learned helplessness model (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978)
has emphasized the stability of attributions regarding the environment
and personal behavior.
Rothblum et al. (1986) found that high procrastinators were significantly more likely than low procrastinators to attribute success on examinations to external and unstable factors. Both procrastinators and nonprocrastinators increased studying as a deadline loomed, but unlike the
study of McCown and Johnson (1989a,b), both groups reported less
anxiety as the deadlines approached. High procrastinators, particularly
women, were also significantly more likely than were low procrastinators
to report more test anxiety, state anxiety, and anxiety-related physical
symptoms.
Perhaps the most comprehensive study regarding learned helplessness and procrastination was the dissertation by McKean (1990), who di-

38

CHAPTER 2

rect1y tested several hypotheses from the reformulated learned helplessness

model as they apply to procrastinators. Academic procrastination was
measured by the PASS (discussed in Chapter 3). Academic procrastinators
were found to display a significantly elevated expectation of task uncontrollability, a significantly greater level for active depression, and lower
grade point averages. A key hypothesis that they would endorse a more
pessimistic explanatory style of explaining negative events was not supported. Furthermore, an attempt to demonstrate that academic procrastinators are more susceptible to laboratory-induced learned helplessness
was not supported.
IRRATIONAL PERFECTIONISM

Clinicians often claim that perfectionism is a primary motive for

procrastination (Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ellis & Knaus, 1977). Presumably, a
person procrastinates in order to gain additional time to produce the best
possible product (Ferrari, 1992b). When personal standards regarding task
completion are irrationally high, it is hypothesized that tasks are unlikely
to be completed in a punctual manner. Chapter 8 discusses the relationship of perfectionism to procrastination in detail.
DEPRESSION, WW SELF-ESTEEM, AND ANXIETY
Depression, low self-esteem, and anxiety often occur together (U\bate,
1994). At times it is difficult to draw distinctions between these syndromes,
suggesting that a common factor may be responsible for all three (Eysenck,
1970). Howeve~ despite their frequent cooccurrences, most investigators
have viewed these constructs as being somewhat independent of one
another and warranting separate study.
Surprisingly, little is known about the relationship of depression and
procrastination. Clinicians frequently report that depressed people don't
get things done promptly. Sometimes it is noted that specific failure to
complete tasks may cause depression. Intuitively, this makes sense. Most
of us have experience with feeling dejected following an inability to meet
a deadline. However, data presented in Chapter 1 indicates that depressed
people do not score higher on the Adult Inventory of Procrastination. Other
data ijohnson, 1992) suggests that procrastination may be a risk factor for
more serious depression, as well as anxiety (discussed later).
Low self-esteem is characterized by many contemporary theorists as a
product of an extensive history of failure to meet internally generated
expectations (L'Abate, 1994). Intuitively, one might expect that people with

PROCRASTINATION RESEARCH

39

low self-esteem would put off completing tasks. On the other hand,
people who do not complete tasks might very well develop low selfesteem, especially during periods of their lives when punctuality is highly
reinforced, such as during college. Data does not allow for causal inference, but does support a moderate relationship between self-esteem and
procrastination. Aitken (1982) found a correlation of -.42 between "low
self-concept" (measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept scale, Fitts, 1965)
and academic procrastination scores. Similar correlational findings have
been reported elsewhere (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1989b, 1992b) and
appear to be consistent throughout all studies in the literature.
The relationship between anxiety and procrastination is more complex
and controversial. Earlier in this chapter, we discussed how anxiety might
be a discriminative stimulus for avoidance. The role of anxiety as a cue for
task avoidance has been discussed above and appears to have some
support. A separate question involves whether or not procrastinators are
more or less anxious than nonprocrastinators. Aitken (1982) tested the
hypothesis that procrastination is related to an elevated level of anxiety.
She correlated academic procrastination scores from her inventory with a
measure of anxiety (the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale, Taylor, 1953).
Procrastination scores correlated only slightly with this measure (.21,
p < .05). Although significant, this correlation accounts for only about
5% of the total variance.
McCown, Rupert, and Petzel (1987) found a strong curvilinear relationship between neuroticism scores (as measured by the Brief Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire, Revised) and academic procrastination (as
measured by Aitken). High neuroticism scores were related with the first
and fourth quadrants of scoring on the Aitken measure. Students who
were extremely habitual and timely were more likely to be higher on the
neurotic score. Students who were extremely procrastinating were also
likely to score high on neuroticism. These authors suggest that, depending
upon other factors, neuroticism or autonomic activity can serve as either
signals to get things done or as signals to avoid things.
Lay, Edwards, Parker, and Endler (1989) report a more linear relationship between anxiety and procrastination, with anxiety increasing among
procrastinators during an exam period. Rothblum, Solomon, and Marakami (1986) report that test and trait anxiety is particularly problematic for
female procrastinators and believe that anxiety reduction is key for reducing procrastination, especially in women. The relationship between anxiety and procrastination is probably complex and depends largely on
measurement methodology. This may be because anxiety is a multidimensional mixture of both cognitive and physiological variables (Gray, 1987;
Zuckerman, 1991). Chapter 5 further discusses this relationship.

40

CHAPTER 2

TEMPERAMENTAL AND PERSONOLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS

A number of different temperamental or personological differences
have been hypothesized to be related to procrastination. As stated previously, it is often difficult to determine which variables are "cognitive" and
which are related to "traditional" theories regarding more inherent individual differences.
ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION AND PROCRASTINATION

One of the classic constructs in motivational research has been individual differences in achievement motivation-a variable that spans the
division between a cognitive and personological construct. Low negative
correlations have been found between various nonprojective measures for
achievement and chronic procrastination. Briordy (1980), for instance,
found that students who self-reported frequent procrastination showed
less achievement motivation, as measured by self-statements. Sweeny,
Butle~ and Rosen (1979) found a negative correlation ( - .30) between selfreported procrastination and achievement motivation. Aitken (1982) reported a negative correlation (- .36) between procrastination, as measured
by her scale, and achievement motivations measured by Jackson'S Personality Research Form. On the other hand, Taylor (1979) found no significant
differences in achievement motivation between procrastinators and punctual students.
To date, no studies exist to link achievement motivation, measured
projectively with the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), and procrastination. McCown (1994) examined achievement motivation in college students, including a group that was at high risk for behavioral and other
problems, due to a history of abuse. Procrastination correlated -.47 with
the need for achievement. To some extent, these effects were mediated by
the need for interpersonal intimacy, also measured by the TAT. When this
was partialed out, the correlation dropped to - .32. McCown stated that
procrastination seems to be somewhat fostered by the tendency to be
engaged in deep, intimate discussion, probably because it takes time away
from the individual who otherwise could be engaged in academic pursuits.
INTELLIGENCE AND ABILITY

More intelligent students probably have a greater capacity for successful"last minute" performance. However, the underlying assumption from
behavioral and cognitive-behavioral research is that students who showed

PROCRASI'INATION RESEARCH

41

less ability are those most likely to procrastinate. It is not surprising that
such significant differences have been found between groups on these
variables. Ferrari (1991a) compared procrastinators and nonprocrastinators
on intelligence measures. He found that they did not differ significantly on
verbal or abstract-thinking abilities, as assessed on the Shipley (1940)
Intelligence Test.
A study cited earlier is relevant to the discussion of academic procrastination and ability. Blatt and Quinlan (1967) found no significant differences between overall grade point average and procrastination. Similarly,
Newman, Ball, Young, Smith, and Purtle (1974) found that procrastination
was unrelated to grade point average, and only insignificantly related to
the final grade in a PSI class.
Several other studies appear in the literature supporting the hypothesis that academic procrastination. is unrelated to ability. Rosati (1975)
operationally defined procrastination as the number of modules completed
in a self-paced engineering class. He found no differences between procrastinating and nonprocrastinating students on grade point average or
mathematical ability. Taylor (1979) constructed a self-report questionnaire
to distinguish procrastinating from nonprocrastinating students. He also
found no significant difference between the two groups in terms of grade
point averages or WAIS scores. Ely and Hampton (1973) found that English
Achievement Tests (ACT) and a composite of algebra achievement-test
scores correlated negatively with procrastination, at least in a PSI curriculum. It is important to note, however, that these researchers used a battery
of 11 different achievement tests and found only two significant (p < .05)
correlations with procrastination. Furthermore, the multiple-regression
composite of the tests utilized accounted for only a small portion of the
total variance between procrastinating students and their more punctual
peers.
On the other hand, Morris, Surber, and Bijou (1978) found that students who procrastinated in a PSI course tended to be better students than
nonprocrastinators. This fact might be because brighter students feel more
comfortable putting off work until the last minute. O~ it also could be that
the brighter students had more difficult academic "completion" from other
courses and scarce resources of time. In this case the PSI simply was
"triaged" until later.
Aitken (1982) found that academic procrastinators actually had
slightly significantly higher math SAT scores than punctual students. This
led her to advance the hypothesis, similar to that of Morris et al. (1978),
that procrastination is more common in capable students who have learned
that they possess the cognitive abilities to perform the bulk of their course
work at the last minute and still do reasonably well in school.

42

CHAPI'ER2

The largest study regarding academic procrastination and intelligence

was conducted by McCown and Ferrari (1995a) who examined archival
data from the 1970s in a PSI-based high school. The data were interesting
because they were obtained from a Hschool without walls" where students
could pursue a number of nontraditional subjects in addition to the
requirement of completion of a certain number of PSI modules for each
academic subject. Due to this fact, there was little academic demand or
necessity for cramming. Most students who did avoid doing PSI modules
did so to participate more fully in artistic or political endeavors. Additionally, because the school drew largely upper-middle-class students, SAT
scores were available from practically an entire group and were part of the
students' records. Finally, despite the PSI nature of the curriculum, a
standardized test drawn from PSI questions was given at the end of the
year-one used by administrators to attempt to prove the superiority of
this type of program over more traditional methods.
Data analysis showed a slight, yet significant, correlation between
SAT scores and a tendency to fall behind during the semeste~ as measured
by days behind per unit (r = .14, P < .01). However, mathematics SAT
scores correlated negatively with the tendency to put off mathematics and
science modules (r = - .17, P < .01). Students who do poorly in math and
science may procrastinate these subjects in particular. In fact, maximal
procrastination was found with students who scored well on the verbal
SAT, less well on the nonverbal sections, and who procrastinated in
mathematics and science courses. Taken together, it seems that in a PSI
curriculum, high verbal ability is associated with procrastination of verbal
curriculum, while low math ability is associated with procrastination of
mathematics-based work.
Interestingly, in this study there was a very high correlation between
the measure of falling behind and the final (nonbinding) test grade (r =
.56, P < .001). The uniqueness of this measure should be emphasized. It
was not connected to final student evaluation or grade, and no feedback
was given to the student. Consequently, there was no incentive to study for
it. However, it might be stated that this measure was a legitimate sampling
of what was actually learned and retained from the curriculum. Students
who did substantial last-minute cramming learned less and retained less,
despite being able to complete PSI modules Hsatisfactorily."
IMPULSIVITY AND EXTRAVERSION

Aitken (1982) found a small, though statistically significant, correlation between self-reported procrastination and impulsivity (.21, P < .05).
She considered this partial support for one Ellis and Knaus (1977) claim,

PROCRASI'INATION RFSEARCH

43

namely that procrastination is related to an inability to delay gratification.

However, she cautiously noted that this relationship might be surprisingly
high. Her test measure, the Personality Research Form (PRF), showed a
high correlation between subscales measuring achievement motivation
and "lack of impulsivity." Although these subscales are not orthogonal, it
is likely that the impulsivity detected by the PRF for procrastinators is the
same factor as the lack of achievement the test also measures in procrastinators.
McCown (1995) examines the relationship between impulsivity, venturesomeness, empathy, and procrastination in college students and
adults. He finds significant correlations between procrastination and measures of impulsivity and venturesomeness in college students, and in
adults, only for impulsivity. He believes that the routinization of adult life,
compared with the diverse entertainment opportunities in college, provides for greater relationship between procrastination and venturesomeness, and its lack of relation in adulthood.
Regarding extraversion, McCown, Petzel, and Rupert (1987) found a
significant and quite high relation (.60, p < .01) between academic procrastination (measured by the Aitken [1982] measure) and extraversion
(assessed by the Brief EPQ-R). It is easy to see that extraversion might be
related to procrastination. Extraverts may have more distractions in completing tasks, since they are more social. Furthermore, extraverts are more
likely to need a variety of social and nonsocial stimulations (Eysenck,
1967). Consequently, they are less likely to start and finish a task in one
sitting. It should be noted, howeve~ that a correlation this high has not
been reproduced by our laboratory on subsequent occasions. Therefore, it
may be that students who volunteered for the study represented those
individuals self-selected on one of the last possible days to obtain experimental credits, and hence are a skewed sample.
CONSOENTIOUSNESS

Johnson and Bloom (1993) examined procrastination from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. This "Big Five" framework
includes the major factors of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to
Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae,
1989). Each factor is composed of several dimensions, or facets, and can be
reliably measured through use of the NEO-PI-R (Costa & McCrae, 1989).
In Johnson and Bloom's (1993) study, college undergraduates (N =
210) completed the Aitken (1982) measure of procrastination and the NEOPI-R. Multiple regression procedures yielded the factor of Conscientiousness as the major factor accounting for variance in procrastination scores.

44

CHAPTER 2

Neuroticism was also significantly related to scores. Contrary to previous

findings (e.g., McCown, Petzel, & Rupert, 1987), Extraversion was not
significantly related to procrastination scores. However, this latter finding
likely relates to the fact that the EPQ-R, used in the McCown et al. (1987)
study, differs from the NEO-PI-R in measurement of Extraversion.
Thus, when major factors are taken together, procrastinators appear
to be largely characterized by a lack of Conscientiousness. Their scores
were Significantly related to each facet of this factor, indicating that
procrastinators can be described as lacking self-discipline, dutifulness,
and order. Further research is indicated to identify the exact nature of the
relation between both Neuroticism and Extraversion, because the Johnson
and Bloom (1993) study failed to replicate previous research on these two
factors and procrastination. Although this lack of replication relates to the
differences in the measurement of these variables, future research is
necessary to further examine these differences.
DIFFERENCES IN CAPACITY FOR ACCURATE TIME PERCEPTION

A popular self-help book on procrastination (Burka & Yuen, 1983)

suggested that procrastination is related to an inability to estimate time
correctly. Burka and Yuen relied upon their clinical experiences with
treating this problem, rather than empirical findings.
As noted previously, procrastination tendencies have been associated
with a "present-oriented" perspective (Blatt & Quinlan, 1967). Wessman
(1973) found that some individuals are ineffective users of time and lack a
sense of punctuality. Gorman and Wessman (1977), uncertain about the
meaning of this fact, urged future investigators to bear in mind that there is
probably more than one dimension to time-oriented behaviors.
Aitken (1982) attempted to correlate scores on her academic procrastination questionnaire with experimental measures of the passage of time.
She administered her questionnaire to UO students, and tested them on
several measures of time estimation. No Significant correlations were
found between the procrastination scores and the following: students'
estimates of a period of 30-second intervals; intervals of 4 minutes; 20
minutes; and their estimates of how much time was left until the end of a
class period. The only significant correlation was between the procrastination scores and students' estimates of how long they thought it would take
them to do a required task (e.g., read a brief passage). Not surprisingly,
procrastinators tended to underestimate time necessary to complete a
task, while nonprocrastinators tended to overestimate this period. This
finding was replicated by McCown (1986), who found that while both
procrastinators and nonprocrastinators tend to take equal time to complete

PROCRASl'lNATION RESEARCH

45

a reading passage, procrastinators underestimate the amount of time that

they require.
McCown (1986), however, failed to find that either group was more
accurate, although nonprocrastinators tended to have higher correlations
with the actual correct time (r = .38, P < .10). For procrastinators, the
correlation was practically nonexistent. External stress applied via a distracting audio procedure failed to influence either the perception or the
actual correct time. Procrastinators also failed to inaccurately estimate the
correct time of day (Le., the question ''What time is it?") more than
nonprocrastinators.

NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL AND BIOWGICAL VARIABLES

The demarcation between personality-oriented and biological variables regarding human behavior is also somewhat arbitrary. Most authorities now recognize the role of both nature and nurture in human behavior.
In this section we will limit discussion to variables that are primarily
physiological and appear not to have a substantial component involving
learning in their development or expression.
Strub (1989) discussed a neurologic syndrome partially characterized
by procrastination. This involves a constant tendency toward putting off
major life tasks (such as buying food). Etiologically, this syndrome appears
to be due to damage to the dominant frontal or prefrontal lobes. Johnson
and McCown (1995) discussed this syndrome further, as it relates to a
variety of acquired neurobehavioral disorders. To date, however, almost
nothing is known regarding the neuropsychology of procrastination. theoretically, it is possible that less severe chronic procrastinators exhibit subtle neuropsychological deficits related to executive functioning, but currently this remains simply an interesting speculation.
Other notions of direct biological differences between procrastinators
and nonprocrastinators are merely speculative. Howeve~ neuroticism and
impulsiveness/psychoticism-variables that apparently differentiate pr<t"
crastinators from nonprocrastinators-have moderate to large genetic
components (Zuckerman, 1991). As we saw in Chapter 1, procrastination is
stressful. It is well recognized that stress causes biobehavioral changes,
including downregulation of the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis
(HPA; Leonard, 1992) and numerous other neuroendocrine and immunological changes. Consequently, it might be difficult to separate the purported biologically mediated causes of procrastination from its effects.
Although direct evidence is lacking, biology may play a role in the
subtype of procrastination that a person displays. At least two subtypes of

46

CHAPTER 2

motives have been postulated in the procrastination literature (Ferrari,

1992c; 1993a). One type of procrastinator tended to be underaroused,
hence missing appropriate cues for deadlines, whereas another type appeared to be overaroused, and hence avoided performing tasks because of
anxiety (McCown & Johnson, 1989a). Ferrari (1992c) found that scores on
Lay's (1986) General Procrastination scale loaded on thrill-seeking, sensationseeking measures, whereas scores on McCown and Johnson'S (1989c) AlP
loaded on avoiding cognitive information and low self-esteem. It seems,
then, that some forms of procrastination are motivated by arousal-seeking, a
variable with a moderate genetic component, namely sensation-seeking
(Zuckerman, 1991). Further studies should not overlook the possibility that
procrastination may have a substantial temperamental component and be
due, at least indirectly, to genetics or a genetic-environmental interaction that
has yet to be specified.

CONCLUSION.
We have outlined the use of the term procrastination, diverse explanations for this behavior, research findings, and applications. We hope this
overview provides a pragmatic framework to foster understanding of
procrastination as a psychological construct worthy of scholarly interest
and systematic study. Chapter 3 focuses on how procrastination has been
assessed through self-report measures. The psychometric properties of
seven major inventories will be presented to provide a "handbook" of
measures for future researchers and clinicians. Then, we present five
chapters discussing the role of procrastination within a number of educational, clinical, and social areas. Finally, we provide two chapters outlining
treatment protocols for modifying the behavior of chronic procrastination.

CHAPTER

ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC
AND EVERYDAY
PROCRASTINATION
THE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

As indicated in Chapter I, there is reason to believe that procrastination is

an important subject for empirical research. Tasks that are not completed
promptly may reduce both individual performance and organizational
effectiveness (Ferrari, 1993a; 1994). Furthermore, they may be a source of
stress to those individuals who are expected to complete the tasks
(McKean, 1990). Articles and books on procrastination have appeared
recently in the popular press (e.g., Burka & Yuen, 1983; Comyn-Selby,
1986; Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Gagliard, 1984; Knaus, 1973). Useful theory and
research have begun to be conducted. However, before theory construction and substantial research are performed, precise measurement of the
construct is needed. Our purpose in this chapter is to address the
psychometric properties of several self-report measures of procrastination.
Literature searches through Social Science Citation Index, Psych LIT: CD/
Rom, Psychological Abstract, Med Line and major periodicals in psychology
from 1980 to the present were performed. This process uncovered seven
procrastination inventories with two or more citations. In presenting these
measures, we have followed a standard outline that includes the following:
Purpose, Description, Psychometric Characteristics (Normative Data, Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure), and Clinical Use. In addition, if we
were able to obtain the items for published and unpublished scales, we
47

48

CHAPTER 3

have included a copy of the inventory in table format. We present the

inventories in this manner since this format has been used effectively to
describe a number of measurement techniques (d. Hersen & Bellack,
1988). Moreove~ we have used this approach to facilitate the work of both
our clinical and research colleagues.
We found in writing this chapter that procrastination inventories
measure two broad categories, namely academic procrastination and everyday
procrastination. Consequently, we categorize and present the inventories
under separate headings (see Table 3-1). Following the last inventory in
each heading, an overall discussion of the scales and suggestions for
future directions are presented.

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION
PROCRASTINATION AsSESSMENT SCALE-STUDENTS (PASS)
Purpose
The most widely used scale to explore procrastination on academically related tasks is the Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students
(PASS), developed by Solomon and Rothblum (1984). The scale was developed for research purposes to measure the frequency of cognitive and
behavioral antecedents to academic procrastination among college stu-

dents. The scale assesses the prevalence of, and reasons fo~ academic
procrastination and is a useful tool to compare self-reported procrastination with other potentially related constructs.
Description
The 38-item PASS is divided into two parts, with Part 1 assessing the
frequency and reasons for procrastination in six academic areas (writing a
term paper, studying for an exam, keeping up with weekly reading
assignments, performing administrative tasks, attending meetings, and
performing academic tasks in general), as well as the desire for change in
each of these areas. On three 5-point scales, participants respond to the
frequency procrastination in each academic area, the extent to which
procrastination caused them a problem, and the desire to stop procrastinating at these target areas. Scores may be summed for each set of items
(prevalence, problem, motivation), and a total score summed across all six
areas.
Part 2 presents the respondent with a given scenario of procrastinating
at writing a term paper and then asks for a 5-point scale rating of 13 reasons

49

TIm USE OF SELF-REPORI' MEASURES

TABLE 3-L MajOl' Self-Report Procrastination Inventories by 'Thrget CategOl'f

TItle/year of citation

Author and source

Total items!
reliability coefficient

Aaulemic behaviors
Procrastination
Assessment Scale-

Students (PASS,
1984)

Aitken Procrastination
Inventory (API,
1982)
Tuckman
Procrastination Scale
(TPS,1991)

Everday, global tendencies

General
Procrastination Scale
(GP, 1986)

Decisional
Procrastination Scale
(DP, 1982)

Adult Inventory of
Procrastination (AlP,
1989)

E. Rothblum, Ph.D.
Dept. of Psychology
University of Vermont
Burlington, VT 05405

OM. Aitken, Ph.D

B. Tuckman, Ph.D.

Dept. of Educational Psychology

Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306-1051

c. Lay, Ph.D.

Dept. of Psychology

20 items
alpha r = .82
retest r = .80

York University
4700 Keele St.
North York, Ontario
Canada M3J IP3
L. Mann, Ph.D.
Dept. of Psychology
Flinders University
South Australia,
Australia

5 items

J. Johnson, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology
Villanova University

15 items
alpha r = .79
retest r = .71

N. Milgram, Ph.D.

54 items
alpha r (time frame) = .91
alpha r (schedule) = .81
retest r = NA

Villanova, PA 19086

The Tel-Aviv
Procrastination
Inventory (TAP,
1983)

38 items
split-half
T (prevelence) = .26
r (reasons) = .81
retest
r (prevelence) = .74
r (reasons) = .56
19 items
alpha r = .82
retest r = NA
16 items
alpha r = .86
retest r = NA

Dept. of Psychology
Tel-Aviv University
Ramad Aviv, 66
Israel

alpha r = .721.80
retest r = .62/.69

Aitken's (1982) Procrastination Inventory was developed as part of a doctoral dissertation submitted to the
Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
NA = information not available

50

CHAPTER 3

for procrastinating on this task. The reasons include (1) evaluation anxiety,
(2) perfectionism, (3) difficulty making decisions, (4) dependency and
help-seeking, (5) task aversiveness, (6) lack of self-confidence, (7) laziness,
(8) lack of assertion, (9) fear of success, (10) feeling overwhelmed and
poor time management, (11) rebellion against control, (12) risk-taking, and
(13) peer influence.
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. Solomon and Rothblum (1984) based normative information on responses from 291 out of 323 university introductory psychology students (222 women, 101 men)., Most students were freshmen
(81.7%) and between 18 and 21 years of age (90%). Mean scores for the
total endorsement of procrastination on the PASS were 33.53.
Reliability. Only one study reported tests of reliability for the PASS
(Ferrari, 1989a). With 116 college students enrolled in introductory psychology, split-half (odd versus even) comparisons were performed for the
prevalence of procrastination (Part 1 subset of items) and reasons for
procrastination on an essay (Part 2). The procrastination prevalence coefficient was low (.26), perhaps because it included six different target areas,
while the essay procrastination coefficient was moderately high'(.81). Testretest reliability (1 month) with 99 of the origina1116 students (85.3%) was
.74 for prevalence and .56 for reasons, which may be more susceptible to
changes during a semester.
Validity. Total scores on Part 1 of the PASS have been significantly
related to self-reported disorganization (- .37), parental criticism (.24) and
expectations (.21), low personal standards (- .30), depression (.44), irrational cognitions (.30), low self-esteem (- .23), and trait anxiety (.13; Frost,
Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). With
community-college students (72 women and 27 men; Mage = 24; M GPA
= 2.7), Ferrari (1989: Study 1) found that total PASSlPart 1 scores were
related to self-reported self-handicapping (.48) and decisional selfconfidence (- .40), but unrelated to self-monitoring and its components
(e.g., extraversion). Solomon and Rothblum (1984) evaluated total PASS/
Part 1 scores against the length of time students (n = 161) took to complete
23 self-paced quizzes and against attendance at one of three extra-credit
classes. High PASS scorers took more quizzes at the end of the term and
more often attended the last extra-credit classes than low PASS scorers.
Rothblum, Solomon, and Murakami (1986) reported that total PASSlPart 1
scores were negatively related to course grades (- .22) and that high
scorers (117 women and 117 men), as compared to low scorers (144 women

TIIE USE OF SELF-REPORI' MEASURES

51

and 80 men), reported more anxiety, state anxiety, physical symptoms,

and attributed test success to external and unstable factors.
Several researchers have modified items on the PASS to "fit" their
population or research needs. For example, Beswick, Rothblum, and
Mann (1988) created an Australian version of the PASS. Introductory
psychology university students (216 women and 81 men) indicated their
PASS frequency scores were related to indecision (.32), irrational beliefs
(.20), low self-esteem (- .35), depression (.27), and state anxiety (.40). PASS
frequency scores also were related to lower grades on a term paper outline
(.26), final paper ( - .21), and course grades ( - .30), as well as length of time
to hand in the outline (.36) and the fmal term paper (.23). Muszynski and
Akamatsu (1991) modified the PASS to generate item categories appropriate to the long-term, independent process of completing a dissertation (the
DPASS) among clinical psychology doctoral students (n = 151). Total
DPASS scores had a coefficient alpha of .89. DPASS scores were significantly related to the number of days students took to return the scale (.22);
moreover, doctoral students who delayed in completing the degree requirements (i.e., procrastinators), as compared to "early finishers," reported more self-denigration, task aversiveness, insufficient rewards and
structure, and low frustration tolerance.

Factor Structure. Solomon and Rothblum (1984) performed a factor

analysis of students' (n = 291) reasons for academic procrastination as
assessed by the PASS. Varimax rotation of a principal axis produced a twofactor solution with eigenvalues greater than 1. The first factor, which
accounted for 49.4 % of the variance, tapped fear of failure, while the second
factor accounted for 18% of the variance and reflected task aversiveness. Fear
of failure correlated significantly with depression (.41), irrational cognitions (.30), decisional self-confidence (-.40), self-esteem (-.26) and anxiety (.23). Task aversiveness correlated significantly with depression (.36),
irrational beliefs (.23), punctuality (- .53), and self-handicapping (.35;
Ferrari, 1989; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984).
Oinical Use
To date, the PASS has not been tested with clinical populations.
Solomon and Rothblum (1984) claim that the PASS is useful to assess
the effectiveness of intervention programs on academic procrastination.
Howeve~ they do not report any data in terms of its use in treatmentprogram evaluation. Future studies may examine the usefulness of the
PASS to explore academic procrastination with younger (e.g., high school
students) and older (e.g., nontraditional-age college students) populations.

52

CHAPfER3

THE ArrKEN PROCRASTINATION INvENTORY

(API)

Purpose
A second self-report measure of procrastination cited in the literature
is the Aitken (1982) Procrastination Inventory (API), which first appeared
in her doctoral dissertation. This inventory was developed to differentiate
chronic procrastinators from nonprocrastinators among college undergraduates.
Description
The API consists of 19 items interspersed throughout a larger body of
52 items. Each statement is rated along 5-point scales from False (1) to True
(5). Table 3-2 includes only the items that formulate the procrastination
scale.
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. Aitken (1982) reported that the API scale was tested
against 120 freshmen and sophomore university students (62% women
and 38% men). No information was provided on their age, GPA, or other
demographics. The mean for the total procrastination scores was 46.4
(SD = 12.0).
Reliability. Coefficient alpha with the Aitken (1982) sample was .82.
No evaluations of temporal stability have been performed on the API.
Validity. Based on Aitken's (1982) dissertation, total scores on the API
were related positively to anxiety (.19), and negatively to cognitive structure (- .26), dominance (- .17), frustration tolerance (- .31), order (- .28),
energy level (- .26), and self-concept (- .28). In addition, total API scores
have been related to self-reported measures of dispositional procrastination with two samples (.72, McCown, Johnson, & Petzel, 1989a; .64,
McCown & Johnson, 1989b). McCown and Johnson (1989a) found that,
among university students (n = 421), API scores loaded on excessive time
constraints caused by university life, lack of accurate perception of the
time needed for tasks, and commitments to noncollege-related tasks.
McCown, Petzel, and Rupert (1987) compared 40 high- and 40 lowAPI scorers. Results indicated that procrastinators underestimated the
time needed to complete a reading task and preferred to complete simple
components over difficult parts of tasks. McCown et al. (1989b) asked a
sample of high-API scorers (121 men and 106 women) to complete measures of depression, Type A behavior, and a questionnaire on time factors.

THE USE OF SELF-REPORI' MEASURES

53

TABLE 3-2. Aitken Procrastination Inventory (1982)

For each of the items below, please indicate the extent to which the statement is more or less
FALSE (1) or TRUE (5) of you. Read each statement carefully; remember, there are no right or
wrong answers.
1 = False
2 = Mostly false
3 = Sometimes false/sometimes true
4 = Mostly true

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
7.
8.
9.

to.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

16.

17.
18.
19.

= we

I delay starting things until the last minute.

I'm careful to return library books on time."
Even when I know a job needs to be done, I never want to start it right away.
I keep my assigments up to date by doing my work regularly from day to day."
If there were a workshop offered that would help me learn not to put off starting my
work, I would go.
I am often late for my appointments and meetings.
I use the vacant hours between classes to get started on my evening's work."
I delay starting things so long I don't get them done by the deadline.
I am often frantically rushing to meet deadlines.
It often takes me a long time to get started on something.
I don't delay when I know I really need to get the job done."
If I had an important project to do, I'd get started on it as quickly as possible."
When I have a test scheduled soon, I often find myself working on other jobs when a
deadline is near.
I often finish my work before it is due."
I get right to work at jobs that need to be done.
If I have an important appointment, I make sure the clothes I want to wear are ready the
day before."
I arrive at college appointments with plenty of time to spare."
I generally arrive on time to class."
I overestimate the amount of work that I can do in a given amount of time .

= reverse score; high scores are associated with procrastination.

A factor analysis indicated three types of procrastination: Type 1 academ,ic

procrastinator, who is an impulsive person preoccupied with time loss;
Type 2 extravert procrastinator, who is energetic and slightly anxious; and
Type 3 neurotic procrastinator, who can't get a handle on finishing tasks,
with time seeming to be out of his or her control. McCown, Johnson, and
Carise (1991) also reported that, among 252 college students, 64 (35 women
and 29 men) procrastinators, as determined from the API, claimed that one
or both parents were excessive drinkers.

Factor Analysis. McCown and Ferrari (1995) performed a factor analysis on the Aitken measure. Data were obtained from 127 communitycollege students. Two factors (eigenvalues greater than 1) emerged but

54

CHAPTER 3

proved difficult to identify from item loadings. However, these factors may
tap the two previously identified on the PASS, namely fear of failure and
task aversiveness.
Clinical Use
The API scale has only recently been evaluated with populations other
than college students. McCown and Ferrari (1995) administered the inventory to 111 public high school students (78 females), mean age of 15.5, SD
= 1.1. Coefficient alpha for this population was .79, in the satisfactory
range. One month test/retest correlation was .71. No evidence regarding
validity has been obtained with high school students.
As with the PASS, this scale should be tested with younger students
in high school and with older college students. Designed to assess academic procrastination, this scale may not be appropriate with clinically
related forms of procrastination.
TUCKMAN PROCRASTINATION SCALE (TPS)

Purpose
The Tuckman (1991) Procrastination Scale (TPS) was developed recently to detect whether undergraduates tend to procrastinate at completing college requirements. This scale provides a general index of academic
procrastination resulting from a student's ability to self-regulate or control
task schedules.
Description
The TPS is actually 16 items embedded among 35 items concerning
academic behaviors. Tuckman (1991) claimed that procrastination is caused
by a combination of one's disbelief that he or she is capable of performing
tasks well, inability to postpone gratification, and frequent assignment of
blame to external sources for life "predicaments." An initial set of 72 items
was developed to examine these aspects of procrastination. The 72-item
scale was administered to 50 college junior- and senior-education majors
(age range = 19-22) and a principle component factor analysis with
orthogonal rotation resulted in a shorter, unidimensional scale version of
16-items, 4-point scales (1 = Low; 4 = High).
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. Tuckman (1991) reported that the median score was
2.5 out of a 4-point Likert scale alternative, as computed with the original

THE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

55

50 participants and the original 72 items. No description by gender, academic life, or other demographics was provided about the sample, only
major and academic rank.

Reliability. On the 35-item revised scale, the 16 procrastination items

had Cronbach alphas of .86 (n = 50) and .90 (n = 183). A previous 32-item
measure (Tuckman, 1991) had an alpha coefficient of .75. No assessment of
test-retest stability has been performed.
Validity. Few studies using the TPS have been conducted. In one
study, Tuckman (1991) reported data on an earlier 32-item TPS inventory. A
group of 64 upper-division education majors completed this earlier TPS
version and earned bonus points for writing weekly test items in educational psychology. Half the students received praise and positive feedback
for their test items. Rewarded students earned more points than nonrewarded students, even with procrastination scores covaried out. Tuckman (1991) also found that among upper-division students (n = 183), scores
on the 16-item TPS were negatively related to self-efficacy and completing
homework (-.54).
Factor Analysis. As noted above, Tuckman (1991; Study 2) factor
analyzed scores on an original, longer TPS to produce a unidimensional,
short scale on academic procrastination. Following a varimax rotation, the
16-item scale accounted for 30% of the common variance and seemed to
describe a student procrastinator who wastes time, delays, and avoids
unpleasant tasks.
Clinical Use
The TPS has not been evaluated with clinical populations. Tuckman
(1991) claimed it is a reliable test for identifying students with academic
problems early in their career. Future studies should include tests of
reliability (e.g., test-retest) and extensive validity assessments (e.g., with
behavioral indices and other construct measures). Research also is needed
to evaluate this measure with different populations (e.g., age, gender) and
subgroups (e.g., minority students).
CONCLUSIONS ON ACADEMIC MEASURES

Three measures of academic procrastination have been developed in

the past decade. The most often used inventory is the PASS, by Solomon
and Rothblum (1984), followed by the AlP (1982), and most recently, the
TPS (1991). Although variations of the PASS have been developed for use

56

CHAPTER 3

with different target behaviors and populations (Beswick, Rothblum, &

Mann, 1988; Muszynski & Akamatsu, 1991), all three inventories need to be
evaluated further. The PASS has been used most often, but its low
reliability coefficients and the length of time needed to complete both
sections may make it undesirable for some research or clinical use. By
comparison, the API and the TPS are somewhat lacking in measures of
temporal stability. The TPS also suffers from insufficient validity assessments with behavioral indices of procrastination. It also is unclear how
these scales measure academic procrastination with elementary and secondary students, nontraditional-age adult students, and minority and
special-needs students. None of these inventories has been evaluated with
school-based intervention programs designed to improve student performances, which brings their validity for clinical-treatment evaluations into
question. We hope that by providing these inventories in this chapter,
educational, clinical, and social/personality psychologists will investigate
further the utility of these three measures of academic procrastination.

MEASURES OF EVERYDAY PROCRASTINATION

Measures designed to assess academic procrastination of college
students are almost always irrelevant for use in nonstudent populations.
Regardless of whether they tap a similar construct, academic measures are
composed of items asking about academic behavior. Obviously, such
questions are inappropriate for people who are not in a school or university setting. Several measures have been constructed to assess procrastina~
tion in adults. We have labeled this class of instruments as "measures of
everyday procrastination" simply to differentiate these instruments from
those designed primarily for college students.
GENERAL PROCRASTINATION SCALE (GP)

Purpose and Description

The first major measure of self-reported procrastinatory behavior was
Lay's (1986) General Procrastination (GP) Scale. Originally designed from
two 18-item true-false inventories for academic tasks, the present 20-item
"Form G" is more global in that it examines diligence across a variety of
tasks. Most frequently the inventory has been used in a 5-point Likert scale
(1 = Very Untrue; 5 = Very True) to increase response variability. Table 3-3
shows the 20-item, 5-point-scale version of the GP scale, and items with
asterisks should be reverse-scored.

THE USE OF SELF-REPORI' MEASURFS

57

TABLE 3-3. General Procrastination Scale (1986)

On a scale of 1 (IJW VALUE) to 5 (HIGH. VALUE) please answer each of the following items.
These statements are concerned with your opinions on different situations. No two statements are exactly alike, so please consider each statement carefully before responding.
Answer as honestly as possible. Thank you.

1 = False o'f me
2 = Not usually true for me
3 = Sometimes false/true for me
4 = "Mostly true for me
5 = we of me
1. I often find myseH performing tasks that I had intended to do days before.
2. I often miss concerts, sporting events, or the like, because I don't get around to buying
tickets on time.
3. When planning a party, I make the necessary arrangements well in advance.
4. When it is time to get up in the morning, I most often get right out of bed.
5. A letter may sit for days after I write it before I mail it.
6. I generally return phone calls promptly.
7. Even with jobs that require little else except sitting down and doing them, I find they
seldom get done for days.
8. I usually make decisions as soon as possible.
9. I generally delay before starting on work I have to do.
10. When traveling, I usually have to rush in preparing to arrive at the airport or station at
the appropriate time.
11. When preparing to go out, I am seldom caught having to do something at the last
minute.
12. In preparing for some deadlines, I often waste time by doing other things.
13. If a bill for a small amount comes, I pay it right away..
14. I usually return a "R.S.v.P." request very shortly after receiving it.
15. I often have a task finished sooner than necessary.
16. I always seem to end up shopping for birthday gifts at the last minute.
17. I usually buy even an essential item at the last minute.
18. I usually accomplish all the things I plan to do in a day.
19. I am continually saying "I'll do it tomorrow."
20. I usually take care of all the tasks I have to do before I settle down and relax for the
evening.

= items are reverse-scored.

Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. The inventory was constructed by asking 110

introductory-psychology students to respond to 18 true items and 18 false
items. The 20 items selected from the origina136 items were those that
were most highly interrelated. No demographic information (e.g., age,
gender ratio, race) was provided, nor was a median/mean response on the
scale.

58

CHAPTER 3

Reliability. Several studies indicated a Cronbach alpha of .78 (Ferrari,

1991c; n = 53), .82 (Lay, 1986; Study I, n = 76), .83 (Lay,1986; Study 3, n = 62
adults), .85 (Lay, Edwards, Parker, & Endler, 1989; n = 63), and .86 for men
(n = 122) and .88 for women (n = 215; Lay, 1987). Test-retest reliability (1
month) was .80 (Ferrari, 1989a; n = 132; Mage = 19.5).
Validity. Lay (1986) conducted three validity studies. Study 1 participants (n = 110 university students) were administered the GP and seven
other scales, and were asked to return completed scales by mail. Overall
semester grade point averages in four courses, the length of time to finish a
2-hour final exam, and exam scores also were recorded. Of the 81 scales returned, 76 forms (61 women and 15 men) were useable. High-procrastination
scorers took longer to return scales, but GP scores were not related to
official GPA, test-taking time, or exam scores. GP scores were related
positively to neurotic disorganization (.69) and rebelliousness (.34) and
negatively to organization (- .49). Study 2 participants (n = 156 university
students) were asked to list all their personal projects at 1-,2-, and 3-week
intervals and to rate these projects on 18 ~ensions. Based on a median
split of scores, high procrastinators (n = 44), as compared to low procrastinators (n = 45), across time reported spending less adequate time
working on daily-life projects and more time on projects perceived as
highly visible to others. In Study 3, airport passengers were asked to
complete and return the GP scale and a measure of cognitive failures. Of
the 89 passengers approached, 62 returned the measures and scores were
significantly higher by later returnees than early. GP scores also were
related positively to cognitive failures, like forgetting (.40).
Using a modal profile analysis, Lay (1987) reanalyzed the data from
Lay's (1986) Study 2 participants. He found that procrastination scores
loaded on a profile of neurotic disorganization and rebelliousness with
personal projects of high stress and difficultly, and low progress. Procrastinators also loaded on a profile with low-energy level and need for
achievement with projects that were low in stress and difficulty, and high
in progress. In a second study, 215 women and 122 men completed the GP
scale and 14 other measures. For women, procrastination loaded with
neurotic disorganization, high-cognitive failures, low self-esteem, and
energy level. For men, procrastination loaded with neurotic disorganization and either high other-directed self-monitoring, low sensitivity for
rejection, or high private self-consciousness and low stimulus screening.
In addition, it was reported that optimistic procrastinators, compared
to pessimistic procrastinators on this scale, underestimated the time
needed to complete a literature search and final term pape~ and procrastination and optimism scores were inversely related (- .15; n = 105; Lay,
1988). Sixty-three Canadian high school seniors (whose age would be

THE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

59

similar to American college freshmen) classified as high procrastinators

claimed that they would study differently at stages prior to an exam as a
way of coping with anxiety, although procrastination scores were not
related to state or trait anxiety (Lay et al., 1989). In another study (Lay,
1990), 72 college students completed the GP scale and evaluated a list of
personal projects they were to complete in the next several weeks. Projects
were rated on task aversiveness, likelihood of failure, and extent to which
adequate time was spent on the tasks. Procrastinators spent less time on
short-term projects and more time on projects more likely to fail than
succeed than did nonprocrastinators.
Scores on the GP scale also have been correlated with self-reported
indecisiveness (.46), self-handicapping (.30, .39, and .46), low self-esteem
(-.23), public (.26 and .31) and private (.20 and .21) self-consciousness,
social anxiety (.13 and .26), cross-situational variability (.21 and .29),
attention to social comparison (.35 and .41), concern for appropriate social
behavior (.38), defensive avoidance (.34), rationalization (.30), buckpassing (.56), protective (.23) and acquisitive (.31) self-presentation, and
perfectionism (.34; Ferrari, 1989b; 1991c; 1991d; 1992b). Ferrari (1991a)
found that high- and low-GP scorers (procrastinators and nonprocrastinators, respectively) reported a diffuse identity (a tendency to avoid selfrelevant identity information), but were not significantly different in verbal
or abstract intelligence.
High (n = 24) compared to low (n = 24) GP scorers also indicated that
they would avoid diagnostic information about their cognitive ability when
performance feedback was provided (Ferrari, 1991c). However, in another
study (Ferrari, 1991d), high (n = 39) and low (n = 36) GP scorers indicated
in public- and private-performance conditions that they considered socialability tasks to be more attractive, personally relevant, and likely to
be performed well. However, procrastinators preferred to complete a
cOgnitive-ability task when their performance was public.
Self-handicapping tendencies also were examined by procrastinators
who were identified in part by the GP scale (Ferrari, 1989b; 1991b). Female
college students (M age = 18.3; SD = 0.5) with extremely high GP scores
(n = 57) were more likely to actively self-handicap their task performance
(choosing the presence of a distracting, debilitating noise) on a bogus
cognitive-thinking ability task than women with extremely low GP scores
(n = 63). In another study (Ferrari, 1992a) working-adult college students
(78 women and 78 men) completed the GP scale in a social-comparison
situation. High (n = 90) compared to low (n = 66) GP scores indicated
that a male business colleague labeled a Hprocrastinator" at work tasks was
responsible for his poor performance and should be fired or not allowed to
continue his regular job duties.
Excuse-making tendencies by procrastinators faced with a real-world

60

CHAPrER3

task deadline-Christmas shopping-also were studied (Ferrari, 1993a).

Between Thanksgiving and Christmas Eve, GP scores increased among
adult holiday shoppers (n = 120; Mage = 38.4), and GP scores were related
to the length of time shoppers took to redeem a mall gift certificate (.43).
Furthermore, high (n = 56) compared to low (n = 64) GP scorers attributed
postponing gift purchases to external, job-related variables as potential
excuses for delays. Ferrari (1992b) found that for high GP scorers (n = 168)
perfectionistic behavior loaded with acquisitive and protective selfpresentation, social anxiety, and self-handicapping (indicating a protective
Ngetting alon~ with others factor for doing fine work). For low GP scorers
(n = 139), perfectionism loaded only with acquisitive self-presentation (suggesting a striving for excellence motivation by Ngetting ahead" of others).
Ferrari (1992c) also administered the GP scale to two samples of
college students (Sample 1-30 women and 22 men; Sample 2-44 men
and 15 women). The first sample was mature adult students (M age = 32),
whereas the second sample contained traditional-age college students (M
age = 19.5). All participants were asked to complete and return the GP
scale before their last exam. Their test scores and test-taking time also were
recorded. GP scores were related to the length of time to return scales in
Sample 1 (.58) and Sample 2 (.40), but not to test scores or test-taking time
in either sample. In a second study with mature students, 134 women and
81 men completed the GP scale and measures of cognitive avoidance, selfesteem, and sensation-seeking. GP scores loaded on a factor containing
sensation-seeking alone. In short, it appears that the GP scale assesses a
Hthrill-seekin~ motive for procrastination (i.e., working against a deadline to increase arousal).

Factor Analysis. Factor analysis of the 20 items by Lay (1986) suggested the items reflecting diligence at everyday tasks loaded together.
Academically related items were eliminated from the final GP scale to
produce a unidimensional measure for dispositional procrastination. No
information on the type of analysis, percentage of variance, or other details
of the factor analysis were presented.
Oinical Use
The GP scale has not been tested with any clinical population. It
remains unclear how this measure would assess procrastinatory behavior
among certain pathologies. Future research should explore its use with
these populations. However, the GP scale has been tested with noncollegestudent populations. In fact, this scale has an advantage over other
measures in that it has been widely tested across settings, responses, and

61

THE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

populations. Nevertheless, further research is needed on cross-cultural

verification of the GP scale, its usefulness to evaluate treatment programs
focused on decreasing procrastination, and its effectiveness to identify
procrastinatory behaviors in different clinical disorders.
DECISIONAL PROCRASTINATION

(DP) SCALE

Purpose
Developed by Mann (1982), a well-known decision-making theorist at
Flinders University (Australia), the Decisional Procrastination (DP) scale
examines procrastinatory behavior as it relates to important decisionmaking situations. The scale is based on the conflict theory of decision making
by Janis and Mann (1977). In that theory, procrastination (i.e., indecision) is
treated as a maladaptive coping pattern used when persons are faced with
conflicts and choices.
Description
The DP scale is composed of 5 items, originally on a 3-point scale that
later was converted to a 5-point Likert scale (1 = low; 5 = high). These 5
items are embedded with 5 other decision-making styles (e.g., buckpassing, vigilance, rationalization) for a total inventory of 31 items. The
items focusing on decisional procrastination, or indecision, address the
tendency to put off decisions by doing other tasks. Table 3-4 presents
the DP scale items.
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. The items selected for the final version of the DP
scale were chosen from items piloted with Australian introductorypsychology students (n = 262) using the 3-point rating scale (0 = low; 2 =
high). The mean score was 2.92 (SD = 2.16; L. Mann, personal communication, January 8, 1988).
Reliability. The DP scale has reported Cronbach alphas of .72 and. 80,
and test-retest scores (1 month) of .62 and .69 (Beswick et al., 1988; Mann,
1982).
Validity. Scores on the DP scale have been related to self-reported
scores on academic procrastination (.32), locus of control (.36), low selfesteem (- .39 and - .46), steady-state orientation (.70), forgetfulness and
absentmindedness (.42), impatience (.29), and noncompetitiveness (- .23;

62

CHAPTER 3

TABLE 3-4.

Decisional Procrastination Scale (1982)

People differ in how they go about making decisions. Please indicate how you make decisions
by selecting the response from 1 (low) to 5 (high) to each question that best fits your usual
style.
1 = Not true for me
2 = Often untrue for me
3 = Sometimes true/false for me
4 = Often true for me
5 = 1l:ue for me
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

I waste a lot of time on trivial matters before getting to the final decision.
Even after I make a decision I delay acting upon it.
I don't make decisions unless I really have to.
I delay making decisions until its too late.
I put off making decisions.

NOTE: Typically; these items are embedded among a set of items exploring coping strategies to decision
making situations. See Janis and Mann (1977) for details.

Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989). In one study (Ferrari, 1989b)
with 72 women and 27 men enrolled in introductory psychology at a
community college (M age = 24, SD = 6), DP scores were related to selfhandicapping (.30), low self-confidence at making decisions (- .21), and
unrelated to self-monitoring. With 119 other community-college students
(M = 24, SD = 5), DP scores were related to scores on behavioral
procrastination (.47), self-handicapping (.45 and .49), low self-esteem
(- .44), public self-consciousness (.21), and social anxiety (.38). Indecision
also has been a predictor of academic procrastination, such as delays in
submitting a term pape~ missing deadlines, and nonattendance as a
research participant (Beswick et al., 1988)
Ferrari (1991a) selected female procrastinators and nonprocrastinators
(extremely high and low scores, respectively), on two procrastination
scales, including the DP scales. In Sample 1, from among 241 women at a
public college in introductory-psychology courses, 46 procrastinators and
52 nonprocrastinators were selected. Procrastinators reported lower selfesteem and higher public self-consciousness, social anxiety, and selfhandicapping than nonprocrastinators. In Sample 2, from among 287
women attending a liberal arts college and enrolled in introductory psychology, 48 procrastinators and 54 nonprocrastinators were selected using
the same criteria as with Sample 1. Procrastinators claimed to have a less
information-oriented and more diffuse-oriented identity style than nonprocrastinators. Neither group differed significantly in verbal or abstract
intelligence.
In another study, Ferrari (1991b) selected high-scoring (n = 57) and

63

mE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

low-scoring (n = 63) procrastinators from scores on both the DP and Lay's

(1986) procrastination scales. Among these individuals, scores between
both procrastination scales were significantly related (.88). Participants
then were assessed randomly on one of four conditions, in which they
could choose the presence of a distracting, debilitating noise when their
performance on either a (bogus) diagnostic or nondiagnostic task was
public or private to a female experimenter. Procrastinators (49.1%) were
more likely than nonprocrastinators (30.2%) to self-handicap by requesting that the noise be present.

Factor Analysis. No factor analysis has been performed, nor does it

seem appropriate with a 5-item scale.
Oinical Use
To date, this scale has been used almost exclusively with nonclinical
populations (i.e., college students, primarily women) to assess their tendency to be indecisive. The usefulness of this measure with clinical
populations (e.g., depressives, obsessive-compulsives) seems apparent
and worthwhile for investigation (see Ferrari & McCown, 1994). Future
researchers also may wish to include this scale to examine the cognitive
processes of indecisive and other types of individuals, including their
ability to process information quickly and how they seek information
when making decisions (Clark, Boyer, & Ferrari, 1993; Zelinsky, Ferrari, &
Dovidio, 1994). In addition, the DP scale may be an important addition to
studies designed to evaluate interventions focused on promoting decision
strategies.
ADULT INVENTORY OF PROCRASTINATION

(AlP)

Purpose
McCown and Johnson (1989a,c) developed the Adult Inventory of
Procrastination (AlP) to meet the need for a measure of procrastination not
limited to traditional-age college undergraduates. This scale has been
through numerous revisions, and perhaps as an indication of the reticence
the authors feel regarding the scale's contents, they have been reluctant to
publish a "final" version of the instrument.
Description
The AlP originally contained 16 items, but 1 item ("1 have a problem
with procrastination") was eliminated because it directly sensitizes respondents to the scale's purpose. Consequently, the AW is a 15-item scale

64

CHAPTER 3

in which respondents rate the extent to which they disagree (1) or agree (5)
with each item along a Likert scale. Seven items are reverse-scored and
ratings are summed for a single-scale score. High total scores reflect a high
tendency toward diligence. Table 3-5 presents the lS-item AlP, and items
with asterisks should be reverse-scored.
In its original form, the authors constructed the inventory as a 7-point,
instead of S-point, Likert-type measure. The authors also experimented
with a 9-point scale. However, subsequent work failed to produce any
meaningful differences between the 5- and 7-point scales. Ferrari, particularly, has preferred the S-point Likert-type version because it seems more
understandable to students.
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. Scale development involved 431 undergraduates

enrolled in lower division psychology courses in three institutions. One of

TABLE 3-5. Adult Inventory of Procrastination (1989)

These statements are concerned with your opinions on different situations. No two statements are exactly alike, so please consider each statement carefully before responding.
Answer as honestly as possible with the following rating scale.
1 = Strongly disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Sometimes disagree/sometimes agree
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly agree
I pay my bills on time."
I am prompt and on time for most appointments."
I lay out my clothes the night before I have an appointment so I won't be late."
I find myself running later than I would like to be.
I don't get things done on time.
If someone were teaching a course on how to get things done on time I would attend.
My friends and family think I wait until the last minute.
I get important things done with time to spare."
I am not very good at meeting deadlines.
I find myself running out of time.
I schedule doctor's appointments when I am supposed to without delay."
I am more punctual than most people I know."
I do routine maintenance (e.g., changing the car's oil) on things I own as often as I
should."
14. When I have to be somewhere at a certain time my friends expect me to run a bit late.
15. Putting things off till the last minute has cost me money in the past year.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

"items are reverse-scored.

mE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

65

these was an East Coast community college, the second a Midwestern

university, and the third a Southern university. The mean score for this
sample was 36.21 (SD = 14.11, McCown & Johnson, 1989b). The mean age
for this group was 19.2 years, with 211 subjects beingJemale.
Reliability. McCown and Johnson (1989a) reported that the AlP has a
coefficient alpha of .79 (n = 40 adult students, Mage = 38.3), and retest
reliability (1 month) of .71 (n = 22 third-year medical and social-work
graduate students). Subsequent research has suggested a higher reliability
among nonstudents. McCown and Johnson (1989b) found a coefficient
alpha of .86 for a group of1lD adults (M age 37.2) and a 6-month test-retest
of .76.
Validity. Construct validity measures on the AlP indicates high
scores are related to inefficient time management (.49), time loss (.59),
impulsivity (.51), neuroticism (.63), and depression (.52; McCown & Johnson, 1991; McCown, Johnson, & Petzel, 1989b). Scores on the AlP also have
been significantly related to Aitken's (1982) procrastination scale (.64, n =
44, McCown & Johnson, 1989a; .72, n = 227, McCownetal.,1989b), but not
to scores on Lay's (1986) general procrastination scale (Ferrari, 1992c). This
suggests that Lay's inventory measures a different construct.
McCown and Johnson (1989b) reported several studies on the predictive validity of the AlP measure. For instance, scores on the AlP were
predictive of less studying time by 48 undergraduates (- .24) and with 40
third-year medical students (- .27). Among adults (M age = 39.4) who
completed the AlP by phone (36 women and 26 men), AlP scores were
related to the number of bills paid late in the past year (.29). With a sample
of 50 homeowners who were mailed the AlP and asked to return it
completed within 3 days, 13 out of 17 early returnees had low AlP scores.
Results of another study showed that 40 adults who filed their income
taxes in February, compared to 40 adults who filed in April, had significantly lower AlP scores.
Ferrari (1993a) examined the validity of the AlP to predict diligence at
a real-world task deadline-Christmas shopping. Across five weekends
between Thanksgiving and Christmas Eve, 30 adult shoppers (M = 38.4)
per weekend were asked to complete the AlP and answer several questions
about shopping time preference. Respondents received a gift certificate
redeemable for up to 6 months at any mall store. Inventory scores were
higher among shoppers on Christmas Eve than 5 weeks earlier, and were
related to length of time to redeem the certificates (.24). Moreover, extremely high AlP scores (n = 62), as compared to extremely low AlP
scorers (n = 58), were more likely to attribute their diligence at shopping to

66

CHAPTER 3

self/personal factors (e.g., lack of energy, indecisiveness, dislike of shopping), as opposed to situational factors (e.g., weather, current sale prices,
business affairs).
In another validity study, Ferrari (1992c) found that among nontraditional-age, working-adult college students (n = 52), AlP scores were
significantly related to the number of days taken to return completed
scales (.65), but not exam scores or test-taking length of time. Furthermore,
scores on the AlP by 215 adult respondents (M age = 34; 134 women and 81
men) enrolled in psychology courses at a large urban university were
factor analyzed with scores on other personality measures. Results indicated that AlP scores loaded on a factor involving low self-esteem and an
avoidance of self-relevant cognitive information. It would appear that the
AlP assesses procrastinatory behavior motivated by an avoidance strategy
to protect one's self-esteem.

Factor Analysis. McCown and Johnson (1989b) stated that the scale
was constructed out of 36 items administered to 431 undergraduates.
Items were factor analyzed using an oblique rotation producing four
factors, using the criteria of a scree test. One factor represented general
procrastination, and items loading .5 or greater were selected. One item,
which addressed procrastination directly, was dropped, and the 15 remaining items formed the AlP. Specific meanings of the other three factors
are unclear from the item loadings.
Clinical Use
The validity of the AlP to measure diligent behavior has been tested in
a limited number of studies. Its clinical use was illustrated in Chapter 1.
The fact that it is designed for mature, nonstudent populations makes the
scale attractive to psychologists and other behavioral scientists interested
in adult behaviors. In addition, since it seems to measure avoidance
motives for procrastination, it may be desirable to research and clinical
psychologists. Howeve~ future students need to report on the effectiveness of the AlP with a number of target responses, clinical populations,
and experimental tasks before utility of the measure is clearly delineated.

THE TEL-AVIV

PROCRASTINATION

(TAP)

INvENTORY

Purpose
Sroloff (1983) developed the Tel-Aviv Procrastination (TAP) Inventory
to assess two measures of procrastination in tasks of everyday living: time

THE USE OF SELF-REPORT MEASURES

67

frame, and ease of scheduling and schedule adherence. The first investigates when a person does a particular task-that is, early or late in the
respondent's personal time frame for that particular task. The second
investigates the ease with which a person schedules when to do a given
task and whether he or she adheres to the schedule once set. The first
kind of measure has been used in other procrastination scales, the second
has not.
Description
The TAP Inventory instructs respondents to rate 54 tasks twice on
4-point scales. In the time frame instructional set, respondents rate when
they do the task: promptly, fairly promptly and well before the deadline, a little on
the late side, but before the deadline, or at the last minute, if at all. In the ease of
scheduling and schedule adherence set, respondents classify themselves
as falling into one of four categories with reference to each task: promptly
schedule when to do the task and do it on schedule; delay scheduling when to do the
task, but once scheduled, do it on schedule; promptly schedule when to do the task,
but do not do it on schedule; and delay scheduling when to do the task and do not
do it on schedule. Milgram, Sroloff, and Rosenbaum (1988) found that
ratings by the two instructional sets were highly correlated (.67). They
concluded that people who schedule tasks promptly and adhere to their
schedules tend to do these tasks relatively early in their personal time
frame. The two instructional sets are not, however, equivalent. The time
frame instructional set should be used for routine purposes and the other
set should be used when differential relationships of the two instructional
sets to relevant variables are expected.
The TAP Inventory consists of 38 items on everyday tasks (e.g., doing
the dishes, paying the telephone bill), 10 work-related tasks (e.g., asking
your employer for a raise, preparing assignments at work), and 6 academic
tasks (e.g., being on time to lectures, checking your latest grades).
Psychometric Properties

Normative Data. Sroloff used an initial sample of participants for a

student project in 1983 to develop the TAP Inventory, but his honors' paper
was unavailable for this chapter. However, Milgram et al. (1988) reported
data with a second sample of 314 college students (210 women and 104
men) enrolled in introductory psychology at an Israeli university. These
students were older than traditional American college students (M age =
24.7) because of an Israeli policy of completing 3 years of compulsory
military service before one enters higher education. Mean scores for time-

68

frame and schedule-adherence subscales were 2.1 (SD

= 0.3), respectively.

CHAPTER 3

= 0.4) and 1.8 (SD

Reliability. Milgram et al. (1988) report coefficient alphas of .91 and

.81 for time-frame and schedule-adherence scales, respectively. Intercorrelates between scales were .67. No measure of temporal stability for the TAP
inventory has been reported.
Validity. Psychometric validation of the TAP Inventory has been
reported in two studies. Milgram et al. (1988) asked two samples of
students (n = 64 and n = 60) to rate the 54 tasks on 4-point scales four times
in succession according to the following instructional sets: time frame
procrastination set; a "dysphoric affect" set (degree of pleasure versus
displeasure associated with doing each task); a "duress" set (whether
respondents do the task freely or under duress); and a "perceived incompetence" set (whether they do this kind of task well or poorly). When item
ratings were collapsed across the 54 items and across samples to yield
summed scores, procrastination was related to dysphoric affect (.58), to
duress (.49), and to perceived incompetence (.23), providing support for
the construct validity of procrastination as measured by the TAP. Further
evidence of the TAP's construct validity was its negative relationship to self
regulation (- .35), life satisfaction (- .22), and Type A hard-driving and
time urgency factors (- .57 and - .31, respectively), in a sample of 230
students.
A second study (Milgram, 1988), was the mirror image of the Milgram
et al. (1988) study in assessing the opposition of task aversiveness and
procrastinatory behavior. The author developed a new inventory of 24
tasks that varied in importance, complexity, and personal desirability.
There were 8 tasks on routine life chores of relatively minor importance, 8
tasks of moderate importance in which the respondents take the initiative,
and 8 externally-imposed and stressful or aversive tasks with which the
respondents must cope. With 77 Israeli university students (40 women and
37 men, Mage 23.7), these tasks were rated three times in succession on
5-point scales-first for the importance that respondents attach to doing a
given task well and on time; second for their promptness versus delay in
scheduling and planning the task; and third, for their performance in
doing the task. Respondents were more prompt in scheduling and planning and more successful in performing tasks they considered important
than those they considered unimportant (.45 and .43, respectively).
Scheduling-planning efficiency and task performance were highly correlated (.83). The former was associated with two measures of well beinggreater current life satisfaction (.25), and less current dysphoric affect

THE USE OF SELF-REPORI' MEASURES

69

(- .33)-providing further support for the validity of a procrastinatory

measure based on ratings of a representative series of specific tasks.

Factor Analysis. No factor analysis of the TAP inventory items has

been performed. The categorizing of tasks into everyday, work-related,
and academic were performed a priori to any research study.
Oinical Use

The TAP Inventory was designed to assess behavioral delay in performing a representative sample of tasks of everyday life and has consequently been used thus far only with normal populations. It is worthwhile
to investigate its validity with clinical populations of compulsive procrastinators to ascertain whether procrastination generalizes across all phases
of their functioning. The authors recommend its use in research on the
relationship between daily hassles and mental and physical health outcomes and propose that: A high daily hassle index is the direct result of
pervasive, chronic procrastination with reference to the recurring tasks of
daily life; and efficient planning and scheduling and performing on
schedule are teachable skills that will reduce procrastination and associated distress and thereby contribute to greater well-being. Both hypotheses should be vigorously tested. The two TAP subscales show promise for
research and clinical assessment because they provide operationally independent measures of inefficient time management and deficiencies in
scheduling when to do things and following through. Future studies
should undertake a factor analysis of the two TAP subscales and investigate their discriminant validity in non-Israeli populations. In addition,
more and varied validity studies are needed on the TAP inventory and on
scales derived from this assessment approach.
CONCWSION ON MEASURES OF EVERYDAY PRoCRASTINATION

This section outlined four current measures of procrastinatory behavior cited at least twice in the professional literature. By far, the most oftenused scale was the GP scale, followed by the AlP scale, DP scale, and TAP
measures. As with measures of academic procrastination, these inventories need to be evaluated further in a number of areas. For example,
reliability measures of temporal stability are needed with the TAP, as well
as cross-cultural evaluations for its usefulness with populations other than
the Israeli students. The GP and AlP scales have been tested with mature,
nonstudent adults, yet they should be evaluated further, perhaps with
younger individuals. Noncollege-student populations (mature adults and

70

CHAPrER3

younger children) also should be studied using the DP and TAP measures.
Only the AIP has been substantially used with clinical populations to
diagnose procrastinatory behaviors. Only the AIP has been frequently
used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment programs to reduce procrastinatory behavior. (This is discussed further in Chapters 9 and 10.) Future
studies should address the utility of these scales with both clinical populations and clinical-intervention programs.
Furthermore, studies should compare and contrast these scales to
determine if any, or all, are necessary and sufficient measures of procrastination. Possibly, all four measures are not needed. Preliminary research
(Ferrari, 1992, 1993a) indicates that two scales assess different motives for
procrastinatory behavior, thereby suggesting they be used for different
research purposes. However, no other comparisons between or across
measures exist. It is possible that the use of an inappropriate measure
would result in erroneous conclusions, either wrongly supporting or rejecting one's hypothesis. Therefore, it is important to ascertain which
measure is appropriate for which target goal.
In summary, a number of self-reported measures exist on procrastinatory behavior. These recent measures have both research and clinical
promise. Still, further research is needed to establish their validity across
settings, behaviors, and respondents. Moreover, investigations that compare and contrast these measures are needed in the literature for social!
personality and clinical psychologists.

CHAPI'ER4

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION
THEORETICAL NOTIONS,
MEASUREMENT, AND RESEARCH
HENRI

C.

SCHOUWENBURG

It has been estimated that over 70% of college students engage in procrastination (Ellis & Knaus, 1977). Solomon and Rothblum (1984) concluded

that academic procrastination may depend on the task: Among university

students in an introductory psychology course, 46% of students reported
procrastination when writing a term paper, 30% when reading weekly
assignments, 28% when studying for exams, 23% on attendance tasks, and
11% on administrative tasks. In addition, they examined possible causes of
academic procrastination, as perceived by students. Results indicated that
fear of failure and task aversiveness were the primary motives reported.
These motives have been replicated with Dutch university students as well
(Schouwenburg, 1992a).
The first part of this chapter will review various theoretical notions on
the manifestations and underlying psychological mechanisms of academic
procrastination. More specifically, types of procrastinatory behavior, the
issue of irrationality, the assumed relationship with fear of failure, the
nature of trait procrastination, and a presumed function of academic
procrastination, will be discussed. These aspects then will be integrated
into a working hypothesis with respect to the nature and function of the
phenomenon. In conclusion, procedures for the treatment of academic
procrastination will be suggested. In the second part of this chapter, selfreport instruments for measuring different aspects of academic procras-

71

72

CHAPTER 4

tination will be presented. Finally, research projects using these instruments will be evaluated.

MANIFESTATIONS OF PROCRASTINATORY BEHAVIOR

Strictly speaking, procrastination is the behavior of postponing tasks
(Burka & Yuen, 1983). Accordingly, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) define
procrastination as the act of needlessly delaying tasks to the point of
experiencing subjective discomfort. This definition identifies procrastination with dilatory behavior (procrastination in the strict sense), but additionally characterized by "needlessness" (Ellis & Knaus, 1977), and by
Usubjective discomf~ (Burka & Yuen, 1983). The criterion of needlessness seems to be adequate, because not all late performing of tasks must be
called procrastination. The criterion of subjective discomfort, however,
seems to be too confining; procrastinating does not necessarily imply
suffering.
What can be observed in procrastinating students, however, is that
they begin studying much later than would be optimal. This delay may be
because their study behavior is not in accordance with their stated intentions (Milgram, Sroloff, & Rosenbaum, 1988), but also because their
intention to begin studying is delayed. Consequently, both an intentionbehavior discrepancy and a lack of promptness in intending to perform
and performing study tasks may be observed. In addition, procrastinating
students are easily distracted toward behaviors other than studying (e.g.,
social activities). These obvious preferences for competing activities are
characteristic of procrastinators (Silver & Sabini, 1981).
Although the term procrastination refers to postponing of tasks, such
postponing is inferred from three behavioral manifestations: (1) lack of
promptness, either in intention or in behavior; (2) intention-behavior
discrepancy; and (3) preference for competing activities.
PROCRA5fINATION AND IRRATIONAL THOUGHT

The authors of an early lay book on procrastination, Ellis and Knaus

(1977), viewed procrastination as a habit or trait, stemming mainly from a
self-defeating philosophy. They believed such a philosophy to include an
uabsolutistic demand to do well at almost anything," as well as the
conviction that upresent pains for future gain" are unbearable (Ellis &
Knaus, 1977). Decisions based on this philosophy are necessarily irrational
and, as a consequence, produce inefficient behavior. At the same time,
feelings of inadequacy are supposed to be the emotional consequences of

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

73

this behavior. Such feelings amplify irrational thought and inefficient

behavior. Procrastination would be overcome by disrupting this selfdefeating chain of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (Ellis & Knaus, 1977).
Burka and Yuen (1983), discussing both academic procrastination and
general, everyday procrastination, labeled the unrealistic assumptions
under which procrastinators operate the "Procrastinator's Code." These
assumptions are private beliefs, such as:
I must be perfect.
Everything I do should go easy and without effort.
It's safer to do nothing than to take a risk and fail.
These beliefs constitute a way of thinking that can make it impossible to
move beyond the inevitable obstacles of daily living. Such beliefs keep pr0crastinators from making any progress, and create repeated frustration.
In contrast with this view, irrational thought can be viewed as a
result-that is, as an attempt by the individual to make sense of a more
fundamental phenomenon involved in both academic and general procrastination. This is the familiar phenomenon that people tend to devaluate
future events in favor of nearer ones (Ainslie, 1975, 1992). For students
deciding to watch TV tonight, instead of studying for an examination that
is due a few weeks late~ this phenomenon is in operation. Although in
itself of a lesser value, the perceived value of watching TV now is temporarily higher than the perceived value of passing the examination, which
objectively is of greater value later. In Ainslie's well-documented view,
such temporary preference for a short-term activity of a lesser value over a
long-term activity of a greater value is a function of both the ratio of values
involved, and the (inverse) ratio of the delays in obtaining the rewards
associated with these activities (Ainslie, 1992). Thus, prospectively, the
students' decision to watch TV instead of studying follows from a quite
general "matching law" (Ainslie, 1992). In retrospect, however, watching
TV instead of studying must be judged as irrational.
FEAR OF FAILURE AND PROCRASTINATION

Because fears generally produce avoidance, achievement-related fear,

or fear of failure, 1 is believed to result in avoidance behavior. In educational
settings, this avoidance behavior may be easily confused with academic
procrastination. For example, being late in choosing the moment to start
ITests of fear of failure consist largely of items referring to evaluation anxiety and test anxiety.
Although these concepts may differ in general, in educational settings they may be regarded
as identical.

74

CHAPI'ER4

studying may be an act of academic procrastination, but it may also reflect

fear of failure with respect to the examination to come. Consequently,
academic procrastination may be viewed as resulting from fear of failure.
In effect, Rothblum (1990) proposed an avoidance model of academic
procrastination. According to this model, students with high fear of
failure will experience worry and anxiety as the deadline for a task
approaches (e.g., an examination). This anxiety is reduced by stimulus
avoidance (procrastination), resulting in relief from anxiety and, consequently, in reinforcement of avoidance behavior.
The avoidance model of academic procrastination finds support in
clinical observations (Burka & Yuen, 1983) and empirical studies. For
example, college students have been asked to state their reasons for
academic procrastination (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984; Schouwenburg,
1992a), indicating fear of failure as one of the principal motives. However,
self-reported reasons for procrastination should be regarded as attributions, not as causes. Attributions of seemingly irrational behaviors (e.g.,
watching TV while having to study for an examination) as subsequent
interpretations of such behaviors, in the first place, serve the purpose of
restoring consistency among behaviors and thoughts. Achievement of
consistency, in its turn, is a necessary step in maintaining self-esteem for
the procrastinating student (Snyder & Higgins, 1988). A "cause" interpretation of attributions of procrastinatory behavior should, therefore, be
mistrusted.
Instead of a result of fear of failure, academic procrastination may
simply be a general tendency or habit to procrastinate or to "postpone that
which is necessary to reach some goal" (Lay, 1986). Such a personality trait
interpretation of procrastination is, in effect, shared by many authors on
general procrastination (e.g., Ferrari, 1991b; Milgram, Sroloff, & Rosenbaum, 1988). Whether trait procrastination and fear of failure have psychological characteristics in common should be decided empirically. Therefore, I conducted a study involving measures of trait procrastination and of
fear of failure (H. Hermans, 1976) with various subsamples of university
students. Table 4-1 shows the results.
The lower, right segment of the table displays the correlation coefficient for the sample as a whole (r = .09; n = 318). This clearly indicates that,
in general, trait procrastination and fear of failure are unrelated. As further
noted in this table, high, medium, and low scores of trait procrastination
and fear of failure define 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the empirical
distributions. By combining the two subdivisions, 9 independent subsampIes were obtained. The correlation coefficients for these subsamples,
included in the middle segment of the table, were tested against the
hypothesis that the true correlation coefficient in the 9 subsamples is the

75

ACADEMIC PROCRASrINATION

Correlations of ProcrastinationFear of Failure for Various Subsamples

TABLE 4-1.

Procrastination
Low

Fear of failure
Low

= 19)

-0.41
(n

= 25)

(n

= 21)

0.14

High

Total

(n

= 65)

= 44)

0.15
(n = 103)
-0.16
(n

= 33)

(n

= 180)

0.03

0.06

(n

High

-0.21

0.10

(n

Medium

Medium

Total
0.14

0.39

(n

= 14)

-0.01
(n = 38)
0.63
(n = 21)
0.28
(n

= 73)

(n

= 77)

0.14
(n = 166)
0.01
(n = 75)
0.09
(n = 318)

Source: Schouwenburg, 1992b.

same (Hays, 1973). For the subsample of high fear of failure and high
procrastination, this hypothesis was rejected (p < .05). For the remaining 8
subsamples, it was not rejected. Thus, both traits were strongly related
only in students with a high score on both trait procrastination and fear of
failure. For all other students, this relationship was close to zero.
It may be argued that students reporting both extremely high procrastination and fear of failure would be most likely to consult student
counselors or psychologists. In educational research, however, researchers
select participants sampled from the complete spectrum of possible values
of trait procrastination and fear of failure (Ferrari, Parke~ & Ware, 1992).
Based on the results presented earlie~ procrastination and fear of failure
are unrelated with most students. Consequently, the fact that fear of
failure and procrastination are related may be due to selective perception.
Thus, in students who have a strong habit of procrastination and who
suffer from extreme fear of failure, avoidance behavior and procrastinatory
behavior are probably identical. This is not necessarily the case in other
students. On the other hand, fear of failure or test anxiety is a respectable
phenomenon among students. As was recently noted by Covington (1993),
the test anxious student is the perfect "blameless victim." For this reason
fear of failure is, in retrospect, very well suited to serve as an explanation
for procrastinatory behavior.
In summary, there is no doubt that some procrastinators do suffer from
high levels of fear of failure. It has been estimated that 6-14% of the
procrastinating students also display high levels of fear of failure (Rothblum, 1990). Although exact percentages will depend on the selection

76

CHAPrER4

criteria for scores, their data can actually be taken to indicate that, for most
procrastinating students, fear of failure is rwt the main issue. Indeed, fear
of failure and procrastination are generally unrelated (Schouwenburg,
1992b). Nevertheless, strong correlations may appear, depending on the
selection of subjects. In addition, fear of failure seems to play a role as an
excuse for academic procrastination.
PRoCRASTINATION AND ''THE

BIG FIVE"

Some students who procrastinate are. apparently more habitual procrastinators, whereas others are not and appear to procrastinate only
during discrete periods of their lives or over specific courses. In students
for whom procrastination has become a habit, we may regard their procrastination as a personality trait. Thaits are assumed to be relatively enduring
response dispositions that will manifest themselves in a wide variety of
stimulus situations (Wiggins, 1973). This robustness of traits allows us to
draw conclusions from empirical studies in which procrastination is measured in connection with other psychological variables.
In empirical studies of academic procrastination, both academic and
trait procrastination reduce largely to a dimension that also includes motivational variables. Fear of failure, on the other hand, loads on a different
dimension. This independence of procrastination and fear of failure has
been demonstrated repeatedly, as can be seen in factor analyses of three
sets of variables, derived from my own research from 1990-1992. Table 4-2
lists the variables contained in each of the three sets.
listed in sequence, these variables were assessed by a Dutch studyskills inventory (Vorst, 1989), a standard Dutch achievement-motivation
test (H. Hermans, 1976), a standard Dutch personality questionnaire
(Luteijn, Starren, & Van Dijk, 1985), Beck's Depression Inventory (Beck,
Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961), a Dutch version of Spielberger's Test Anxiety Inventory (Van der Ploeg, 1988), Lay's General Procrastination Scale, Solomon and Rothblum's (1984) Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students, and three items from Strong's Procrastination Log
(Strong, Wambach, Lopez, & Cooper, 1979). In addition, variables were
assessed by the Procrastination Checklist Study Tasks (see Table 4-4), the
Academic Procrastination State Inventory (see Table 4-5), and the Study
Problems Questionnaire (see Table 4-6).
Factor analysis of these three datasets (principal components, followed by varimax rotation) yielded a two-factor solution in which all the
procrastination variables grouped in Factor 1, and all emotional disturbance variables grouped in Factor 2 (Table 4-3). To most research psychologists in the field of personality, interpretation of the two factors obtained is

77

ACADEMIC PROCRASI1NATION

TABLE 4-2.

Three Sets of Variables (1990-1992 Studies) for Factor Analysis

Variable
Planning and time management
Planning and time management (rating)
Optimizing working environment
Optimizing working environment (rating)
Self-control
Self-control (rating)
Hope for success
Fear of failure
Inadequacy/neuroticism
Social inadequacy
Rigidity
Hostility
Egotism
Dominance
Self-esteem
Depression
Test anxiety: worry
Test anxiety: emotionality
Thtit procrastination
Academic procrastination
Rating academic procrastination
Academic procrastination: log doing other things
Academic procrastination: administrative tasks
Academic procrastination: attending lectures
Academic procrastination: preparing exams
Academic procrastination: lack of promptness
Academic procrastination: attending examination
Academic procrastination: intention-behavior discrepancy
Task aversiveness
Lack of autonomy
State academic procrastination: doing other things
State evaluation anxiety
State (low) study motivation
State lack of self-discipline
Study problems: low work discipline
Study problems: lack of study motivation
Study problems: fear of failure
Study problems: study stress

Set 1

Set 2

601
426
603
426
596
426
277
277
278
278
278
278
278
278
278
98
602
599
776
585
592
413
731

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

780

734
688

781
699
183
183
493
504
504
323
783
786
787
785

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes

Set 3
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes

yes

yes

yes
yes

yes

yes

yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

yes

78

CHAPTER 4

TABLE 4-3. Varimax Rotated Principal Components (Two-factor solution)

Factor 1

Factor 2

Variable

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Planning and time management

Planning and time management
(rating)
Academic procrastination (PASS)
Low work discipline
'frait procrastination
Academic procrastination: intentionbehavior discrepancy
Rating academic procrastination
(PASS)
Academic procrastination: prepared
for exams
Academic procrastination: lack of
promptness
Hope for success
Self-control
Self-control (rating)
State academic procrastination:
doing other things
Optimizing working environment
Optimizing working environment
(rating)
Lack of study motivation
State lack of self-discipline
State low study motivation
Academic procrastination: attending
lectures
Task aversiveness
Fear of failure
Study problems: fear of failure
Inadequacy/neuroticism
Test anxiety: emotionality
Test anxiety: worry
Study problems: study stress
Social inadequacy
Self-esteem
Hostility
State evaluation anxiety
Depression
Lack of autonomy in study tasks
Percentage of variance explained

-0.88

-0.89
-0.78

-0.78

0.83
0.83
0.79
0.75

0.82
0.82
0.80
0.74

0.81
0.77
0.77

0.70

0.71

0.69

0.70

0.68

0.61

-0.68
-0.66

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

-0.11

-0.11
-0.15

-0.16

-0.06
0.18
0.09
0.17

0.00
0.27
0.12
0.10

0.28
0.17
0.05

0.00

0.04

0.75

0.18

0.17

0.16

0.53

-0.08

-0.22

-0.15

-0.33
-0.22
0.33

-0.22
0.36

-0.08

-0.09
-0.06

-0.02

0.53

0.18

0.52
0.50

0.11

0.28
0.41
0.40
0.05

0.06
-0.34

-0.64
-0.71
0.67

-0.73
0.62

-0.52

-0.53
-0.49

-0.50

0.51

0.48
0.67
0.51
0.44

0.59

0.45

0.09

0.48
0.01
0.14
0.30
-0.01
0.06
0.15
0.09
-0.46
0.12

29.80

0.10

0.08

-0.05
0.03
0.14

-0.12
-0.02
0.15

0.28
0.27

0.26

38.00

0.12
31.60

0.26
0.39
0.02
0.24

0.85
0.81
0.79
0.79
0.76
0.68
0.62
-0.56
0.55

15.60

0.85

0.84

0.80
0.82
0.71

0.79
0.80
0.71

0.79
0.66

0.77

12.70

0.46
12.70

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

79

obvious: Both factors can be identified as "Big Five" dimensions of personality (Digman, 1990; John, 1990).
Specifically, Factor 1 comprises time management, work discipline,
self-control, hope for success, and study motivation, next to trait procrastination and procrastinatory behaviors. This factor may be identified as the
personality dimension of Conscientiousness. This dimension has been
given many other labels in the past: Will to Achieve, Strength of Character,
Superego Strength, Responsibility, Dependability, Prudence, Constraint,
and Work (Digman, 1990). Moreover, Conscientiousness has been an
impressive predictor of indicators of educational achievement, such as
grade point average (GPA; Smith, 1967; Wiggins, Blackburn, & Hackman,
1969; Digman, 1989). Also, Romine and Crowell (1981) showed that underand overachieving university students can reliably be differentiated in
terms of a discriminant function that can be equated with the dimension of
Conscientiousness. Recently, Costa, McCrae, and Dye (1991) observed that
individuals low in certain aspects of Conscientiousness are prone to
procrastination, and quickly give up when faced with frustration. Similar
findings were reported by Johnson and Bloom (1993), reported in Chapter 2.
Factor 2, comprising inadequacy/neuroticism, fear of failure, test
anxiety, evaluation anxiety, study stress, and depression, must be identified with the familiar dimension of anxiety or emotional (in)stability. Since
Eysenck (1970), the label Neuroticism is generally used for this factor. This
fmding is quite in line with previous research suggesting that procrastination correlates with Neuroticism (e.g., McCown, Petzel, & Rupert, 1987).
Both Conscientiousness and Neuroticism have been considered two
basic dimensions of personality within a "Big Five" taxonomy Oohn, 1990).
This taxonomy is rooted in half a century of systematic inquiry into the
major dimensions of personality description, which is still continuing
(e.g., Hofstee, De Raad, & Goldberg, 1992). The five factors constituting
this taxonomy have proved to be extraordinarily robust. They have been
observed both at the adult and the child levels, in ratings and in questionnaire data, and across different languages and cultures (Digman, 1989). To
a considerable extent, these factors seem to be heredity-based (Heath,
Neale, Kessler, Eaves, & Kendler, 1992): Zuckerman (1991) estimated that
heredity typically accounts for 50% of the variance of most personality
traits covered by the "Big Five" taxonomy, a point that was discussed in
Chapter 2.
In conclusion, then, where most theoretical considerations with respect to procrastination (and test anxiety or fear of failure) associate
procrastinatory behavior and concomitant subjective discomfort, the three
independent sets of correlational data presented in Table 4-3 corroborate
the earlier conclusion that both variables are, in effect, unrelated. Moreover, these results suggest that the former seems to point to the influence of

80

CHAPTER 4

"Big Five" factor Conscientiousness, and the latter to the independent

influence of "Big Five" factor Neuroticism. Consequently, both procrastination and anxiety may vary freely in individuals. Interestingly, these
results are not incongruent with findings by Lay (1987) and McCown,
Johnson, and Petzel (1989b), which, using independent methods, found
two types of procrastination, one that appears to be related to neuroticism
or overarousal, and another that seems to be related to a lack of conscientiousness and impulsiveness.
PROCRASTINATION AND SELF-WORTH

According to Covington and Beery (1976), students are motivated to

achieve competitively, and are inclined to derive their sense of self-worth
from their ability to do so. From the competitive nature of their achievement motivation, it follows that ability status among peers is an important
condition for self-acceptance. As a consequence, maintaining their ability
status is an important goal for students. Consequently, students strive for
success and try to avoid making the impression that they are incompetent.
In Covington's (1993) view, students have developed a number of
defensive ploys for attempting to avoid failure. One class of failure-avoiding
tactics is composed of so-called "self-handicapping strategies" (Baumeister & Scher, 1988; Ferrari, 1991b). In such strategies, failure is set up, but
readily excused. According to Covington (1993), academic procrastination
belongs to this class. Covington and Beery (1976) presented the following
characteristics of this process:
By putting things off until too late the student sets up his own failure, but he
does so in such a way as to avoid the shameful implication that he lacks ability.
He can now attribute failure to other things and argue, in effect, that his poor
performance is not representative of what he can really do and therefore is not a
fair measure of his ability and even less of his worth. In short, this becomes a
kind of "failure with honor." The irony of all this is that by his own actions the
failure avoiding student may actually set up overt failure in his desperate
attempts to avoid feelings of failure. Thus this student becomes his own worst
enemy. He continues to harbor doubts about his ability because he is unwilling
to test his limits by trying his hardest. He fears that he might be inadequate, but
what he fears even more is finding out. (p. 9)

In Covington'S view, academic procrastination is a coping behavior for

managing academic stress. People, however, differ in their coping styles.
As a means of cataloguing students with respect to their coping style,
Covington employs need achievement theory (Covington & Omelich, 1991;
Covington, 1993). Need achievement theory (Atkinson, 1964) explains how
achievement motivation is supposed to work. The theory holds that
achievement can be viewed as resulting from an emotional conflict between two opposing forces: a motive to achieve success, or Hope for

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

81

Success (HS), and a motive to avoid failure, or Fear of Failure (FF).

Achievement behavior is thus the result of an approach-avoidance conflict, depending on which component appears to be strongest. Accordingly, achievement motivation has been treated as a product of both forces
HS and FE People whose HS exceeds FF are considered success-oriented,
while people whose FF exceeds HS are labeled as failure-avoiding. Recently, however, Covington and Omelich (1991) challenged this unidimensional interpretation of achievement motivation by providing empirical
evidence for the existence of four separate groups of students, each
characterized by a relatively high or low position on the original concepts
ofHS and FE
These student groups have been labeled as (1) overstriving students
(high HS, high FF), who suffer from fear of failure but are not procrastinators; (2) success-oriented students (high HS, low FF), who do not procrastinate or suffer from fear of failure; (3) failure-avoiding students (low HS,
high FF), who are academic procrastinators who suffer from fear of failure;
and (4) failure-accepting students (low HS, low FF), who are "pure" academic procrastinators, not suffering from fear of failure.
In my 1990 study (n = 278), both measures of Hope for Success and
Fear of Failure were included. This allowed me to replicate and supplement part of the Covington and Omelich (1991) study. My results showed
that the Hope for Success dimension was associated with self-control,
study skills (especially planning and time management), and 'both academic and trait procrastination. The Fear of Failure dimension, on the
other hand, was associated with inadequacy/neuroticism and test anxiety.
As a consequence, I would identify Covington's dimensions with "Big
Five" factors Conscientiousness and Neuroticism.
In recapitulation, Covington'S analyses show that academic procrastination in students may serve the important goal of preserving feelings of
self-worth by avoiding situations in which they might fail. However, some
people are habitually more inclined toward procrastinatory behavior than
other people. In Covington'S terms this is the case with two categories of
students: failure-accepting students, who are characterized by traits from
the negative pole of the "Big Five" dimension Conscientiousness, and
failure-avoiding students, who are also characterized by traits from "Big
Five" dimension Neuroticism. Rothblum's (1990) contention that avoidance
behavior may serve the goal of anxiety reduction probably applies only to
failure-avoiding students.
INTEGRATION INTO A WORKING HYPOTHESIS

According to Milgram, Sroloff, and Rosenbaum (1988), academic

procrastination typically is regarded as a task-specific behavior rather than

82

CHAPTER 4

a generalized trait. Consequently, its etiology has been ignored and only
symptomatic treatment in the form of improved time management and
study habit techniques has been offered. As we have shown, this statement is not accurate because most authors who seek explanations of
procrastinatory behavior postulate a personality trait.
As we have seen, however, the term procrastination applies to various
phenomena. First, we can call any sample of dilatory behavior procrastination. Second, we can reserve the term for the habit of postponing things
and imply a personality trait. Third, we can also use the term procrastination for any single manifestation of the personality trait. This is the statetrait distinction, already made by Cicero in the year 45 B.C. (Eysenck,
1993). Procrastinatory behavior appears to be diverse; by the term academic
procrastination we may designate: (1) postponing the moment one is intending to begin studying; or (2) postponing the moment that actual studying
is to begin; or (3) study intention-behavior discrepancy; or (4) doing
things other than studying.
Ellis and Knaus (1977), by observing that most procrastinators know
that they are procrastinating and yet do not manage to stop, inferred an
emotional disturbance. This emotional disturbance leads people to denigrate themselves, to suffer from low self-esteem, and to be depressed.
These characteristics are clearly associated with one of the most wellknown, broad personality dimensions-Neuroticism or emotional instability. In relation to academic achievement, this dimension is represented
by fear of failure. In addition, Ellis and Knaus observed that procrastinators demonstrated a lack of frustration tolerance. Such a trait seems to be
characteristic of the broad personality dimension of Conscientiousness
(Costa et aI., 1991).
According to Ainslie (1992), however, procrastinating knowingly does
not necessarily imply emotional disturbance. Rather, this phenomenon is a
consequence of a general motivational mechanism that involves time delay
of future events. Consequently, procrastination is only seemingly irrational. As the effects of this mechanism can be countered to a large extent
by deliberate effort, it seems probable that people characterized by traits
on the negative pole of the Conscientiousness factor (i.e., trait procrastination) are especially susceptible to this mechanism.
As Neuroticism and Conscientiousness are independent, broad personality dimensions, traits derived from these dimensions may vary freely
within a person. Consequently, both trait procrastination and fear of
failure may be present in academic procrastinators. Because academic
procrastinators who, in addition, suffer from fear of failure (Covington's
failure-avoiding students) seem to be the preeminent clients of student
counselors and clinical psychologists, such a selection of procrastinating

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

83

students may have given rise to theoretical notions in which fear of failure
plays a predominant role.
Moreove~ theoretical notions on academic procrastination have been
based on attributions made by procrastinating students, of which fear of
failure appeared to be one of the favorites. In my view, attributions of
academic procrastination may serve two different goals: one is to reduce
the apparent irrationality of procrastinating knowingly, the other is to
maintain feelings of self-worth (Covington & Beery, 1976). The former goal
is served by any plausible excuse, whereas the latter goal is served by the
excuse of fear of failure par excellence (Covington, 1993). By claiming fear
of failure, a student sacrifices his chances for success in exchange for
the benefit of a respectable excuse. By doing so, the student is selfhandicapping.

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

In Chapter 9 a comprehensive treatment strategy for academic procrastination for college students is discussed. However, the following
points probably warrant preliminary discussion. From the various views
on processes related to academic procrastination, different suggestions for
treatment may be derived. These may help the reader form a cognitive
schema for the remaining theoretical chapters, as well as the treatmentoriented chapters that conclude this volume.

1. Changing the Procrastinator's Code. Since procrastinators deeply cherish and tenaciously hold unrealistic private beliefs, attempts at changing
the Procrastinator's Code have been the main objective of treatment for
academic procrastination.
2. Changing the parameters of Ainslie's ratio. From Ainslie's view, it
follows that academic procrastination should be countered either by increasing the (perceived) reward value of the long-term activity (i.e.,
passing the examination), or by decreasing its delay. One possibility of
increasing the relative value of passing an examination could be the explicit
precommittment of the student to the explicitly stated goal of studying for
that examination (e.g., some study contract). At the same time, a decrease
in examination delay could be attained by changes in the educational
setting/ that is, by shortening time intervals between examinations.
3. Personality management. A hereditary basis of the personality structure involved in academic procrastination may be considered as the source
of an error in adjustment that may be readjusted by deliberate (though
perhaps ongoing) efforts. For adjustments in the sphere of Conscientious-

84

CHAPTER 4

ness, such deliberate efforts may be directed at strengthening of work

discipline by methods of operant conditioning, or at expanding the student's perceived ability to achieve by means of time-management training
(Ziesat, Rosenthal, & White, 1978). Behavioral psychotherapy, on the other
hand, seems indicated for adjustments in the sphere of Neuroticism, since
this method of treatment seems effective in reducing neurotic symptoms.

MrnASUREMENT:THEDEVELOPMrnNT
OF NEW INSTRUMENTS
In the course of my research project, beginning in 1989, the development of theoretical notions on academic procrastination was accompanied
by a process of construction of various tests for measuring academic
procrastination in its diverse manifestations. A total of 792 Dutch university students (both genders and across age groups and study departments)
has participated in this process. They were requested to complete que~
tionnaires in exchange for free admission to academic-skills courses of
their choice. Such courses included Social Skills, Study Skills, Fear of
Failure Management, Writing Papers, Addressing an Audience, Applying
for a Job, and so on. As a consequence, subjects have been sampled from
various subpopulations of university students.

THE

PROCRASTINATION

CHECKUST STUDY TASKS (PCS)

While focusing on intention-behavior distinctions, I developed (in

collaboration with a former student, Reinout de Vries) a checklist of
possible study actions that would be comparable for students of all
university departments. For inclusion as checklist items, single actions of
study behavior were sampled from three task areas: administrative tasks,
attendance at lectures, and preparation for exams. Because the actions
sampled had to be applicable to students of all different departments,
study behavior in the three areas could be measured by only a few actions.
Further, the time scale of the three task areas varied: administrative tasks
comprise actions performed only once an academic year; lecture attendance was limited to the present or last term, whereas preparation for
exams was limited to the last three exams prepared for. Because of these
constraints, the content of the resulting checklist was rather heterogeneous, although obviously of high face validity.
Thus, the Procrastination Checklist Study Tasks (peS) consists of
three parts; in each part the checklist enumerates study actions, and
presents statements with respect to promptness of execution (a-item), in

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

85

combination with statements regarding the accompanying intention (b-item).

In order to obtain (a-b) discrepancy scores, response formats for a- and

b-items are identical. The items and instructions are listed in Table 4-4.

Subscales were formed by summing discrepancy scores (a-b) for each

part of the checklist; a total pes score was obtained by summing the three
partial-scale scores. In addition, two promptness scales were formed by
summing both a- and b-items separately across the three parts of the
checklist. The internal consistency (n = 687) for the first two discrepancy
subscales (A and B) was rather low: .25, and .42, respectively. Internal
consistency for the third subscale (C), and for the totalll-item scale, in
contrast, was reasonable (.66 and .68, respectively). The internal consistency for the behavioral promptness scale was .60, and for the intentional
promptness scale was .42.
Subscales A, B, and e correlated .28, .30, and .51, respectively, with
trait procrastination. Although study behavior in the context of preparing
for an examination (part C) may be more affected by trait procrastination
than the other academic behaviors, the higher correlation coefficient for
part e may also reflect better internal consistency of the latter subscale.
The correlation of the total pes score for behavior-intention discrepancy
with trait procrastination amounted to .53. Behavioral promptness and
intentional promptness correlated .56 and .19, respectively, with trait
procrastination. Clearly, the relatively wide time scale of the pes allowed
for factors other than trait procrastination in determining academic procrastinatory behavior. This may be due to errors in recall or to other
(environmental) influences. In addition, the differential relationship of
both promptness scores with trait procrastination may require an explanation. Theoretically, howeve~ procrastinatory behavior of the first type
(performing tasks late) may be attributed to intention delay, probably
resulting from judgment errors; in practice, lack of promptness seems to
apply mainly to behavior, resulting in behavior-intention discrepancies
(second type of procrastinatory behavior). This may be an indication of
distractibility or lack of discipline in academic procrastinators.
THE ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION STATE INvENTORY (APS!)

To measure the third aspect of academic procrastinatory behavior

(doing things other than studying), while allowing for temporal variation
in procrastinatory behavior, I constructed (in collaboration with a former
colleague, Froukje Buma) a state inventory of study behaviors possibly
associated with academic procrastination-the Academic Procrastination
State Inventory (APSI). This inventory, designed to measure changes or
fluctuations in academic procrastination, was factor analyzed in order to

86

CHAPfER4

TABLE 4-4. Procrastination Checklist Study Tasks (pes)

Part A: At the start of the present or last academic year, you had to do a few administrative
tasks. Please indicate how you did these tasks in comparison with your intention to do them.

1. a. Registered as a student . . .
b. Intended to do so . . .
(upon receipt of forms; early August; late August; after September 1st)
2. a. Read through the study guide . . .
b. Intended to do so . . .
(upon receipt; after a few days; after a few weeks; not yet)
3. a. Made a selection of courses ...
b. Intended to do so . . .
(amply before term began; just before term began; in the course of the term; at
exam registration)
Part B: For the last term in which you attended lectures, please indicate how you did that in
comparison with your intention to do so.

1. a. Present at lectures ...

b. Intended to be ...
(always; most of the time; half of the time; seldom)
2. a. listened with concentration . . .
b. Intended to do so . . .
(all of time; most of time; half of time; less than half of time)
3. a. Took notes .
b. Intended to do so . . .
(all of time; most of time; half of time; less than half of time)
Part C: For the last three exams you intended to do, please indicate how (on the average) you

performed the following actions in comparison with your intention to perform them.
1. a. Obtained books and papers ...
b. Intended to do so . . .
(before term began; as term began; in course of lectures; just before exam)
2. a. Registered for examination ...
b. Intended to do so ...
(first day registration; after a while; last occasion possible; too late)
3. a. Started studying (homework) ...
b. Intended to do so . . .
(beginning of lectures; amply in time; just in time; too late)
4. a. Started making extracts ...
b. Intended to do so . . .
(beginning of lectures; amply in time; just in time; too late; not at all)
5. a. Rehearsing materials ...
b. Intended to do so . . .
(after first lectures; amply in time; just in time; too late)

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

87

obtain reliable scales. The items, and the results of this factor analysis
(varimax rotated principal components), are displayed in Table 4-5.
Three factors accounted for 54% of the variance (n = 177). By linear
combination of the items constituting these factors, three very homogeneous scales were formed (Table 4-5). As expected, the first scale applied to
academic procrastinatory behavior; the correlation of this scale with trait
procrastination was .60, and with test anxiety .19. The second scale
appeared to measure fear of failure. This scale correlated .66 with test
anxiety, and .19 with trait procrastination. Finally, the third scale measured
lack of study motivation. The correlations of this scale with both trait
procrastination and fear of failure were low (.20 and .18, respectively).
The APSI and its subscales seem both reliable and valid. The procrastination scale produces a measure of academic procrastinatory behavior.
The items of this scale, howeve~ are a mixture of Type 1 (postponing) and
Type 3 (doing other things) procrastinatory behavior.
THE STUDY PROBLEMS QUESTIONNAIRE (SPQ)

At the same time, I reanalyzed an obscure but presumably valid

Dutch study-problems questionnaire (0. Hermans, 1977), designed to
measure motivation-related study problems. The questionnaire was included in my procrastination studies, and subsequently factor analyzed
(n = 483). Three factors emerged, accounting for 50% of the variance. The
items, scale characteristics, and factor analysis results (varimax rotated
principal components) are listed in Table 4-6.
The resulting factors were labeled Low Work Discipline, Fear of
Failure, and Study Interest. Scales constructed by linear combination of
the items defining each factor were homogeneous. Results of these analyses were similar to those of the APSI. In effect, to some extent the Study
Problems Questionnaire (SPQ) seems to mirror the APSI. The former,
however, is trait-oriented while the latter is state-oriented. Nevertheless, in
correlating the three trait SPQ scales with the three state APSI scales, the
corresponding scales correlated .73 on the average, while the average
correlation between the noncorresponding scales amounted to only .26.
In conclusion, three diagnostic instruments were constructed, each
divided into separate subscales. To establish the relationship among these
subscales, a final secondary factor analysis was performed in which both
trait procrastination and fear of failure were included by way of anchors.
Using the scree test, a four-factor solution (varimax rotated principal
components) was obtained (n = 171), accounting for 75% of the variance.
Table 4-7 shows the results.
Factor 1 included all procrastination measures except behavior-

88

CHAPI'ER4

TABLE 4-5.

Academic Procrastination State Inventory (APSI)

How frequently last week did you engage in the following

behaviors or thoughts?
(1 = not; 2 = incidentally; 3 = sometimes; 4 = most of the
time; 5 = always)

F1

F2

F3

0.64
-0.61
0.58
0.70

0.20
-0.10
0.20
0.22

0.06
-0.18
0.39
0.26

0.68
0.77

0.24
-0.02

0.11
0.08

0.70
0.77
0.67
0.73

0.24
0.12
0.25
-0.00

-0.05
0.04
0.05
0.17

0.41
0.68

0.14
-0.05

0.10
0.04

0.51

0.05

0.33

0.16
0.05
0.12
0.08

0.72
0.80
0.83
0.68

0.09
-0.04
-0.01
0.22

0.19
0.33

0.77
0.56

0.17
0.17

0.09
0.23
0.13
0.12
33%
13
0.90

-0.13
0.24
0.27
0.11
12%
6
0.85

0.81
0.70
0.63
0.86
9%
4
0.79

Factor 1: Procrastination
1. Drifted off into daydreams while studying.
2. Studied the subject matter that you had planned to do.
3. Had no energy to study.
4. Prepared to study at some point of time but did not get
any further.
5. Gave up when studying was not going well.
6. Gave up studying early in order to do more pleasant
things.
7. Put off the completion of a task.
8. Allowed yourself to be distracted from your work.
9. Experienced concentration problems when studying.
10. Interrupted studying for a while in order to do other
things.
11. Forgot to prepare things for studying.
12. Did so many other things that there was insufficient
time left for studying.
13. Thought that you had enough time left, so that there
was really no need to start studying.
Factor 2: Fear of failure
14. Had panicky feelings while studying
15. Had doubts about your own ability.
16. Experienced fear of failure.
17. Wondered why you would study if this would mean so
much trouble for you.
18. Felt tense when studying.
19. Gave up studying because you did not feel well.

Factor 3: Lack of nwtivation

20. Found the subject matter boring.
21. Felt that you really hated studying.
22. Doubted that you should have ever taken this course.
23. Felt, when studying, that you disliked the subject.
Variance explained
Number of items in scale
Coefficient alpha

89

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

TABLE 4-6. Study Problems Questionnaire (SPQ)

Please indicate (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 =
neither disagree nor agree; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree)

F1

F2

F3

0.82
0.75
0.77
0.69

0.16
0.24
0.18
0.11

0.20
-0.02
0.07
0.13

0.63
0.77
0.72

-0.23
0.06
0.17

0.22
0.07
0.39

-0.06

0.64

0.04

0.11

0.65

0.20

0.18
-0.00

0.73
0.56

0.03
0.01

0.17
0.26

0.63
0.64

0.02
0.28

-0.00
0.16
0.09

0.70
Q.61
0.65

-0.02
-0.00
-0.02

-0.06
0.15
-0.11

0.04
-0.03
-0.07

0.76
0.60
-0.62

0.16
29%
7
0.88

0.02
13%
9
0.84

0.65
8%
4
0.65

Factor 1: Low work discipline

I can't get myself down to work hard enough.
I work in an unsystematic way.
I'm always behind with my work.
I continuously interrupt my work in order to smoke,
have coffee, walk around, or talk to somebody.
5. I don't care enough about my study.
6. I work by fits.
7. I miss a real incentive to work.
Factor 2: Fear of failure
8. I can't stop thinking about my work, even when I try to
relax.
9. When I start working on some task, I think that I won't
be able to manage it.
10. At times, when studying, I feel struck by panic.
11. I often can't get to sleep because I have to think about
my work.
12. I feel guilty when not working.
13. Often I feel too depressed to concentrate adequately on
my work.
14. I fear being seized by panic during examinations.
15. I often think that people know more than I do.
16. I'm afraid that all my weak points will show up at
examinations.
Factor 3: Study interest
17. Certain aspects of my study are really interesting.
18. I like to talk about my study with other people.
19. I often think that a different study is more interesting
than mine.
20. My interest in my study is growing all the time.
Variance explained
Number of items in scale
Coefficient alpha

1.
2.
3.
4.

intention discrepancy for administrative tasks. The latter scale defined

Factor 4. Low Work Discipline was also included in the first factor. Factor 2
consisted of all Fear of Failure measures, and Factor 3 contained both
motivational factors. From a "Big Five" perspective, Factors 1 and 2 clearly
represent the broad personality dimensions Conscientiousness and Neuroticism. In my view, this must signify that, at least as far as studies of

90

CHAPTER 4

TABLE 4-7. Secondary Factor

Analysis Measurement Instruments
Factor
Test/scale
'frait procrastination
PCS-Iecture attendance (B)
PCS-preparing for exam (C)
PCS-behavioral promptness
APSI academic procrastination
SPQ low work discipline
Test anxiety
APSI state fear of failure
SPQ trait fear of failure
APSI lack of study motivation
SPQ study interest
PCS-administrative tasks (A)
Variance explained

0.80
0.60
0.80
0.75
0.78
0.81
-0.04
0.15
0.13
0.25
-0.09
0.20
36%

0.12
-0.08
0.12
-0.19
0.29
0.15
0.89
0.88
0.92
0.19
-0.00
-0.00
20%

0.03
0.08
0.02
0.11
0.19
0.22
-0.02
0.15
0.08
0.86
-0.93
0.02
12%

0.08
0.21
0.02
0.26
-0.06
-0.01
0.00
-0.03
-0.00
-0.06
-0.09
0.95
8%

prediction are concerned, all separate traits belonging to such broad

dimensions can be interchanged to some extent.

RESEARCH
The implications of my working hypothesis on academic procrastination should subsequently be tested. With a view to this, various measurement instruments have been constructed. In the rest of this chapter, two
studies using these instruments are reported. One study concerned
changes in academic procrastination over time, while the other study
focused on the role of academic procrastination and its related concepts in
the prediction of study progress.
TIME DEPENDENCY OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

In a study among 66 student participants in a study-skills course in

the first term of 1992, study behavior was recorded in each of the 10 weekly
course sessions. Students were volunteers, coming from various departments of the University of Groningen. Recorded were the number of
weeks left until the next examination, study behavior defined as the
number of hours studied in the preceding week, the number of hours

91

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

intended or planned for study in that week, and state procrastination and
lack of study motivation, as measured by the APSI. In addition, before the
course started, trait procrastination (see Chapter 5), test anxiety (Van der
Ploeg, 1988), work discipline, and study interest were assessed. The latter
two variables were measured by the SPQ. The aim of this study was to
examine changes in study behavior over time, including academic procrastination, and to investigate the role of individual differences in this time
dependency. Because of the rather small number of observations, nonparametric statistical tests were used.
First, number of hours planned for studying, number of hours actually spent studying, state procrastination, and lack of study motivation
were plotted against the number of weeks left until the next examination.
For clarity, Figure 4-1 shows only the linear trend lines for these plots. The
figure shows a decrease in academic procrastination, a decrease in
intention-behavior discrepancy with respect to hours spent studying, and
an increase in study hours both planned and studied, and also a slight
decrease in lack of study motivation, as a function of time left until
examination. In order to test for these trends, time was categorized into
32
30

28
26
24

Pro,.__ ,.
;:-:-:~natJon

............. ....

.... ..... ....

....

22

20
18

16

14
12
10
8~'---'---~---'---'---'---'r---.-__. -__~
9+
8
7
6
5
4
3
2

Weeks until examination

FIGURE 4-1. Time dependency of state measures (students, n

= 66).

92

CHAPI'ER4

three phases: a first phase up to 7 weeks before examination, a second

phase of 7 to 4 weeks before examination, and a final phase of less than 4
weeks before examination. State scores were aggregated to an average
score for each of these phases. 1fends for hours planned or spent studying,
and for academic procrastination, appear to be significant (Friedman test;
p < 0.001). These trends do not differ significantly for gender, nor for firstyear versus older students (Mann-Whitney test). The trend for lack of
motivation, however, is not significant.
To examine the influence of trait variables on the significant trends,
scores on trait procrastination, Fear of Failure, Work Discipline, and Study
Interest were dichotomized by median splits. Subsequently, for each
subset defined by such dichotomy, average scores for each of the three
phases were recalculated and differences between the three averages
defining each trend were examined (Mann-Whitney test). No significant
differences appeared between high and low trait procrastinators, between
high and low test-anxious students, and between high and low interest
students. In contrast, a very marked difference was observed between
students with high and low Work Discipline for the trends of procrastinatory
behavior and time spent studying. The results are displayed in Table 4-8.
Table 4-8 shows that relatively undisciplined students, in comparison
with relatively well-disciplined students, in the phase closest to the examination date, displayed a level of procrastinatory behavior that was still
somewhat higher than the level of well-disciplined students in the most
remote phase. Apparently, relatively well-disciplined students were able

TABLE 4-8. Effects of Work Disciprme, as Measured by the Study

Problems Questionnaire (SPQ), on trends in Study Behavior (n = 66)
High work
discipline

Mann-Whitney

discipline

32.19
28.39
25.75

25.19
24.76
19.74

<0.001
0.02
0.004

7.65
12.12
17.76

13.60

18.51

0.006
0.004
0.03

Low work

Weekly average APSI academic

procrastination
in phase 1
in phase 2
in phase 3
Weekly average number of
hours spent studying
in phase 1
in phase 2
in phase 3

23.93

Note: Higher scores in upper part of table indicate more procrastination.

test

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

93

to reduce academic procrastination considerably further. Apart from that,

the trends for both groups were fairly parallel.
In conclusion, academic procrastinatory behavior is clearly timedependent as far as the diminishing time span until the date of examination is concerned. A similar, but inverse, trend applies to the time spent
studying. Both variables are highly intercorrelated. This signifies that, in
general, deadlines drive study behavior. On the other hand, study motivation remains relatively constant as a function of time. Contrary to intuition, individual differences in trait procrastination do not produce markedly different trends in academic procrastination. On the other hand,
differences in Work Discipline do so. Given the position of Work Discipline, in conjunction with trait procrastination, on personality factor
Conscientiousness (Table 4-7), some clarification is still needed.
PREDICTION OF STUDY PROGRESS

In collaboration with my colleague, Ineke Vugteveen, I conducted a

study on the influence of procrastination and related study problems on
study results in the Economics Department of Groningen University.
Subjects were 231 first-year students participating in the examination of
General Economics. Measurements included trait procrastination (see
Chapter 5); 12 rating scales on cognitive and metacognitive skills that are
parallels of the 12 scales of the Learning & Studying (L&S) study-skills
inventory (Vorst, 1989); and the three scales of the SPQ, including Low
Work DiScipline, Fear of Failure, and Study Interest. Data concerning
results of previous schooling (college final examination) were added. As
study results, average grades for the three main courses (Le., General
Economics, Business Economics, and Mathematics), as well as general
progress in terms of hours successfully studied, were recorded. From
among these many potential predictors of study success, only previous
schooling, skills in planning and time management as measured by the
relevant L&S rating scale, trait procrastination, and Low Work DiScipline,
correlated with study results. 2 Table 4-9 displays these correlations with
general study progress.
Subsequently, a path model predictive of average grades in each main
course, and of general study progress, by means of llSREL, submodel 2
ijoreskog & Sorbom, 1988), was constructed. One path model appeared to
account well for the pattern of correlations with respect to all four separate
2Genera1 study progress (in hours) correlated .83 with grade in General Economics, .74 with
grade in Business Economics, and .70 with grade in Mathematics.

94

CHAPTER 4

TABLE 4-9. Correlations for Prediction of Study Progress

with First-Year Economics Students (n = 231)
1.

Study progress (hours)

2. Work discipline
3. li"ait procrastination
4. Planning and time management
5. College grade in mathematics
6.

Extra mathematics at college

0.59
-0.33
0.45
0.28
0.11

-0.35
0.70
0.01
0.01

-0.28
0.02
0.01

0.04
0.01

-0.20

criteria. This model, applied to general study progress (hours), is displayed in Figure 4-2.
In this model, both variables reflecting previous schooling in mathematics contributed independently to study results. This is obvious; these
variables can be viewed as operationalizations of ability, especially relevant
to university courses of Economics. On the other hand, a cluster of three
effort-related variables contributed even better to study progress. The best
predictor in this cluster is work discipline, which is a simple reflection of
Low Work Discipline. In this model, both trait procrastination and planning- and time-management skill have been assumed to contribute to

College
graduate Ir_-.;;O.:.::.3~1==========-___
mathematics
.- ____--,
Study progress

Extra mathematics
at college

Trait
procrastination

-0.17

L..;:.:...;....-~=-7f

Work discipline

\
Planning and time
management

0.56

0.49

Chi-square (4) = 9.63 (p=0.05)

Adjusted goodness of fit = 0.93

FIGURE 4-2. Prediction of study progress (first-year Economics students, n = 231).

95

ACADEMIC 'PROCRASTINATION

study results only indirectly, namely through work discipline. Constructed in this way, the model fit the data better than it did in other
configurations.
Regardless of the exact configuration of these variables, it is clear that
together they form a cluster that is highly predictive of study success.
Thus, the model as a whole can be viewed as a replication of the wellknown "law" of prediction of educational achievement: Results are a
function of both ability and effort.

CONCLUSION
Procrastination appears to be a personality trait generated, like other
related personality traits as (lack of) achievement motivation, work discipline, or self-control, by a broad, partly inherited dispositional factorConscientiousness. Likewise, fear of failure, and other related traits, such
as emotionality or depression, are personality traits generated by a broad,
largely inherited dispositional factor-Neuroticism. In an academic setting, trait procrastination produces academic-task delays or academic
procrastination, in a strict sense. Depending on the stage of decisional
processes with respect to studying, academic procrastination manifests
itself in one of various different types: behavior delay, intention delay,
intention-behavior discrepancy, or a shift to other activities. Such dilatory
behavior, in retrospect, must be excused in order to preserve one's sense of
self-worth. At the same time, fear of failure may produce avoidance
behavior, which can function to reduce anxiety. Since Conscientiousness
and Neuroticism are conceived as orthogonal dimensions, people's position on these dimensions can vary independently. Therefore, students may
demonstrate both procrastination and fear of failure. In this respect,
students can be characterized by Covington's classification as either
success-oriented (no procrastination, no fear of failure), failure-avoiding
(both procrastination and fear of failure), failure-accepting (pure procrastination), or overstriving (pure fear of failure). Despite their hereditary
basis, the behavioral effects of these traits can be counteracted to a
considerable extent by personality management, supplemented by measures that impede unwanted trait effects.
Academic procrastination and its related concepts can be measured
reliably and validly. These concepts may serve as important predictors in
studies of educational outcome. The extent, however, to which these
variables are, in effect, interchangeable, should be explored further. In
addition, future research using these variables should include experimen-

96

CHAPTER 4

tal studies on the treatment of academic procrastination, guided by the

theoretical notions provided in this chapter.
AcKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank Joseph R. Ferrari, DePaul University; Jan T. Groenewoud

and Willem K. B. Hofstee, Groningen University; and Carry Lay, York
University, for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this chapter.

CHAPTERS

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION,
AGITATION, DEJECTION,
AND SELF-DISCREPANCY
CLARRY

H.

LAY

The defIning characteristic of trait procrastinators is the extension of

temporal sequences between their/ intentions and their corresponding
goal-directed behavior. Procrastinators are often acutely aware of these
intention-behavior gaps. For example, student procrastinators will recall
numerous occasions on which their study behavior failed to match their
temporal intentions. 'frait procrastinators may also anticipate such discrepancies in their future behavior. These self-cognitions should have implications for the everyday affective experiences of such individuals. This
chapter addresses these implications, drawing from Higgins's (1987) selfdiscrepancy theory-a theoretical account that may be most useful in
understanding and explaining the behavior of procrastinators.
A key aspect of self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987) is its important distinction between agitation-related emotions and dejection-related
emotions. These emotions, or discomforts, are linked to the experience of
discrepancies between people's actual-ideal selves, on the one hand, and
their actual-ought selves, on the other. The ideal self contains the "person's representation of the attributes that someone (self or other) would like
the person ideally to possess, i.e, someone's hopes, wishes, or goals for the
person" (McCann & Higgins, 1988, p. 66). The ought self is a "person's
representation of the attributes that someone (self or other) believes the

97

98

CHAPl'ER5

person ought to possess, i.e., someone's beliefs about the duties, responsibilities, and obligations for the person" (McCann & Higgins, 1988, p. 66).
Actual-ideal discrepancies are thought to involve the absence of positive
outcomes and to result in dejection-related emotions (e.g., disappointment
and shame). Actual-ought discrepancies involve the presence of negative
outcomes, or the anticipation of punishment, and result in agitationrelated emotions (e.g., fear and uneasiness). Self-discrepancy theory has
generated a great deal of research activity and support (Higgins, Bond,
Klein, & Strauman, 1986; Higgins, Klein, & Strauman, 1985; McCann &
Higgins, 1988; Moretti & Higgins, 1990; Sanchez-Bemardos & Sanz, 1992;
Strauman & Higgins, 1987, 1988).
Higgins and his associates have explored self-discrepancies primarily
within an idiographic framework. Research participants are typically
asked to list traits or attributes associated with their different self-states.
Categories of self may involve the actual self, the ideal self viewed from the
person's own perspective or from that of a significant other, and the ought
self, viewed from one's own perspective or that of a significant other. The
levels of the various self-discrepancies are derived for each subject and
related to the specified emotions, sometimes after a particular type of selfdiscrepancy has been primed. To date, no mention has been made of
individual-difference variables that may be particularly related to the
tendency to experience self-discrepancies and their corresponding emotions. Nevertheless, the researcher with a more nomothetic perspective
could address this question, and it is a particularly natural one for anyone
interested in trait procrastination. 'Irait procrastinators have a preponderance of experiences in which their behavior does not match their
intentions, goals, and commitments. In many situations, such intentions
may reflect what one ought to be doing, producing actual-ought discrepancies. In other situations, intentions reflect what one would like to do,
resulting in actual-ideal discrepancies.
At the same time, many tasks and experiences in the lives of individuals involve elements of both "ought" and "ideal." For example, student
procrastinators who delay in preparing their history-course essay due in a
week's time may view the preparation as something they would ideally do,
as well as something they ought to do. Students away from home may also
put off phoning their parents, a delay which could be viewed from both an
"ideal" and an "ought" perspective. Consequently, trait procrastinators
would be expected to experience both types of discrepancies and thus be
more likely to report both dejection-related emotions and agitation-related
emotions than would nonprocrastinators.
Although both types of discrepancies may occur, one type of discrep-

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DEJECTION, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY

99

ancy may be dominant in the day-to-day life of the trait procrastinator. This
is one of the central research questions of the present chapter. It is related
to Higgins's Hypothesis 3 (1987, p. 324), which states that "if a person
possesses more than one type of self-discrepancy. . . he or she is likely to
suffer most intensely the kind of discomfort associated with whichever
type of discrepancy has the greatest magnitude." Do trait procrastinators
experience greater actual-ideal, or greater actual-ought discrepancies? By
reversing Hypothesis 3, this question can be addressed by comparing the
extent to which trait procrastinators experience agitation emotions and
dejection emotions in their everyday lives, in relation to nonprocrastinators.

THE QUASI-INDEPENDENT NATURE OF AGITATION

(ANXIETY) AND DEJECTION (DEPRESSION)
Although often thought of as independent concepts, there is growing
recognition of the need to consider the conceptual and dynamic overlap
between agitation, or anxiety, and dejection, or depression (Block, Gjerde,
& Block, 1991; Clark & Watson, 1991; Kendall & Watson, 1989). This need
occurs when considering both acute and more chronic experiences. Clark
(1989) concluded that "the typical anxiety-depression correlations in the
.40 to .50 range may be viewed as evidence of quasi-independence as well
as overlap" (p. 122). Although inextricably linked, the two concepts can be
distinguished in terms of their accompanying cognitions (Watson & ~n
dall, 1989). Anxiety is linked to cognitions about fearful or harmful events
in the future; depression, on the other hand, concerns actual or perceived
loss, failure, or degradation in the past. In addition, low positive affect is
uniquely associated with depression.
In the analyses of data to be reported in this chapte~ the question of
the link between agitation and dejection was responded to in terms of
statistical controls. In examining the relation between trait procrastination
and agitation, semipartial correlation coefficients were computed in which
the variance in agitation accounted for by the variance in dejection was
controlled (Block et al., 1991; Strauman, 1992; Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989).
Likewise, semipartial correlation coefficients between trait procrastination
and dejection were computed, controlling for agitation variance in the
dejection scores. Thus, the extent to which procrastinators were more
likely to experience agitation or dejection emotions than nonprocrastinators took into account the level of the "quasi-independent" other category
of emotion.

100

CHAPI'ER5

ASSESSING THE RELATIONS OF TRAIT PROCRASTINATION

WITH AGITATION- AND DEJECTION-RELATED EMOTIONS
(STUDIES 1-4)
STUDY

In one study recently completed, 58 female and 13 male university

students with a median age of 21 years completed a personality inventory
that included a measure of procrastination (Lay, 1988). This scale is more
fully described in Chapter 3.
Participants also indicated how they felt on 24 emotion-labels used in
previous work by Higgins and his associates. 1 These included 6 positive
instances of agitation (e.g., anxious, worried) and 6 negative instances (e.g.,
calm, secure), along with 6 positive instances of dejection (e.g., discouraged,
ashamed) and 6 negative instances (e.g., energetic, happy). The negative
instances were reverse-scored and total agitation scores and dejection
scores were calculated. Assessments of the internal consistency of both
emotion scales led to the elimination of one emotion-label (virtuous) from
the total agitation measure. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the resulting
ll-item agitation-related emotion scale was .89; for the 12-item dejectionrelated emotion scale it was .87.
The students first made their emotion judgments at the outset of a
lecture session (T1Il\e 1) early in a summer course which met daily for 3
hours over a 3-week period. They were then asked to think about their
study and work plans for the two term tests and the two papers required in
the course. Students indicated when they planned to begin writing a paper
or studying for a test, when they planned to finish each assignment, how
many days they intended to study, and the average number of hours per
day. They also rated the amount of control they had in following all of their
plans. The questionnaire on study and work plans was immediately
followed by a second version of the affect scales (Time 2). This time, the
students were asked to rate how IIthey feel now when they think about
their study and work plans for this course."
The making of plans for their course was expected to act as a priming
procedure with different repercussions for procrastinators and nonprocrastinators. Higgins (1987) outlined three hypotheses (numbers 3, 4, and
5, p. 324), which concern the current or temporary accessibility of the
different types of self-discrepancies and their relation to the kinds of
discomfort experienced by the individual. The lIaccessibili~ hypotheses
11 would like to thank T'lmothy Strauman for supplying the list of emotion-labels.

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DEJECTION, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY

101

were examined directly through different priming manipulations (Higgins, 1987; Higgins et al., 1986; Strauman & Higgins, 1987). For example,
Higgins et al. (1986, Study 2) selected subjects who were high on both
actual-ideal and actual-ought discrepancies, or low on both types of selfdiscrepancies, and primed the ideal-self or the ought-self. Priming was
carried out by asking subjects to think about the kind of person they and
their parents would ideally like them to be or the kind of person they and
their parents believed they ought to be. As predicted, it was found that
"ideal" priming increased the experience of dejection-related emotions for
subjects high on both discrepancies, and "ought" priming increased the
agitation-related emotions experienced for subjects high on both discrepancies. In addition, for subjects low on both self-discrepancies, the priming resulted in slight decreases in the relevant emotions. These results
were direct support for Hypothesis 5 (Higgins, 1987), which states that "the
greater the accessibility of a particular type of self-discrepancy, the greater
the likelihood that its possessor will suffer the kind of discomfort associated with that type of discrepancy (p. 324). In another study (Study 1;
Higgins et al., 1986), students were asked to imagine either a positive event
or a negative event (receiving a grade of "A" or "0" in an important course).
The negative event as a priming procedure was expected to increase
dejection-related emotions for subjects who primarily reported experiencing actual-ideal discrepancies, and to increase agitation-related emotions
for subjects reporting greater actual-ought discrepancies. These predictions, drawn from Hypothesis 5 (Higgins, 1987), were supported. In the
recent study, when asked to think about their study and course plans, the
affect of procrastinators should have corresponded to their more dominant
self-discrepancy.
Results
The semipartial correlation coefficient between trait procrastination
and agitation emotions at Time 1, controlling for the variance in agitation
attributable to dejection emotions, was .15 (ns). The corresponding semipartial correlation coefficient between trait procrastination and dejection
emotions, controlling for the variance in dejection attributable to agitation
emotions, was .26 (p < .02). Thus, under relatively neutral conditions, trait
procrastinators reported experiencing higher levels of dejection, but not
agitation, compared to nonprocrastinators. At Time 2, after completing the
study-plans questionnaire, trait procrastination was unrelated to both the
dejection and the agitation-related emotions.
In this first study, trait anxiety scores were also obtained from respon-

102

CHAPTERS

dents, using a 16-item scale taken from the Jackson Personality Inventory
Gackson, 1976). As a means of contrasting agitation-related emotions and
dejection-related emotions, the relations between trait anxiety and the
emotion subscales were assessed. At Time I, the semipartial correlation
coefficient between trait anxiety and agitation was .36 (p < .001); the
corresponding coefficient between trait anxiety and dejection was .06 (ns).
These results clearly distinguished the two emotion-related scales (which
were, nevertheless, highly related to one another-r = .66), and provided
evidence for their conceptually independent validity.
After making their plans, students indicated how much control they
had in following them. This perceived level of control was unrelated to
either agitation or dejection emotions at Time I, as would be expected, but
was related at Time 2 to dejection emotions (semipartial r = .32, P < .003).
Students perceiving greater control over their study plans reported experiencing lower levels of dejection.
The relation between trait procrastination and dejection under relatively neutral conditions at Time 1 was not repeated at Time 2. The making
of plans for the course at Time 2 was expected to prime the more accessible
self-discrepancies experienced by procrastinators. It did not appear to do
so. Rather, the act of making plans may have countered the everyday
dejection experienced by many of the procrastinators. It may have provided a structure to their academic pursuits, and removed them from
future concerns based on past behavior. Perceived control over study plans
was now the important factor-for that moment, at least.
STUDY

In a second study, the participants were 57 female and 22 male

university students with a median age of 21 years. They completed the
agitation-emotions and dejection-emotions scales used in Study 1 on three
occasions. The first occasion was at the outset of their second-year psychology course, rating "how they had felt during the past week" (Time 1). The
second time was 2 weeks prior to their final examination. Students completed an in-class questionnaire about their plans for studying for the final
examination in the course. They indicated when they intended to begin
studying, and the number of days and the total number of hours they
planned to study. They were also asked to predict their future "actual"
behavior, a question which follows from the distinction between intentions
and expectations made by Warshaw and Davis (1985) and Gordon (1989).
Following this, the students were asked to complete the agitation- and
dejection-affect scales concerning "how they feel now" (Time 2). Finally, 2
weeks later, immediately after completing their examination, they were

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DE}ECflON, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY 103

asked to indicate Hhow they feel now when they think about their study
behavior for this exam" (Time 3).
Results
As in Study 1, under relatively neutral conditions at Time 1, trait
procrastination was positively related to dejection-related emotions (semipartial r = .22, P < .02). 'D:ait procrastination was also related to agitation
(semipartial r = .22, P < .02). Consistent with Study 1, at Time 2, after
making study plans, trait procrastination was unrelated to both dejection
emotions and agitation emotions. Finally, at Time 3, after the final examination, procrastinators reported experiencing higher levels of dejection
(semipartial r = .22, P < .05), but not agitation. At Time 3, students also
completed a 6-item scale assessing the frequency with which they had
engaged in 6 behaviors representing delay in studying. These items were
adapted from Schouwenburg (1992). Sample items include: HI watched TV
or listened to music when I should have been studying"; HI prepared to
study at some point but did not get any further"; HI gave up studying early
in order to do more pleasant things." Responses were made on as-point
scale which ranged from Never (1) to Very Often (5). The item responses
were summed to form a procrastinatory-behavior scale with a Cronbach's
alpha of .79. Scores on this procrastinatory-behavior scale provided the
opportunity to examine the relations between such self-reported behavior
and affect, as opposed to the earlier assessments of the associations
between affect and trait procrastination.
Higher levels of self-reported procrastinatory behavior during the
study period were associated with higher dejection emotions after the
examination (semipartial r = .37, P < .001), but not with higher agitation.
Thus, the measures of trait procrastination and procrastinatory behavior
were linked to affect in comparable ways at Time 3, although the behavioral
measure accounted for more than twice the variance.
STUDY

In a third assessment of the relations between trait procrastination and

agitation and dejection, data gathered but not reported in Lay (1990) were
examined. The participants, 50 females and 20 males, had provided
emotion ratings about their ongoing personal projects (Little, 1983). This
sample, drawn from a college devoted to part-time students, ranged in age
from 20-61 years, with a median age of 34.
A version of Little's (1983) Personal Projects Analysis questionnaire
was administered at the outset of the study. Respondents were asked to list

104

0IAPTER5

as many ongoing personal projects as they could. They then selected 12

projects that they were most likely to engage in over the next month or so,
and entered them on a special rating-matrix page. Subjects indicated
whether a project had a sharf-term deadline within the next 2 months or
so, a long-term deadline beyond 2 months, or no specific deadline.
Examples of short-term deadline projects included: UWrite essay for my
history class," and HBuy a birthday present for my mother." Long-term
deadline projects included: HComplete major house renovations," and
"Lose 20 pounds." Open projects with no specified deadline included
projects (e.g., HEnhance my self-esteem") that were similar to life tasks
(Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987) or personal strivings (Emmons & King, 1989),
although they also included more mundane tasks (e.g., HClean up my
room"). For projects with specified deadlines, subjects indicated whether
the project was self-imposed, imposed by others, or mutually imposed by
themselves and others. For purposes of analysis, the last two categories
were combined, forming one category of projects that were self-imposed
and one category that involved others. Thus, five types of projects were
available for separate consideration: short-termlself-imposed, short-term!
other-imposed, long-termlself-imposed, long-termlother-imposed, and
open (without deadlines). Unfortunately, no direct assessment of the
source of open projects had been made.
In the original study, participants were contacted 3,6, and 12 weeks
after the initial session. At the 3-week point, they were asked to rate each
project on 15 emotions in terms of "how you feel at this moment with
regards to the project." Ratings were made on a 5-point scale, which
ranged from 0 (Not at All) to 4 (A Great Deal). Although the emotion labels
had not been selected with self-discrepancy theory in mind, 12 emotions
could be assigned to either the dejection or agitation categories. The
dejection-related emotions included: exhilarated, hopeful, happy, sad, disappointed, and disgusted. The agitation-related emotions included: confident,
relieved, worried, guilty, fearful, and anxious.
Results
With short-term, self-imposed projects, trait procrastination was related to dejection-related emotions (semipartial r = .27, n = 56, P < .03)
and unrelated to agitation. With short-term projects, mutual or otherimposed, procrastination was again related to dejection (semipartial r =
.30, n = 54, P < .03), and unrelated to agitation. With long-term, selfimposed projects the results were unique. Procrastination was now negatively related to dejection (semipartial r = - .39, n = 44, P < .01). Procrastination was unrelated to agitation emotions with such projects. Finally,

TRAIT PROCRASTINXI10N, AGIT.AJION, DEJECTION, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY 105

with long-term, mutual or other-imposed projects, and with open projects

without deadlines, trait procrastination was unrelated to both dejection
and agitation.
With these data, trait procrastination was related to dejection emotions only, and not to agitation. This relation differed, however, depending
on the type of project involved. When asked to think about their ongoing
projects with short-term deadlines, procrastinators reported higher levels
of dejection than nonprocrastinators. With long-term projects (deadlines
beyond 2 months) that were self-imposed, trait procrastination was also
related to dejection, but for the first time in this series of studies, the
relation was negative-procrastinators reporting less dejection than nonprocrastinators. Thus, task and project requirements with pending deadlines appear to be associated with greater dejection by procrastinators. In
contrast, the remoteness of distant deadlines had a different emotional
impact. This latter finding may reflect a tendency on the part of procrastinators to deal with distant task requirements in less realistic ways, with
loosely defined hopes and confidences, and loosely imagined constructions of task requirements. These perspectives would enable the procrastinator to reduce any concurrent actual-ideal discrepancies.
The distinctions between categories of projects with regard to the
relations between trait procrastination and dejection would suggest that
these relations (and those reported in the earlier studies) are not merely a
general predisposition by trait procrastinators to report higher levels of
dejection compared to nonprocrastinators. Rather, their affective experiences are linked to particular situational and personal contexts. Deadlines
would appear to play an important role, and for the procrastinator, they
appear to be primarily associated with dejection-related emotions.
STUDY

Scores on trait procrastination and ratings on the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS) developed by Watson, Clark, & Tellegen (1988)
were available from other studies that we have conducted (Lay, 1992, Study
Ii and three sets of unpublished data obtained for various reasons). With a
reinterpretation of the affect scales, these data provided an additional
source in examining the relations between trait procrastination and agitation and dejection.
The participants combined across the data sets were 268 female and
159 male university students enrolled in various undergraduate psychology
courses. Their ages ranged from 18-48 years, with a median age of 21 years.
The PANAS consists of 10 positive-emotion items and 10 negativeemotion items. Some of the emotion terms were reassigned to an agitation-

106

CHAPTER 5

related emotion scale or to a dejection-related emotion scale. 2 Subjects

were asked to indicate the extent to which they had experienced each
feeling or emotion during the past week. The agitation-related items
included the following: guilty, scared, irritable, ashamed, nervous, jittery, and
afraid. The dejection subscale included the following: enthusiastic, proud,
interested, alert, inspired, determined, and active. The emotion labels omitted
from the PANAS were either irrelevant or could be applied to both scales.
This allocation of the PANAS items resulted in the agitation subscale
comprising solely negative emotions and the dejection subscale solely
positive emotions. This stems from an initial confounding in the PANAS
(see also Carver & Scheier, 1990, footnote 6, p. 27). Although beyond the
focus of this chapter, this confounding takes on added importance when
the absence of positive affect is viewed as the characteristic that distinguished depression from general distress and anxiety (Clark & Watson,
1991). Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the newly formed agitation scale was
.84; for the dejection scale it was .85. The Pearson product-moment
correlation coefficient between the two subscales was .24 (p < .01).
'frait procrastination was related to agitation-related emotions (semipartial r = .15, P < .001) and to dejection (semipartial r = .30, P < .0001).
Thus, in the large sample of subjects, procrastinators exhibited higher
levels of both agitation and dejection, compared to nonprocrastinators,
although the dominance of the relation to dejection was still evident,
accounting for more than four times the variance.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STUDIES 1-4

The empirical data gathered for this chapter led to an overwhelming
conclusion. 'frait procrastinators experience higher levels of dejectionrelated emotions than nonprocrastinators. Concurrently, agitation-related
emotions appear to be less characteristic. These findings occurred in
21 would like to thank Usa Feldman for her assistance in allocating the 20 PANAS emotions to
the agitation-related emotion and dejection-related emotion scales. The label "excited"
appears on the PANAS and could have been assigned to the agitation subscale. In Feldman's
unpublished data, the term appears to be interpreted by university students as sexual
excitement, however. The internal consistency of the agitation subscale with "excited"
included was found to decrease the value of Cronbach's alpha. The corrected item-total
scale correlation coefficient for this emotion was .07, compared to the next lowest value of T =
.45. Of additional interest, given the overlap between the positive-emotion subscale of the
PANAS and the newly derived agitation subscale, the inclusion of "excited" in the assessment of the internal consistency of the positive subsca1e did not reduce Cronbach's alpha,
and the item-total scale value was T = .52. This would suggest that the agitation scale was
not simply the positive scale of the PANAS reflected and renamed.

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DEJECTION, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY 107

neutral, task-independent circumstances, when subjects were simply

asked to indicate how they had felt during the past week or how they felt at
that moment. They also occurred when individuals rated how they felt
about their ongoing personal projects involving deadlines, or about their
study behavior for an examination. Drawing from Higgins's (1987) selfdiscrepancy theory, these results indicate that actual-ideal discrepancies
are more prominent in or more accessible to trait procrastinators than are
actual-ought discrepancies.
I did not anticipate this clear distinction. After all, to procrastinate is
to put off that which one "ought" to do, just as much as it involves what
one "wishes" to do. Granted, there were no negative relations found
between trait procrastination and agitation, but given their nature, why do
procrastinators not experience higher levels of agitation? It may simply be
that such individuals are especially immune to the "ought" aspects of their
everyday world.
In general, actual-ought discrepancies would be expected to vary
with the individual's attitude or predisposition to conform with social
expectations and guides. For example, individuals high in trait rebelliousness or low in responsibility may be less likely to experience actual-ought
discrepancies and so less likely to experience corresponding agitationrelated emotions. The trait procrastinators' lack of concern with the
"ought" aspects of their lives may be connected to these characteristics. It
has been suggested that for some procrastinators, their predilection to
dilatory behavior is founded in their need to rebel or to seek autonomy
from significant others (Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Harre,
1984).
The lack of concern with the "ought" aspects of their lives is also
consistent with analyses that have placed trait procrastination at the
negative pole of the conscientiousness dimension of the "Big Five" factor
structure of personality (Johnson & Bloom, 1993; Schouwenburg, Chapter
4). The conscientiousness factor includes the facet "dutifulness" (Costa,
McCrae, & Dye, 1991).

CROSS-CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS
The finding that actual-ideal discrepancies are more accessible to trait
procrastinators than actual-ought discrepancies may not be characteristic
of all cultures. 1iiandis and his associates (1iiandis, 1989; 1iiandis, McCusker, & Hui, 1990) differentiated individualistic cultures from collectivistic ones and described the impact of cultural forces on the self-concept.
For example, the concept of self in collectivistic cultures contains more

108

CHAPTERS

references to the ingroup than it does in individualistic cultures. In

addition, whereas people in collectivistic societies are oriented toward
group harmony and group goals, members of individualistic societies
focus on individual goals. In a similar way, Markus and Kitayama (1991)
described the independent view of self in contrast to the interdependent
view. Tasks within the independent construal of self include the expression
of self and the realization of internal attributes. Contrasting tasks within
the interdependent construal of self include occupying one's proper place
and engagement in appropriate action. 1Jlese perspectives on self have
important implications for cognition and affect.
The cultural contrasts of 1Handis and of Markus and Kitayama may be
applied to the question of affect in trait procrastinators. Procrastinators in
the North American culture would be prone to experience actual-ideal
discrepancies, in comparison with members of more collectivistic or interdependent societies, who would be more likely to experience actual-ought
discrepancies. Thus, trait procrastinators in individualistic or independent
cultures would be expected to exhibit higher levels of dejection than
nonprocrastinators, as demonstrated in the data described to this point,
obtained &om Canadian university students. On the other hand, trait
procrastinators in more collectivistic or interdependent cultures would be
expected to exhibit higher levels of agitation, not dejection.
I have only begun to examine this question. Data are now available
&om Greek students attending the University of Crete in Rethymno.
Greek students, particularly the less urban ones, may be described as more
collectivistic or interdependent than North American students. The Greek
subjects-55 females and 6 males-were enrolled in a psychology course
or in a Latin course for Archaeology majors. They completed a personality
inventory that contained a Greek translation of the trait-procrastination
scale used in the earlier work and a translated version of the agitationrelated and dejection-related emotion scales. The translations were made
in Rethymno, Crete, and back-translated in Canada, with a number af
minor points resolved}
For the first time in these assessments, trait procrastination was
related to agitation and unrelated to dejection. The semipartial correlation
coefficient with agitation was .26 (p < .03). The corresponding correlation
coefficient with dejection was .11 (ns). These findings were consistent with
our expectation that actual-ought discrepancies would be more accessible
to or prominent in the experiences of trait procrastinators in more collectivistic or interdependent societies. Our next sample of trait procrastina31 would like to thank Sophia 1iivilas of the University of Crete for obtaining the data, George
Mamalakis for translating the scales, and Catherine Vamakas-Lay for the back-translation.

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DEJECI1ON, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY 109

tors will be East Asians, thereby involving cultures that are heavily
characterized by their collectivistic or interdependent nature. In the meantime, these initial results with the Greek sample lend more credibility to
our interpretation of the North American sample as bounded by actualideal self discrepancies.

A CONSIDERATION OF SOME OTHER

THEORETICAL STATEMENTS
Following his 1987 paper, Higgins recently expanded his self-discrepancy theory by adding other forms of self-states that may influence actualideal discrepancies (Higgins, Tykodnski, & Vookles, 1990; Higgins, Vookles, & Tykodnski, 1992). These self-states involve the Hcan" self (a representation of someone's, including your own, beliefs about your capabilities
or potential), and the Hfuture" self (a representation of the expectations
about the type of person you will become). The Hcan" self and the Hfuture"
self are considered in terms of their degree of correspondence to the ideal
self. That is, is the ideal self more than, less than, or equal to the person's
capabilities (the Hean" self) and the likelihood of the person's nature in the
future? The pattern of self-guides and discrepancies outlined in Higgins et
al. (1992, pp. 129-130) includes two that may apply to the trait procrastinator. Pattern 2 describes individuals who experience a chronic failure to
meet their potential, in that their actual self is less than their ideal self,
which is equal to their Hcan" self. Pattern 4 individuals experience Hchronically unfulfilled hopes, in that their actual selves are less than their ideal
selves, which in tum are equal to their future selves. Individuals exhibiting these patterns were expected to experience high levels of distress,
although the type of dejection-related emotions would differ. Pattern 2
individuals were characterized by Hfeeling weak" and Pattern 4 individuals
by Hfeeling despondent." Our research has not yet examined the Hcan" self
and the Hfuture" self, but I would expect that procrastinators would be
most characterized by Pattern 2-the chronic perception of failing to meet
one's potential.
In examining the relations of affect to trait procrastination, other
theoretical perspectives may be considered. One of the most applicable is
the self-regulation theory of Carver and Scheier (1990). People monitor
their behavior with reference to what they want, making adjustments in
behavior in line with their goals. The key to this adjustment is the
recognition of discrepancies between current actions and specific intentions. Behavior is guided by a desire to reduce such discrepancies. Parallel
to this monitoring system is a second feedback process which concerns the
H

110

CHAPTERS

rate at which one's behavior is moving toward the goal (Carver & Scheier,
1990). This rate of progress is compared with some standard, resulting in a
second perceived discrepancy in which progress is less than, greater than,
or equal to the standard. Carver and Scheier (1990) suggest that affect is an
outcome of this second feedback process, whereby progress less than the
standard is associated with negative affect and progress greater than the
standard with positive affect.
In general, the trait procrastinator probably has standards of progress
that are comparable to the nonprocrastinator. I say this based on the
finding that, for the most part, the temporal intentions of the two seldom
differ. It is their actions that differ. Thus, trait procrastinators would be
expected to experience higher levels or greater frequencies of the "rate-ofprogress" discrepancy in the Carver and Scheier (1990) model. The consequences would be negative affect. This expectation was confirmed in a
reanalysis of the data presented in Study 4. Putting the confounding of
agitation and depression aside, the emotion ratings on the PANAS (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) were rescored according to the original
positive- and negative-affect subscales. 'frait procrastination was positively
related to negative affect (r = .23) experienced "during the past week."
Recall that Studies 1 and 2 reported that trait procrastination was unrelated
to agitation emotions and to dejection emotions when students were asked
to formulate their study intentions. At that point, discrepancies in rate-ofprogress were either irrelevant, because only intentions were considered,
or they were anticipated to be nil. A rate of progress consistent with one's
standard has no impact on affect (Carver & Scheier, 1990). The earlier
results are therefore consistent with the theory. When students were asked
to indicate how they felt when they thought about their study plans, they
experienced no discrepancy, and thus no systematic link between affect
and trait procrastination was observed.

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AFFECT,

AND DILATORY BEHAVIOR
Up to this point, agitation and dejection have been treated as output
variables. That is, they have been viewed as possible consequences of
frequent dilatory behavior. All the while, the reader has probably wondered about the role of affect as an input variable in producing procrastinatory behavior. There are two popular positions here. The first is that trait
procrastinators experience heightened anxiety in thinking about their
tasks, in preparing to work on them, or in actual task engagement. This
anxiety is debilitating or aversive. The procrastinators' move to nontask

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION, AGITATION, DEJECTION, AND SELF-DISCREPANCY

111

behavior serves to lessen this anxiety. Thus, putting off working on some
tasks may be viewed as avoidance behavior designed to circumvent
heightened-state anxiety. This would be a specific example of the role of
negative affect in self-destructive behavior, a line of inquiry now popular in
psychological literature (e.g., Baumeister & Scher, 1988).
Our own research provides no support for this view. In the research
described above trait procrastination was unrelated to agitation at the point
of making course plans. Lay, Edwards, Parker, and Endler (1989) assessed
high school students 1 week and 1 day prior to their final examination
period and found no relation between trait procrastination and state
anxiety. In unpublished data within our program, students were asked to
indicate their typical intentions of when they would plan to engage in a
variety of 21 everyday tasks, and then to indicate when they would actually
carry out the tasks. They also rated their level of state anxiety when
thinking about each task. Although trait procrastination was associated
with larger intention-behavior temporal gaps, procrastination was unrelated to state anxiety. To date, then, we have no evidence to indicate that
trait procrastinators, compared to nonprocrastinators, experience higher
levels of state anxiety in task-related endeavors. Since they do not experience greater state anxiety, this variable cannot be used to explain their
greater frequencies of dilatory behavior.
Popular thought about procrastinators also includes an arousalseeking interpretation (Burka & Yuen, 1983). Some trait procrastinators
deliberately postpone that which is necessary until the last minute,
thereby providing themselves with a "pleasurable rush" as they scramble
to the deadline. You will be most likely to hear this reasoning from
procrastinators themselves. There is no doubt that the role of deadlines is
important in guiding behavior, but as of yet there is no direct assessment of
the thrill-seeking interpretation. In one indirect study (Ferrari, 1992c),
factor analyses indicated that scores on my general procrastination scale
(Lay, 1986) loaded with sensation-seeking measures. The "rush" reported
by these procrastinators may be positive, but I would argue that the
dilatory behavior that preceded it was due to other factors-factors such as
perceived-task aversiveness.
In other unpublished data that we recently obtained, students made
judgments about their typical intentions and behaviors across 21 everyday
tasks. rrait procrastinators self-reported greater intention-behavior gaps.
Across participants, levels of positive affect (the lack thereof an index of
depression) were unrelated to the expression of dilatory behavior. Thus,
moderate levels of dejection may not be causally linked to the frequent
occurrence of procrastination. Negative affect was also unrelated.
In conclusion, the evidence to date suggests that affect, per se, plays a

112

0iAPTER5

minor role in producing dilatory behavior. What is needed in future

research is studies of concurrent anxiety and other aspects of affect that are
tied to the various components of ongoing-task work within the immediate
situation. For the time being, given the repeated link between trait procrastination and dejection, dejection may be best treated as an outcome variable, the consequence of readily accessible actual-ideal selfdiscrepancies.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COUNSELING OF

TRAIT PROCRASTINATORS
While this chapter is not primarily about treatment, the findings
reported in this chapter have implications for the counseling of trait procrastinators. The first response by many therapists may be to suggest that
counselors focus on the procrastinators' actual-ideal self-discrepancies. I
would like to suggest a different approach. A more productive tactic may
be to focus on their lack of actual-ought discrepancies. Their apparent
immunity to the "oughts" in their lives needs to be more fully confronted.
This may be brought about through self-criticism within the psychotherapy process, leading to a reexamination of "shoulds and oughts" or
values and standards (Rice & Greenberg, 1984). I recognize the dangers
here, particularly with procrastinators who are already high in agitation.
Nevertheless, the payoff would be twofold. Procrastinators would become
more responsible to their intentions at an action level. In tum, the reduction in dilatory behavior based on a greater attention to the "oughts" in
their lives would ultimately serve to lessen the actual-ideal discrepancies
they now experience.
AcKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research reported in this chapter was partially supported by a grant

from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada
(410-89-0646).

CHAPTER

DIMENSIONS OF
PERFECTIONISM AND
PROCRASTINATION
GORDON

L.

FLETT, PAUL

AND THOMAS

R.

L.

HEWITT,

MARTIN

The maxim "Nothing avails but perfection" may be spelled "paralysis."

SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL

Considerable recent research in psychology has focused on the role of

perfectionism in personal and social adjustment. Research in our laboratory has shown that perfectionism is linked to such negative outcomes as
anxiety, depression, suicide, and marital problems (Flett & Hewitt, 1992;
Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Mosher, 1991; Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, &
O'Brien, 1991; Hewitt & Flett, 1991a,b; 1993a,b; Hewitt, Flett, & TumbullDonovan, 1992). This research has increased our general understanding of
the perfectionism construct and it has heightened our appreciation of the
relevance of perfectionism to problems in daily life.
An important focus of interest within the perfectionism field is the
role of perfectionistic standards in procrastination. A common belief about
the nature of procrastination is that it stems from excessively high
standard-setting behavior. Several authors have suggested that there is a
link between procrastination and perfectionism (Burka & Yuen, 1983;
Hamachek, 1978; Missildine, 1963), and descriptions of personality problems such as obsessive-compulsive personality disorder note the cooccurrence of perfectionism and procrastination (American Psychiatric
Association, 1987). Initially, authors discussed perfectionism and procras113

114

CHAPTER 6

tination in a more general sense. For instance, Hamachek (1978) observed

that neurotic perfectionists tend to procrastinate because "the idea of
starting something or trying to achieve a goal is tormenting because they
are so strongly driven by their needs for perfection" (p. 32). Hamachek
cited Homey (1950) as the original source for the hypothesized link
between neurotic perfectionism and procrastination. Neurotic perfectionists are acutely sensitive to evaluative feedback; in this context, lack of
goal-striving in the form of delaying behavior is a means of forestalling
possible failure.
Several other authors have observed that perfectionism is not conducive to the performance of goal-directed behaviors. For instance, Hollender (1965) suggested that excessive perfectionism can produce work
inhibition and a paralysis of effort. Similarly, Mandel and Marcus (1988)
identified perfectionism as one factor that contributes to underachievement and lack of striving for achievement.

THE FAMILY ENVIRONMENT AND ITS LINK

TO PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION
The role of psychodynamic factors in encouraging procrastination was
discussed in Chapter 2. Particularly important seem to be attitudes derived toward authority figures, which are hypothesized to be rooted in
early childhood experiences. Attempts to understand the association
between perfectionism and procrastination have also focused on the role of
factors in the family environment. Missildine (1963) discussed procrastination and perfectionism in terms of exposure to unrealistic and overly
coercive parents. The role of parental evaluations and behavior is also
central to Burka and Yuen's analysis of procrastination. Burka and Yuen
(1983) observed that procrastinators place overwhelming pressure on
themselves. They noted that procrastinators demonstrate many of the
cognitive characteristics associated with perfectionism, including the tendency to endorse the importance of continual success and place unrealistic
demands on themselves.
In addition, Burka and Yuen maintained that procrastination stems,
in part, from being raised in a family that is demanding and doubts the
child's ability to achieve. They stated that the child may respond to his or
her doubting family either by believing and accepting these doubts or by
striving for perfection. In this context, the striving for perfection represents an attempt to please others rather than an autonomous, selfdetermined form of goal-directed behavior.

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASIlNATION

115

The link between perfectionism and procrastination is summarized

cogently in the following case study described by Pacht (1984):
A few years ago I saw man who was highly successful in his field. He
was, however, very unhappy because he had never achieved his
primary goal of earning a Ph. D. His successes meant little to him, and
he continued to obsess and ruminate about his inability to get his
degree. A major problem was his inability to complete a written paper
because "it was never good enough. Like many perfectionists, he was
a procrastinator, unwilling to be judged and demonstrating a fear of
failure that reached overwhelming proportions. I wish I could say that
this case was an outstanding success and that he got his doctorate and
lived happily ever after. Unfortunately, the final chapter has not yet
been written. (p. 388)
II

Taken to the extreme, the cooccurrence of perfectionism and procrastination can be quite debilitating. The degree of dysfunction is illustrated
by excerpts from the description in the DSM-lII-R Casebook (Spitzer,
Gibbon, Skodol, Williams, & First, 1989) of an actual person known as
"The procrastinator."
Forty-nine-year-old Roger comes to a Montreal psychiatric outpatient
clinic, saying that his family thinks that he needs help. He does not
have any specific complaints, but acknowledges that because of "perfectionism and immobility," he has been unable to work for about
seven years .... His wife (whom he met in grade six) claims he was
"methodical and slow" even in his teens. He graduated from the
university, but he was a semester late because he was unable to
complete written assignments on time .... He began to miss deadlines for reports. He had no difficulty starting the reports, but often
was unable to complete them because he wanted them to be "perfect."
In addition, he had difficulty keeping up with opening the mail at
home and paying bills. He was aware that they had to be paid, but he
somehow could not get around to doing it.... When Roger came for
help, he had tasks to complete that went back 14 years. He had mail
that had been unopened for 10 years that he refused to allow anyone
else to touch because they would not "do it properly." (Spitzer et al.,
1989, pp. 3-4)

Cases studies such as these not only highlight the close conceptual link
between procrastination and heightened evaluative standards, they also
illustrate the severe problems in daily functioning that can accompany
procrastination and perfectionism.
The observations outlined indicate that perfectionism and dilatory
tendencies are closely related. The purpose of the present chapter is to
examine in detail the proposed association between perfectionism and

116

0iAPTER6

procrastination. A multidimensional approach to the study of perfectionism is adopted to clarify the link between perfectionism and procrastination. Initially, we examine the similarities and differences between dimensions of perfectionism and procrastination at a conceptual level. Next, we
present a review of existing empirical data on perfectionism and procrastination. A multidimensional approach to the study of perfectionism is
utilized to demonstrate that procrastination is a response to a form of
social evaluation that involves the perceived imposition of unrealistic
expectations on the self. Finally, directions for future investigation in this
area are discussed, including research in our laboratory that examines the
associations among perfectionism, procrastination, and adjustment. We
begin with a brief description of the perfectionism construct and recent
developments in the perfectionism field.

HISTORY OF THE PERFECTIONISM CONSTRUCT

Historically, perfectionism has been treated as a unitary concept; it
has been conceptualized and assessed as if it were a unidimensional
personality trait that consists solely of a belief in high personal standards.
Measures such as the Bums Perfectionism Scale (Bums, 1980) provide only
one score and this score does not capture the breadth of the perfectionism
construct.
In contrast, recent research in our laboratory and elsewhere has
established that the perfectionism construct has distinct personal and
social components. The personal aspects -of perfectionism have been
referred to as self-oriented perfectionism (Hewitt & Flett, 1990, 1991b). The
distinguishing characteristics of self-oriented perfectionism include strong
motivation to be perfect, setting and holding unrealistic self-standards,
compulsive striving, all-or-none thinking whereby only total success or
total failure exist as outcomes, focusing on flaws and past failures, and
generalization of unrealistic self-standards across behavioral domains.
These characteristics of the self-oriented perfectionist have often been
described as important contributors to a depressive-prone personality by
increasing failure experiences and by influencing processing of information related to an inability to attain standards (e.g., Beck, Rush, Shaw, &
Emery, 1979; Bums & Beck, 1978; Hewitt & Genest, 1990). Self-oriented
perfectionism also includes elements such as high personal standards,
personal doubts about actions, and organization (Frost, Marten, Lahart, &
Rosenblate, 1990).
Other-oriented perfectionism is an important interpersonal dimension of perfectionism that involves beliefs and expectations about the

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECflONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

117

capabilities of others. Other-oriented perfectionism entails setting unrealistic standards for others, placing great importance on whether they
attain these standards, and rewarding them only if standards are attained.
Whereas self-oriented perfectionism facilitates self-directed affect and
cognitions, other-oriented perfectionism facilitates externally directed affect and cognitions reflecting hostility toward others, authoritarianism,
and dominating behavior (Hewitt & Flett, 1989; 1991b). Other-oriented
perfectionism does not appear to be related positively with depression,
but it is related to certain personality disorders (see Hewitt & Flett, 1991b;
Hewitt, Flett, & Turnbull, 1992) and to relationship difficulties (Flett,
Hewitt, & Mikail, 1993).
Finally, socially prescribed perfectionism involves perceptions of one's
ability to meet the standards and expectations imposed by significant
others. Socially prescribed perfectionism entails the belief that others have
unrealistic standards and perfectionistic motives for personal behaviors
and that others will be satisfied only when these standards are attained.
This perfectionism dimension is related to numerous social-interaction
variables, including fear of negative social evaluation, belief in the external
control of reinforcement, and need for the approval of others (Hewitt &
Flett, 1991b). Although these perfectionistic standards are believed to
emanate from outside the self, it should be noted that attributing control to
outside or external forces can result in depressive symptoms involving an
element of self-blame (see Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Pickering, in press).
Hence, a lack of perceived control and subsequent learned helplessness
and depressive symptomatology appear to be important consequences of
socially prescribed perfectionism. Socially prescribed perfectionism has
been evaluated as a broad dimension that allows for general pressures at a
societal level (see Hewitt & Flett, 1991b), and it has been measured in terms
of specific components, such as parental criticism or high parental expectations (Frost et al., 1990).

SIMILARITIES BETWEEN PERFECTIONISM

AND PROCRASTINATION
The study of perfectionism from a multidimensional perspective has
important implications for an understanding of procrastination. As noted
earlier, many authors have alluded to the link between perfectionism and
procrastination. Indeed, a conceptual analysis of both personality factors
reveals that they have many features in common. For instance, both
perfectionism and procrastination are related to increased endorsement of
irrational beliefs (Beswick, Rothblum, & Mann, 1988; Ellis & Knaus, 1977;

118

CHAPI'ER6

Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Koledin, 1991). Both perfectionists and procrastinators endorse beliefs involving the need for high levels of performance and the need to avoid social disapproval.
Perfectionism and procrastination are also similar in that they are
associated with elements of Type A behavior. Flett, Hewitt, BIankstein,
and Dynin (1994) have shown that different aspects of the perfectionism
construct correspond to aspects of the Type A construct, while Effert and
Ferrari (1989) have shown that procrastinators exhibit Type A characteristics, such as speed and impatience. Perhaps the most noteworthy characteristic that is common to both constructs is the association with fear of
failure. In the case study described previously, Pacht (1984) alluded to a
link between perfectionism and fear of failure. A recent study on perfectionism and self-actualization confirmed that perfectionism and fear of
failure are closely linked (see Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Mosher, 1991).
Other studies have shown that perfectionism is associated with a variety of
specific fears (Blankstein, Flett, Hewitt, & Eng, 1993) and chronic worry
(Meyer, Miller, Metzger, & Borkovec, 1990).
Similarly, many authors in the procrastination literature have discussed procrastination in achievement contexts and and in the context of
excessive concern with failure (see Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ellis & Knaus,
1977; Rorer, 1983; Rothblum, 1990; Schouwenburg, 1992a; Solomon &
Rothblum, 1984).
DIsTINGUISHING FEATURES

The similarities between perfectionism and procrastination have led

some authors to equate perfectionism and procrastination. However, there
are some important dissimilarities between these constructs. These differences are particularly evident when it is recognized that self-oriented
perfectionism and socially prescribed perfectionism are distinct dimensions. The differences between self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism have direct implications for the study of procrastination. Selforiented perfectionism has a positive motivational component that involves
the active striving to meet goals (Hewitt & Flett, 1990, 1991b). Individuals
with a high level of self-oriented perfectionism are quite conscientious and
ambitious. Self-oriented perfectionists tend to have an internal locus of
control and they may demonstrate high levels of achievement under certain
circumstances (see Flett, Blankstein, & Hewitt, in press). Given that selforiented perfectionism incorporates a sense of intrinsic motivation and a
tendency to approach rather than avoid achievement situations, we would
predict that any association between procrastination and self-oriented
perfectionism would be negative in direction.

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

119

In contrast, socially prescribed perfectionism should be associated

positively with procrastination. Socially prescribed perfectionism is an
amotivational state. It is associated with a sense of helplessness about the
inability to establish personal control over evaluative standards and a
sense of hopelessness about the inevitability of failure in the future. People
with a high level of socially prescribed perfectionism tend to be quite
neurotic and feel that they lack the effective problem-solving skills required for success (Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, Solnik, & Van Brunschot,
1992). Someone with a high level of socially prescribed perfectionism
would be more likely to avoid rather than approach a personal problem
(Hewitt, Flett, & Endler, in press). Consequently, people with high levels of
socially prescribed perfectionism are especially prone to adjustment problems such as anxiety, depression, and suicidal impulses (Flett, Hewitt,
Bellissimo, & Gold, 1992; Flett, Hewitt, Blankstein, & Mosher, 1991; Hewitt
& Flett, 1991a,b, 1993b; Hewitt et aI., 1992).
The distinctions between self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism are particularly evident when considered within the framework of
levels of ego involvement versus task involvement. Ego involvement and
task involvement reflect differences in goal orientation. The primary goal
for ego-involved individuals is to demonstrate their superiority over others
and to maximize positive social evaluations, while task-involved individuals are interested in learning for the sake of learning in the form of selfmastery of tasks (Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, Cheung, Laue~ & Patashnick,
1989). Both perfectionism dimensions incorporate an element of ego involvement in the sense that both dimensions are associated with fears of
personal failure (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Mosher, 1991) and a tendency
to be excessively self-critical (Hewitt & Flett, 1993). However, clear differences exist between the perfectionism dimensions in terms of degree of
task involvement. Whereas self-oriented perfectionists are very goaldirected and task-focused, socially preScribed perfectionists suffer from a
relative absence of intrinsic motivation and an unwillingness or inability to
engage in problem-focused behavior. As a result, self-oriented perfectionists plan carefully in their behavior, while socially prescribed perfectionists
are impulsive (Hewitt & Flett, 1993b).
There are numerous reasons why procrastination more closely resembles socially prescribed perfectionism instead of self-oriented perfectionism. Procrastination is a personality variable that may also be interpreted
as a type of motivational deficit. Procrastinators are plagued by a lack of
self-control (Milgram, Sroloff, & Rosenbaum, 1988; Rothblum, Solomon, &
Murakami, 1986; Ziesat, Rosenthal, & White, 1978) and a general tendency
to suffer from a variety of forms of negative affectivity. If procrastination is
associated with self-oriented perfectionism, we would expect a negative

120

CHAPTER 6

association between these variables, given that procrastinators appear to

suffer from a relative lack of conscientiousness rather than too much
conscientiousness.
The similarities between socially prescribed perfectionism and procrastination are quite noticeable if one compares recent studies that examine
how perfectionism and procrastination relate to broad trait dimensions of
personality. Balleweg (1992) administered the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Hewitt & Flett, 1991b) and the NEO-PI (Costa & McCrae,
1989) to a sample of 87 college students. The MPS is a 4S-item measure of
self-oriented, other-oriented, and socially prescribed perfectionism. It has
adequate reliability and validity in clinical and subclinical samples (Hewitt
& Flett, 1991b; Hewitt, Flett, Turnbull-Donovan, & Mikail, 1991). The NEOPI is a measure of the "Big Five" factor model of personality traits and the
various facets of these five factors. Balleweg (1992) conducted separate
analyses with the MPS subscales and found that self-oriented perfectionism was associated primarily with high levels of Conscientiousness. There
was little association between self-oriented perfectionism and Neuroticism. Other-oriented perfectionism was associated with a high level of
Extraversion and a low level of Agreeableness. Finally, socially prescribed
perfectionism was associated primarily with higher levels of Neuroticism.
Research in our laboratory on the five-factor model has established similarly that socially prescribed perfectionism is linked with Neuroticism,
whereas self-oriented perfectionism is associated with Conscientiousness.
Similar research has examined procrastination and the five-factor
model. Recently, we had 67 college students complete Lay's General
Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986) and the NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1989).
The NEO-FFI is an abbreviated measure of the five-factor model. The
analyses confirmed that procrastination was correlated highly in a negative
direction with Conscientiousness (r = - .64, P < .001). This is in direct
contrast to the positive association between self-oriented perfectionism
and Conscientiousness that was obtained in the research described earlier.
The only other significant correlation in our study of procrastination
and the five-factor model was a positive association between procrastination and Neuroticism (r = .27, P < .05). This corresponds to the positive
link between socially preSCribed perfectionism and Neuroticism. Taken
together, it appears that the conscientious individual is characterized by
a high level of self-oriented perfectionism and a low level of procrastination. Howeve~ the neurotic individual is characterized both by socially
prescribed perfectionism and procrastination to the extent that procrastination may be conceptualized as a response to punitive expectations
from others.

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

121

Correlational Research: Perfectionism as a Unitary Phenomenon

The link between procrastination and perfectionism does not become
apparent until the perfectionism construct is .examined in terms of its separate
dimensions. Collectively, research that has not adopted a multidimensional approach has provided an equivocal picture of the link between perfectionism and procrastination. Two studies indicate that these variables
are positively related, while three studies report little or no association.
Initial evidence of an association was provided by Solomon and
Rothblum (1984), who examined the correlates of procrastination in a
sample of 342 university students. Subjects completed two sections of the
Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS). The second section of
the PASS provides a typical procrastination scenario (Le., delay in writing
a term paper). Students are provided with a list of possible explanations
for why they would procrastinate in this type of situation. Perfectionism
was included among the reasons, along with other factors such as evaluation anxiety, difficulty making decisions, dependency, aversiveness of the
task, lack of self-confidence, fear of success, and so on. Perfectionism was
defined in this study as overly perfectionistic standards for one's performance. A factor analysis revealed that the perfectionism items loaded on a
fear-of-failure factor that also included lack of self-confidence and anxiety
about the ability to meet other people's expectations. Additional analyses
with other measures revealed a homogenous group of procrastinators who
were characterized by excessive levels of fear of failure and perfectionism.
This group of individuals could be differentiated from another group of
procrastinators who were characterized mainly by aversiveness of tasks.
Ferrari (1992b) conducted a study in which the General Procrastination Scale (GPS; Lay, 1986) and the Perfectionism Scale (BPS; Burns, 1980)
were administered to 307 college students. These subjects also completed
measures of self-presentation, self-consciousness, and self-handicapping.
The results showed that procrastination and perfectionism were positively
correlated (r = .34, P < .001). In addition, both measures were associated
significantly with measures of self-presentation, self-consciousness, and
self-handicapping.
As noted previously, other studies have failed to detect a robust
association between perfectionism and procrastination. Johnson and
Slaney (1992) administered a 62-item perfectionism scale to a sample of
1,329 students. This perfectionism scale contained items that refer specifically to self-oriented perfectionism, as well as factors believed to be related
to perfectionism, such as procrastination. Factor analyses of this scale
yielded three distinct factors: (1) perfectionism; (2) procrastination; and (3)

122

0IAPTER6

interpersonal discomfort. A subset of 100 perfectionists and 100 nonperfectionists were compared in terms of their mean scores on the three dimensions. Subjects were classified as high or low perfectionists on the basis of"
their own self-identification as a perfectionist or nonperfectionist. The
validity of this procedure was confirmed in that the groups did differ
substantially in their perfectionism scores, as assessed by the 62-item
perfectionism scale. However, the two subject groups did not differ in
terms of their mean scores on the measures of procrastination and interpersonal discomfort.
In another study, Muszynski and Akamatsu (1991) examined procrastinators' tendencies in a sample of 151 graduate students in clinical psychology. Specifically, students were divided into one of three groups on the
basis of behavioral outcome measure-the speed with which they completed
their doctoral dissertations. The three groups were: (1) early completers
(i.e., less than 5 years to complete the degree); (2) average completers (i.e.,
5-6 years to complete the degree); and (3) delayed completers (i.e., 7 or
more years to complete the degree). Subjects were asked to complete a
version of the Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) that was
modified to contain content that was relevant to the process of completing
the dissertation. This version of the PASS scale measured numerous
characteristics of the respondent, including perfectionism, frustration
tolerance, rebellion, need for approval, difficulty making decisions, and
self-denigration. Analyses of the mean scores showed that the three
groups did vary substantially in levels of frustration tolerance, rebellion,
self-denigration, lack of structure, and task aversiveness. As expected, the
high-delay group tended to be distinguished by more negative responses
on all of these measures. However, the groups did not differ significantly
on the perfectionism factor.
Finally, Schouwenberg (1992a) examined perfectionism and procrastination in an indirect manner (see Chapter 4). In this research, a sample of
278 students from the Netherlands completed a measure of reasons for
procrastination, along with measures of trait procrastination, behavioral
procrastination, and fear of failure. A factor analYSis of the reasons for
procrastination yielded six factors, including a fear-of-failure factor that
closely resembles perfectionism. The two items on this factor with the
largest factor loadings were "Concerned you wouldn't meet your own
expectations" (factor loading of .87) and "Worried you wouldn't meet your
own very high standards" (factor loading of .84). Path analyses of the data
from the total sample showed slight positive relationships between this
fear-of-failure factor and indices of procrastination, leading Schouwenburg
(1992a) to conclude that there is no substantial relationship between fear
of failure and procrastination.

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

123

Overall, then, two out of five studies that have treated the perfectionism construct as a unidimensional construct did report evidence of a
substantial positive association between perfectionism and procrastination. Regarding the two studies that did obtain a link between perfectionism and procrastination, it is worth noting that the results may be due to
the presence of social-evaluation anxiety as a contributing factor. In their
paper, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) reported that the perfectionism item
loaded significantly on a factor that also included an evaluation-anxiety
item. Similarly, the obtained association between perfectionism and procrastination that was reported by Ferrari (1992b) could be due to the fact
that the perfectionism measure in that study was the BPS (Bums, 1980),
and this perfectionism scale includes item content that reflects a fear of
negative evaluation.
Research with Perfectionism as a Multidimensional Construct
Recent research with multidimensional measures of perfectionism
has clarified the association between perfectionism and procrastination.
These investigations suggest that the relation between perfectionism and
procrastination is more complex than past theorists predicted .. At present,
two multidimensional measures of perfectionism exist in the literature (see
Frost et al., 1990; Hewitt & Flett, 1989, 1991b). Both measures demonstrate
the importance of distinguishing the personal and social aspects of the
perfectionism construct.
As noted above, our own measure permits an analysis of the personal
and social aspects of perfectionism. To reiterate, the MPS assesses the
three general dimensions of perfectionism-self-oriented perfectionism,
other-oriented perfectionism, and socially prescribed perfectionism. In a
recent study by Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, and Koledin (1992), these three
dimensions were measured in a sample of 131 college students. Subjects
completed the MPS (Hewitt & Flett, 1989, 1991b), the BPS (Bums, 1980), the
GPS (Lay, 1986), and a modified version of the PASS (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). The Lay scale is a measure of generalized-arousal procrastination tendencies, while the PASS is a multidimensional measure of situational procrastination in hypothetical academic situations.
The correlational findings are shown in Table 6-1. Analyses of data
from the total sample revealed that socially prescribed perfectionism was
associated broadly with the procrastination measures in this sample.
Specifically, socially prescribed perfectionism was correlated positively
with generalized procrastination, the frequency of academic procrastination, the extent to which academic procrastination is perceived to be a
problem, and a pervasive fear of failure. The link between socially pre-

124

CHAPTER 6

Correlations between Perfectionism

and Procrastination Measures
for the lbtal Sample, Males and Females

TABLE 6-1.

Perfectionism dimensions
Procrastination measures
Total sample (n = 135)
Lay Procrastination
PASS-Frequency
PASS-Problem
PASS-Task Aversiveness
PASS-Fear of Failure
PASS-Desire to Decrease

Males (n = 56)
Lay Procrastination
PASS-Frequency
PASS-Problem
PASS-Task Aversiveness
PASS-Fear of Failure
PASS-Desire to Decrease
Females (n = 79)
Lay Procrastination
PASS-Frequency
PASS-Problem
PASS-Task Aversiveness
PASS-Fear of Failure
PASS-Desire to Decrease

Self

Other

-.02
.07

.08

.09 .
.03
.19*

.11

.11
.17
.04

-.03

.10
.14
.15

-.03

.14

.09

.27*

.09

Social

Bums

.01

.30"'*

.2'r

-.01

.21*
.2S**

.22*
.22*
.12
.26**
.13

.09

.08

.1S*
.16

.40"*
.13

-.02
.09
-.14
-.03
.19
.12
.01
.06
.10
.21
.22
.21

.50*'"
.32*
.37*
.04
.39*
.20

.11
.09
.20
.14
.46"
.10

.36**
.32*
.30"
.16
.32*
.19
.15
.10
.14
.26*
.14

.11

'p <.05
"p< .01.

Note: The following abbreviation was used: PASS (Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students).

scribed perfectionism and procrastination was particularly evident among

males (see Table 6-1~ These results appear to provide support for Hamachek's
(1978) observations about procrastination and neurotic perfectionism-the
association between procrastination and socially prescribed perfectionism
should probably be interpreted within the context of other data, which
indicated that socially prescribed perfectionists also tend to be quite
anxious and neurotic (Hewitt, Flett, & Blankstein, 1991).
Analyses comparing the two measures of self-oriented perfectionism
(i.e., the MPS and the BPS) provided some potentially important insights
about the nature of procrastination. Significant correlations were obtained
between procrastination and the BPS, but there were no significant correlations between procrastination and the MPS measure of self-oriented per-

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECfIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

125

fectionism. What factors account for this difference? Perhaps the most
logical explanation is that the MPS measure includes a salient motivational
component that is lacking from the BPS (see Hewitt & Flett, 1990, 1991b, for
related discussions). Individuals with high standards, who are actively
striving to meet these standards, do not appear to exhibit procrastinatory
tendencies. Procrastination is only exhibited by those individuals who
value perfect performance but lack the required intrinsic motivation and
self-determination to attain these standards. These findings suggest that
an analysis of related differences in motivational orientations may further
our understanding of the nature of procrastination.
The need to distinguish self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism was demonstrated clearly in a recent investigation by Martin, Flett,
and Hewitt (1993). A sample of 178 college students completed the MPS
and Lay's GPS. Subjects also completed the Generalized Expectancies of
Success Scale (Fibel & Hale, 1978) because we wanted to test the possibility
that self-expectancies moderate the link between perfectionism and procrastination. This hypothesis stems from self-regulation models and selfefficacy models, which postulate that maladaptive responses are especially likely to be present if an individual with perfectionistic standards
also is characterized by a tendency to be self-critical or a tendency to be
pessimistic about outcomes involving the self (Bandura, 1986; Kanfer &
Hagerman, 1981).
Consistent with Flett et al. (1992), correlation analyses revealed that
greater procrastination was associated with higher levels of socially prescribed perfectionism. In addition, procrastination and socially prescribed
perfectionism were both associated with negative self-expectancies. Analyses with the other perfectionism dimensions revealed that there was a
significant negative correlation between procrastination and self-oriented
perfectionism.
Predictions that were derived indirectly from self-regulation models
(Bandura, 1986; Kanfer & Hagerman, 1981) were tested in this study by
treating trait procrastination as the outcome variable in a hierarchicalregression analysis. These self-regulation models suggest that responses
to self-evaluation follow from the joint consideration of perfectionistic
standards and other variables involving the self, such as self-expectancies
and self-evaluations. According to these models, the most negative responses are likely to be exhibited by perfectionistic individuals with
negative views of the self. Evidence for this view was obtained by Martin et
al. (1993). Initially, a predictor block comprised of the three MPS variables
was entered into the equation to predict levels of procrastination. This
predictor block was highly significant and accounted for 13% of the
variance in procrastination scores (F change = 8.67, P < .01). Interestingly,

126

CHAPTER 6

both socially prescribed perfectionism and self-oriented perfectionism

were significant predictors within the block of variables. Consistent with
the correlational findings, socially prescribed perfectionism was associated
with higher procrastination (t = 4.52, Beta = 0.37, P < .01), while selforiented perfectionism was associated with lower procrastination (t =
-3.76, Beta = -0:-33, P < .01). Other-oriented perfectionism was not
significant. Next, the self-expectancy variable was entered and it was not
significant. The next predictor block consisted of the two-way interactions
of the perfectionism dimensions and the self-expectancy variable. This
block was significant due to the interaction of self-oriented perfectionism
and expectancy (t = 2.42, P < .05). Examination of the interaction showed
that a critical variable is whether low versus high self-oriented perfectionists are characterized by an optimistic or pessimistic outlook. The general
tendency for low self-oriented perfectionism to be associated with procrastination is exacerbated among students with an unfavorable outlook on the
future (see Figure 6-1). That is, it is the joint absence of high personal
standards and optimism that is most closely linked with high rates of
procrastination.

PROCRASTINATION AND PERFECTIONISTIC

PARENTAL EXPECTANCIES
Related research on perfectionism and procrastination has sought to
incorporate the original clinical observations of Burka and Yuen (1983)
about the role of family factors in procrastination. Rather than examining
socially prescribed perfectionism in a more generalized form, this research
has focused directly on procrastination and unrealistic parental expectancies. This research has employed a perfectionism measure developed by
Frost et al. (1990).
The Frost et al. (1990) measure is also entitled the Multidimensional
Perfectionism Scale. This scale consists of six subscales measuring personal standards, concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, organization, parental expectations, and parent~l criticisms. Thus, it measures both
the personal and social aspects of perfectionism. A recent comparison
study of the two MPS inventories by Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia, and
Neubauer (1993) showed that the social components of perfectionism (Le.,
high parental expectations and criticism) represent maladaptive evaluative
concerns in that the parental-criticism factor predicts adjustment outcomes, such as negative affect and depression.
Insight into the link between perfectionism and procrastination was
provided by Frost et al. (1990). They administered their Multidimensional

127

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

15~------------------------------------------1
14

13

~
z

12

~
0

11

II:
Q.

I-

10

I-

8
7

High

Low

GENERALIZED EXPECTANCY FOR SUCCESS

-f-

Low self-perfectionism

-It-

High self-perfectionism

FIGURE 6-1. Interaction of self-oriented perfectionism and generalized expectancies of

success predicting trait procrastination.

Perfectionism Scale and a multidimensional measure of academic procrastination to 106 female college students. Analyses that used a combined
score from all six perfectionism subscales indicated no significant association between overall perfectionism scores and frequency of procrastination. Analyses with the various perfectionism subscales confirmed our
observation that self-oriented perfectionism is associated negatively with
procrastination and imposed perfectionism from others is associated positively with procrastination. Frost et al. (1990) found a significant negative
correlation between procrastination frequency and high personal standards, supporting later claims that high personal standards represent
positive achievement strivings (Frost et al., 1993). At the same time, Frost
et al. reported that increased procrastination was associated positively with
high parental criticism and high parental expectations. Overall, these data

128

CHAPTER 6

are consistent with the view that procrastination may be a response to the
expectation that parents will respond to self-characteristics in a harsh and
controlling manner.
Unfortunately, the Frost et al. (1990) measures of parental expectancies and parental criticism provide combination scores that do not permit
comparisons of the respective roles of maternal versus paternal expectations. Thus, in the present instance, it is not possible to establish which
parent contributes the most to perfectionism and procrastination. Separate
lines of investigation on familial factors in perfectionism and familial
factors in procrastination do not provide a clear picture as to which parent
is perceived as responsible for these tendencies. In terms of perfectionism,
Frost, Lahart, and Rosenblate (1991) examined parental influences with a
sample of female college students and their parents. They concluded that
mothers were mostly responsible for perfectionism in their daughters.
Flett, Hewitt, and Singer (in press) examined this issue from another
perspective by administering the MPS (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b) and a new
measure of parental authority style (Buri, 1991) to a sample of 50 male
college students and 50 female college students. It was found that socially
prescribed perfectionism was associated with an authoritarian, overcontrolling parenting style on the part of both parents. However, this association between socially prescribed perfectionism and authoritarian parenting was present for men but not for women.
As for procrastination, Ferrari and Olivette (1994) administered two
measures of procrastination and the identical measure of parental authority style (Buri, 1991) to a sample of 84 female college students. This study
with college women showed that authoritarian parenting on the part of
fathers was associated with procrastination among daughters. Taken together, these studies suggest that maladaptive parenting styles may contribute to perfectionism and procrastination, but the respective roles of the
mother versus the father need to be clarified.
Some additional insight on the role of parental influences in perfectionism and procrastination was provided in a recent study by Voicu (1993),
who conducted a more detailed analysis of the positive association between procrastination and socially imposed standards of perfectionism
from parental figures. In this investigation, measures of perfectionism and
procrastination were included as part of a larger study on family environment variables that may contribute to the development of procrastination.
A sample of 133 college students completed multiple measures of procrastination. The procrastination measures included a measure of general
procrastination (Lay, 1986) and Solomon and Rothblum's (1984) original
measure of academic procrastination. In its original form, the Solomon and
Rothblum scale provides measures of the frequency of academic procras-

129

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

tination and the extent to which academic procrastination is a problem. In

addition, subjects completed a modified version of Frost's MPS (Frost et
al., 1990). The MPS parental criticism and high parental expectations
subscale items from the Frost scale were reworded to make specific
references to the subject's mother and father. These changes served the
purpose of providing separate subscale measures of parental criticism
from the mother as well as the father, in addition to measures of high
parental expectations from the mother and the father. Subjects completed
the other measures on the Frost scale as well (i.e., concern with mistakes,
organization, high personal standards, and doubts about actions).
The correlational findings with these measures are shown in Table 6-2.
We will limit our discussion to the results involving the measures of
parental criticism and expectations. It can be seen that the procrastination
measures were correlated positively with levels of parental criticism and
high parental expectations from the mother. Interestingly, separate analyses by sex of subject showed that this pattern was more evident for men
than for women.
To summarize, converging sources of evidence indicate that procrastination is associated with the perceived presence of imposed standards of
perfection on the self. These standards appear to derive, at least in part,
from one's parents. The issue of which parent has the greatest influence is
equivocal at present; some evidence highlights the role of the mother (e.g.,

TABLE 6-2. Correlations between Frost's

MPS and Procrastination Measures
Procrastination measures
Perfectionism measures
Concern with mistakes
Personal standards
Doubts about actions
Organization
Parental expectations-mother
Parental expectations-father
Parental criticism-mother
Parental criticism-father

LAY

PASSF

PASSP

.05
-.17"
.2S--.49-.19.07
.1S.06

.02
-.17"
.23--.31-

.12
-.09
.29--.OS
.15
-.09
.21-.02

.11

-.07
.20*
.01

n = 135 (79 women, 56 men)

'p < .05

"p < .01.
Note: The following abbreviations were used: PASSF (Procrastination
Assessment ScaleStudents-frequency of procrastination), PASSP
(Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students-procrastination as a
problem), and LAY (Lay's General Procrastination Scale).

130

CHAPTER 6

Voicu, 1993), while other evidence highlights the role of the father (e.g.,
Ferrari & Olivette, 1994). Procrastination is associated not only with the
presence of social standards of perfectionism, but also with a relative lack
of personal standards of perfection. Finally, as indicated by our regression
analyses, an individual is especially high in the tendency to procrastinate
if this low level of self-oriented perfectionism and goal-directed behavior is
accompanied by a pessimistic view of one's chances for success.

PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

IN WW-THREAT SITUATIONS
The findings described in the previous section are qualified by an
important caveat. It is quite possible that the link between procrastination
and perfectionism varies as a function of situational factors. Analyses of
Person x Situation interactions (see Endler & Magnusson, 1976) should
discover several situation parameters that influence the perfectionismprocrastination association. Preliminary research in our laboratory has
focused on the role of ego involvement in perfectionism. Three separate
research investigations in the perfectionism field have shown that the
association between perfectionism and negative emotional reactions is
stronger in situations that have a high level of ego involvement or threat to
self-esteem (Flett, Hewitt, Endler, & Tassone, in press; Frost & Marten,
1990; Hewitt, Mittelstaedt, & Wollert, 1989). In the most recent study (Flett
et al., in press), individuals varying in trait levels of perfectionism were
asked to perform an anagram task in a condition of high ego involvement
or low ego involvement. Ego involvement was manipulated by informing
subjects either that anagram performance was highly diagnostic of future
success (Le., high ego involvement) or that the link between anagram
performance and future success was uncertain (Le., low ego involvement).
The main dependent measure was the subject's subsequent self-reports of
state anxiety. The results showed the presence of a significant interaction
between socially prescribed perfectionism and ego involvement; the highest state anxiety was reported by socially prescribed perfectionists in the
most threatening situation.
Other research in our laboratory suggests that the tendency for
socially prescribed perfectionism to be associated with procrastination
may indeed depend on the procrastinators' being in a situation of high ego
involvement in which they are very concerned about the possibility of
failure. A recent study of perfectionism and behavioral procrastination in a
nonthreatening situation found no evidence of a link between socially
prescribed perfectionism and procrastination (Martin, Flett, & Hewitt,

131

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

1992). In this study, 146 subjects who varied in trait levels of procrastination
and perfectionism were contacted and told that they would be asked to
complete some questionnaires on two occasions separated by a 2-week
interval. At Time 1, subjects completed various measures, including the
MPS (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b), a measure of general procrastination (Lay,
1986), and a measure of optimism. In addition, because the study had a
health focus, subjects at Time 1 were asked under a pretext to complete a
self-report checklist of their fluid consumption over a 3-day period. It was
left up to each subject tp determine when, during the 2-week period, they
would complete the checklist. However, they were informed that they
should return the form at some point before their next appointment
because the experimenter wanted to begin preliminary analyses of the
data. The behavioral dependent measure was how long it took the subject
to return the fluid-consumption checklist. The situation itself involved
relatively low ego threat because subjects were not to be queried about
their fluid consumption, and there was no way for the experimenter to
discern whether the measure had been completed in a truthful and
accurate fashion. This situation was not very threatening in the sense that
there was little focus on self-evaluation or related concerns.
Table 6-3 is based on the results of a regression analysis with behavioral procrastination as the outcome measure (i.e., length of time to return
the checklist). The five personality variables (i.e., procrastination, selforiented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism, socially prescribed
perfectionism, and optimism) were entered simultaneously in a predictor
block. The five personality measures predicted a Significant 12% of the
variance in the behavioral measure (F change = 11.85, P < .01). Examination of the individual measures within the predictor block confirmed that
the self-report measure of procrastination was able to predict the measure

TABLE 6-3. Hierardrlcal Regression Analysis

Predicting Behavioral Procrastination
Variable
Predictor block
Lay procrastination
Self-oriented perfectionism
Other-oriented perfectionism
Socially prescribed perfectionism
Optimism
n

= 146

'p < .05

p < .01

R2 change

F change

.12

3.77*"

Beta

0.22
-0.01
0.19
-0.07
0.18

2.57*

-0.13
2.11"

-0.70
2.03"

132

CHAPrER6

of procrastinatory behavior (F = 2.57, P < .05), a finding that attests to the

validity of Lay's General Procrastination Scale. Socially prescribed perfectionism was not a significant predictor variable within the block of predictors. Thus, in a nonevaluative situation involving little personal challenge,
the imposed expectations of others were not relevant to actual delaying
behavior. However, greater procrastinatory behavior was predicted by
higher levels of other-oriented perfectionism (F = 2.11, P < .05), and
optimism (F = 2.03, P< .05). That is, people who tend to expect perfection
from others took longer to return the material. People with high standards
for others appeared to exhibit a form of behavioral procrastination that
suggested noncompliance. These data are generally consistent with the
tendency for other-oriented perfectionists to be hostile, passiveaggressive, and relatively unconcerned with gaining the approval of others
(see Hewitt & Flett, 1991b; Hewitt et aI., 1992). This finding emerged
despite the fact that no previous study has suggested a link between
procrastination and other-oriented perfectionism. Additional analyses of
possible interaction effects showed that the link between delay and otheroriented perfectionism was qualified by a significant interaction of otheroriented perfectionism and optimism that accounted for an additional 4%
of unique variance (F change = 6.95, P < .01). The interaction is displayed
graphically in FigUre 6-2. The graph indicates that other-oriented perfectionists with a high level of optimism took a particularly long time to
return the questionnaire.
Oearly, these data need to be replicated in a study that includes both
high and low ego involvement. The main point of importance is that future
statements about the nature of perfectionism and procrastination must be
qualified by some consideration of important factors such as the nature of
the evaluative situation and the task involved.

FUTURE RESEARCH ISSUES

In summary, the results of existing correlational studies suggest that
procrastination stems, in part, from the belief that significant others are
too demanding and expect high performance. Procrastination can be
viewed as a response that is designed to protect the self from the negative
responses that others are likely to exhibit when perfection is not achieved.
Because research on perfectionism and procrastination is in its early
stages, several issues pertaining to perfectionism and procrastination
remain to be tested. Four such issues are a.iscussed below.
In our laboratory, one current line of research is examining the
possibility that perfectionism combines with procrastination to produce

133

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

10~----------------------------------------------~
9

4~----------------------~----------------------~
Low

High

OPTIMISM

--I--

Low other perfectionism

--It-

High other perfectionism

FIGURE 6-2. Interaction of other-oriented perfectionism and optimism predicting behavioral

procrastination.

higher levels of maladjustment. In a previous section, we alluded to selfregulation models (e.g., Kanfer & Hagerman, 1981), which maintain that
poor adjustment is especially likely if an individual is characterized jointly
by perfectionist tendencies and negative self-judgments. These models
also hypothesize that low adjustment will result if the person is perfectionistic and lacks the requisite coping mechanisms required to deal with
the frustrations of being unable to attain perfection (see Flett, Hewitt,
Blankstein, & O'Brien, 1991; Hewitt, Flett, & Endle~ in press). Previous
research by Flett et al. provided some support for this model. Flett et al.
(1991) found that the link between socially prescribed perfectionism and
depression was moderated by levels of self-control; the greatest depression
was reported by those socially prescribed perfectionists who had low
levels of self-control.

134

CHAPTER 6

Procrastination is relevant from a self-regulation perspective because

it has often been interpreted as a lack of self-control, or as a lack of personal
resourcefulness (Milgram et aI., 1988; Rothblum et aI., 1986; Ziesat et al.,
1978). Procrastination has been linked to various forms of negative affectivity, including anxiety and depression (McCown, Johnson, & Petzel,
1989b; Rothblum et aI., 1986; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). We would
expect that procrastination and socially prescribed perfectionism should
interact. That is, adjustment difficulties would be especially predominant
for the socially prescribed perfectionist who responds to the stress of
unrealistic expectations from others with procrastination and chronic taskavoidance behavior rather than with self-control and a willingness to
confront problems in a task-focused manner.
Only one study thus far has examined the associations among perfectionism, general procrastination, and depression (Martin, 1990). A sample
of 195 students completed the MPS (Hewitt & Flett, 1991b), Lay's General
Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986), and the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck,
Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). The correlational findings showed that greater
depression was associated with higher levels of both procrastination and
socially prescribed perfectionism. Moreover, a hierarchical regression
analysis confirmed the presence of a significant interaction between socially prescribed perfectionism and procrastination. The interaction is
shown in Figure 6-3. As expected, substantially higher levels of depression
were reported by socially prescribed perfectionists who also tended to be
procrastinators. Less depression was reported by socially prescribed perfectionists who responded in a more constructive manner by not engaging
in procrastination. These data highlight the potential usefulness of examining procrastination as a form of lack of self-regulation that interacts with
personality variables to produce maladjustment. Future research in this
domain needs to examine specifically how perfectionism and procrastination may combine to predict other forms of maladjustment.
In addition to the association among perfectionism, procrastination,
and depression, another key issue for future research is the nature of the
causal association between perfectionism and procrastination from a developmental perspective. Although we tend to regard perfectionism as
being causally prior to procrastination, there is no empirical support for
this view thus far. If a causal sequence does indeed exist, it is equally
plausible that procrastinators embrace the belief that perfectionistic standards are being imposed on them because it provides an excuse for their
own lack of performance or it represents a self-handicapping strategy.
Overall, the procrastination and perfectionism literatures are characterized
by few empirical attempts to examine issues with prospective designs.
More important insights will be obtained through longitudinal investiga-

135

DIMENSIONS OF PERFECTIONISM AND PROCRASTINATION

18~--------------------------------------------~
16
14
12
w

a:

10

i5

III

6
4
2

O~---------------------r--------------------~
Low

High

TRAIT PROCRASTINATION

Low perfectionism

High perfectionism

FIGURE 6-3. Interaction of socially prescribed perfectionism and trait procrastination predicting depression.

tions. In the study by Martin (1990), for example, it is impossible to make

any statements about the direction of causality among perfectionism,
procrastination, and depression.
The need to incorporate a broader developmental focus is also relevant
to another issue that requires additional investigation-namely, the role of
familial factors in the development of procrastination. All of the research
on family factors in perfectionism and procrastination has been conducted
with adult college students. Some of these students may have had to rely
on retrospective judgments of their parents' behaviors, including evaluative standards. There is a clear need for research that directly examines
perfectionism and procrastination in children and their parents. At present, this objective is hampered by a lack of suitable measures. We have
developed a measure of perfectionism entitled the Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale (Flett & Hewitt, 1991; Flett, Hewitt, Boucher, Davidson, &

136

CHAPTER 6

Munro, 1992), but no comparable measure of procrastination in children

exists at present. A broader understanding of perfectionism and procrastination in the family context awaits the development of such a measure.
Finally, it is important to reiterate the point that future research on
these issues should be accompanied by a more explicit emphasis on
situational factors that may influence the association between perfectionism and procrastination. Earlier, we cautioned that the link between
perfectionism and procrastination may vary according to the level of ego
threat that is present. A variety of other situational factors may play an
important role. Hollender (1965) observed that the nature of the task can be
very important in understanding standards and related phenomena, such
as procrastination and work inhibition. For example, if there is no time
limit for completion of the task, perfectionistic behaviors can greatly
influence procrastination. Attention to these sorts of issues should enhance our understanding of the nature of perfectionism and procrastinatory behavior.

SUMMARY
In our estimation, there is an important lesson to be learned by the
recent research on perfectionism and procrastination. Historically, the
procrastination and perfectionism literature has been characterized by
anecdotal reports and descriptions that emphasized the perfectionistic
tendencies of procrastinating individuals. This view went unchallenged
for many years and seems to have been accepted as fact by authors of
books for the lay public. No attempts were made to explicate the nomological network of the perfectionism or procrastination construct and the
hypothesized associations between these traits. However, as illustrated in
the present chapter, a multidimensional approach that relies on empirical
evidence rather than speculation suggests that the link between perfectionism and procrastination is rather complex-one element of perfectionism is related positively to procrastination, but another element of perfectionism is related negatively to procrastination. This pattern of findings
may have great significance for an understanding of the nature of procrastination; these two perfectionism dimensions differ not only in terms of
their links with procrastination, but also in terms of their association with
measures of motivational orientations, control beliefs, and generalized
expectancies (see Hewitt & Flett, 1991b). The recent research findings on
procrastination and perfectionism lead us to believe that future research
on the more speculative aspects of procrastination and perfectionism will
also confirm some descriptive observations, but it promises to disconfirm
other observations.

CHAPTER

PROCRASTINATION, NEGATIVE
SELF-EVALUATION, AND STRESS
IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY
A REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY MODEL
GORDON

L.

FLETT, KIRK

AND THOMAS

R.

R.

BLANKSTEIN,

MARTIN

Procrastination is defined typically as an irrational tendency to delay tasks

that should be completed (Lay, 1986). Procrastination is believed to be
associated with several cognitive, behavioral, and affective correlates and
is regarded as a "dysfunction of important human abilities" in routine
tasks and critical life tasks (Milgram, Sroloff, & Rosenbaum, 1988, p. 210).
The extent of the dysfunction is reflected by estimates indicating that at
least 25% of students suffer from severe levels of procrastination (see Hill,
Hill, Chabot, & BarraH, 1978; McCown, Johnson, & Petzel, 1989b). Given
the potential importance of the procrastination construct, it is perhaps not
surprising that it is a topic that has been discussed at length by clinicians
and by counselors (e.g., Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Rore~ 1983).
Research in our laboratory has focused primarily on the association
between procrastination and various forms of poor psychological adjustment, particularly perfectionism, as Chapter 6 indicated. This interest
stems, in part, from anecdotal evidence suggesting that procrastination is
a personality factor that can lead to severe adjustment difficulties. For
instance, Safran, Vallis, Segal, and Shaw (1986) described a 25-year-old
male who was being treated with cognitive therapy. Safran et al. (1986)
137

138

0iAPTER7

reported that this patient was severely depressed and apathetic. One of his
chief presenting problems was chronic procrastination. Detailed examination of this individual suggested a close link between procrastination and
negative self-referent thoughts. This patient was described as suffering
from '~ . . a fundamental perception of the self as a powerless child
victimized by powerful and malicious adult figures" (p. 518). This case
study is consistent with the belief that individuals who are characterized
by extreme levels of procrastination suffer from exceedingly negative selfconcepts that generalize across life domains.
The chief purpose of the present chapter is to summarize extant
research on procrastination and maladjustment. The chapter is organized
into three sections. The first section consists of a brief review of past and
current research on procrastination and maladjustment, with a particular
emphasis on research showing that most procrastinators suffer from a
tendency to evaluate the self in a negative manner. This section focuses on
contemporary research on procrastination in anxiety and depression, as
well as work on procrastination and the self-concept. The second section
contains a description of research in our laboratory on procrastination, life
stress, and adjustment. This research identifies the robust link between
procrastination and life stress. Finally, in the third section, we conclude by
discussing the available evidence within the context of a preliminary
model of procrastination and maladjustment.
PROCRASTINATION IN ANXIETY AND DEPRESSION
Most existing research on procrastination and maladjustment has
focused on procrastination and anxiety, in part because of frequent descriptions of procrastinators that emphasize their fear of failure (e.g.,
Schouwenburg, 1992). These investigations have shown repeatedly that
procrastinators, relative to nonprocrastinators, suffer from higher levels of
anxiety. The pioneering work in this field was conducted by Rothblum and
associates (Beswick, Rothblum, & Mann, 1988; Rothblum, Solomon, &
Murakami, 1986; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). The study by Solomon and
Rothblum has been described in many of the previous chapters but
warrants reiteration because it is seminal.
Initially, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) conducted a study in which a
sample of 342 college students completed the Procrastination Assessment
Scale-Students (PASS) and measures of trait anxiety, depression, selfesteem, study habits, assertiveness, and irrational beliefs. The PASS is a
measure of procrastinatory tendencies in academic situations. Subjects
also completed a checklist of their reasons for procrastinatory behavior.

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

139

The results showed that procrastination was correlated significantly with

depression, irrational beliefs, low self-esteem, anxiety, and poor study
habits, but there was no significant association between procrastination
and assertiveness. A subsequent factor analysis of the reasons given for
procrastination yielded two main factors. The first factor resembled fear of
failure and included item content that tapped concerns about meeting
other people's expectations, concerns about meeting perfectionistic standards, and a lack of self-confidence. The second factor tapped general
feelings of task aversiveness. It was surmised from the presence of this
factor that individuals also procrastinate when confronted with overwhelming or boring tasks that must be performed. Finally, further analyses with the fear-of-failure and task-aversiveness factors provided support
for the view that there are two distinct groups of procrastinators-one
group characterized by the fear-of-failure factor, the other characterized
mostly by the task-aversiveness factor. Overall, the study provided general
support for the association between procrastination and maladjustment.
In a related study, Rothblum et al. (1986) administered the PASS to a
sample of 379 college students. Subjects were classified as high or low in
procrastination if they reported that they always or nearly always procrastinated while studying for exams and this procrastination always or nearly
always made them feel anxious. All subjects then completed measures of
test anxiety, causal attributions, and self-control. A subset of 126 students
also provided weekly reports of state anxiety and anxiety-related physical
symptoms. Comparisons of high and low procrastinators confirmed that
high procrastinators had higher levels of test anxiety at the initial assessment. Procrastinators also reported lower levels of self-control and a more
negative attributional style. As expected, analyses of the data from the 126
students who were studied over time revealed that high procrastinators
reported greater state anxiety and anxiety-related physical symptoms at all
timepoints.
Beswick et al. (1988) extended research in this area by examining
psychological adjustment and procrastination with the use of both a selfreport measure and a behavioral measure of procrastination. The measure
of behavioral procrastination consisted of the time it took students to
submit three pieces of work. The results showed th~t self-reported procrastination, as assessed by the PASS, was associated with lower self-esteem
(r = - .35, P < .001), and higher levels of both depression (r = .27,
P< .001), and anxiety (r = .40, P< .001). The correlations obtained with the
behavioral measure of procrastination tended to be lower in magnitude (rs
ranging from .14 to .20), but a significant association did exist between
behavioral procrastination and poor adjustment in the form of low selfesteem, anxiety, and depression.

140

CHAPTER 7

Although these studies support a link between procrastination and

poor psychological adjustment, the fmdings are limited by an interpretative problem inherent in the primary measure of procrastination-the
PASS. Because Rothblum and associates conceptualized procrastination as
the self-reported tendency both to put off academic tasks and to experience anxiety as a result, respondents to the PASS were asked to indicate
both their frequency of procrastination and their affective reaction. The
procrastination score is a combination of these two components. Given that
the PASS procrastination score in part reflects self-reports of anxiety and
there exists a tendency for distressed individuals to experience a more
generalized form of negative affectivity (Gotlib, 1984; Mook, Van Der
Ploeg, & Kleijn, 1990; Watson & Clark, 1984; Vredenburg, Flett, & Krames,
1993), it could be argued that past indications of a significant association
between procrastination and anxiety were due to overlapping content (see
Nicholls, Licht, & Pearl, 1982, for a related argument). This possibility is
supported by the relatively low correlations between a behavioral measure
of procrastination and adjustment measures in the Beswick et al. (1988)
study.
In light of this problem, we have conducted several studies in an
attempt to reexamine the link between procrastination and maladjustment. These studies have included a general measure of procrastination
(Lay, 1986) which does not have content that refers to specific symptoms of
anxiety or depression. Three studies were conducted in the first phase of
our research. College students were utilized in each study because the
university environment provides extensive feedback related to the completion of achievement tasks, and there is ample justification for the study of
depressive symptomatology in college students (see Vredenburg et al.,
1993). In Study 1, we examined procrastination in a sample of 388 undergraduate students (131 men, 257 women) enrolled in an introductory
psychology course at the University of Toronto. Each person completed
Lay's General Procrastination Scale (GPS; Lay, 1986), the worry subscale,of
the Reactions to Tests Scale (Sarason, 1984), and the Beck Depression
Inventory (BDI; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). Pearson productmoment correlations were computed among the various measures. The
results with the total sample confirmed that procrastination was associated
positively with the worry component of test anxiety (r (386) = .27, P <
.001),. and with depression (r (386) = .25, P < .001). Procrastination was
associated to a similar degree with test anxiety in men (r (129) = .31, P <
.001), and women (r (255) = .30, P < .001). Similarly, procrastination was
correlated significantly with depression for men (r (129) = .29, P < .01), as
well as for women (r (255) = .25, P < .001). The absence of gender
differences in procrastination is consistent with other studies (e.g., Ferrari,

141

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIE1Y

1992a, 1992b). However, other research on adjustment suggests that pr0crastination is associated negatively with life satisfaction for men, but not
for women (Milgram et al., 1988).
Our second study included the GPS (Lay, 1986) and a modified
version of the PASS that did not confound academic procrastination and
anxiety assessments. Our modified version of the PASS provides separate
measures of the frequency of procrastination, the extent to which procrastination is a problem, the extent to which procrastination stems from task
aversivene.ss, and the extent to which procrastination stems from fear of
failure (see Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). The main correlational fmdings of interest are shown in Table 7-1 for the total sample,
where it can be seen that both depression and worry in testing situations
were correlated significantly with all of the procrastination measures. The
correlations involving depression and procrastination ranged from r = .30
to r = .40, while the correlations involving worry and procrastination
ranged from r = .28 to r = .47. Given that these findings were obtained
with "purer" measures of academic procrastination, it appears reasonable
to conclude that procrastination is associated positively with higher levels
of depression and worry in evaluative situations.
Finally, a third study was conducted to replicate certain findings
obtained in Study 2 and to examine the link between procrastination and
worry from a broader perspective. A sample of 180 college students
completed two procrastination inventories (i.e., the General Procrastination Scale, and frequency of academic procrastination and extent to which
academic procrastination is a problem subscales of the PASS), the Beck
Depression Inventory (Beck et al., 1979), and a battery of worry measures.
In addition, participants completed the worry subscale of the Reactions to
Tests Scale (Sarason, 1984), the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQi

TABLE 7-1. Correlations between the Measures

of Procrastination and Adjustment in Study 2
LAY

PFREQ

PPROB

PfASK

PFEAR

Depression

.31

.34

.32

.28

.32

.40
.38

.30

Worry

.31

.47

Note: Correlations greater than .19 are significant at the .01 level of

significance.
The following abbreviations were used: LAY (Lay's General Procrastination Scale), PFREQ (Procrastination Assessment Scale for StudentsFrequency), PPROB (Procrastination Assessment Scale for StudentsProblem), PTASK (Procrastination Assessemnt Scale for Students-Task
Aversiveness), and PFEAR (Procrastination Assessment Scale for
Students-Fear of Failure).

142

CHAPfER7

Meyer, Miller, Metzger, & Borkovec, 1990), the Student Worry Scale (SWS;
Davey, Hampton, Farrell, & Davidson, 1992), and the Worry Domains
Questionnaire (WDQ; Tallis, Eysenck, & Mathews, 1992). The PSWQ
provides a single measure that reflects the frequency and intensity of
pathological worry in general, without reference to specific content areas
(Le., "My worries overwhelm me." "Once I start worrying, I can't stop. H).
The SWS is 10-item scale that assesses specific worries in 10 life domains
(e.g., financial concerns, personal relationships, academic demands). The
SWS provides a single score of worry frequency. Finally, the WDQ provides a total score and subscale scores of worry in 5 domains: relationships
(Le., "That I will lose close friends"), lack of confidence (Le., "That I might
make myself look stupid"), aimless future (Le., "That life may have no
purpose"), work incompetence (Le., "That I don't work hard enough"),
and financial worries (Le., "That my money will run out"). The inclusion of
the WDQ in our study enabled us to examine procrastination and worry
across several life domains.
The results of our correlational analyses are shown in Table 7-2.
Several interesting fmdings emerged. As in other studies, procrastination
was associated with greater depression and worry in terms of test anxiety.
However, additional results showed that findings were not identical with
all of the worry measures. There was no significant association between
procrastination and the general measure of pathological worry. In contrast,

TABLE 7-2. Correlations between the Measures

of Procrastination and Adjustment in Study 3
Adjustment measure
Depression
RTI-Worry
PSWQ-Worry
SWS-Worry
WDQ-Total
WDQ-Confidence
WDQ-Aimless Future
WDQ-Personal Relationships
WDQ-Financial
WDQ-Work Incompetence

LAY

PFREQ

PPROB

. 25"

.26....
.19"
-.03
.17""

.35....
.32....

.15"

.01

.11

.27""""
.15"
.2S....
.20....
.30""""
.30""""

.36....
.25....
.36....

.31....
.IS"
.39""""

.10

.25....
.42....
.33....

.37
.39""""
.24....
.38....

n = 182 (141 women, 41 men)

.p < .05.

"'p < .01.

Note: The following abbreviations were used: LAY (Lay's General
Procrastination Scale), PFREQ (Procrastination Assessment Scale for

Students-Frequency), and PPROB (Procrastination Assessment Scale

for Students-Problem).

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

143

there were many significant correlations involving worries in specific life

domains. For instance, general procrastination scores were correlated
significantly with worries involving work incompetence, financial concerns, aimless future, personal relationships, and lack of confidence.
Similarly, slightly stronger correlations were obtained between these same
worry-domain measures and the indices of academic procrastination.
Taken together, then, the pattern of results suggests that procrastinators
suffer jointly from depression and from anxiety in the form of certain types
of worry. Although there is no overall link between procrastination and
pathological worry, the possibility remains that there are subtypes of
procrastinators who do experience extreme worry.

THE NEGATIVE SELF-CONCEPTS OF PROCRASTINATORS

It is our belief that the link between procrastination and poor psychological adjustment reflects a tendency for procrastinators to have a negative
self-concept. Another line of research in our laboratory has established that
a set of core negative beliefs about the self account for the tendency to
experience high levels of test anxiety (Blankstein & Flett, 1990; Blankstein,
Flett, Boase, & Toner, 1990; Blankstein, Flett, Watson, & Koledin, 1990;
Blankstein, Toner, & Flett, 1989). Because procrastinators suffer from
excessive worry in evaluative contexts, it follows that they should also have
negative views of the self.
Examination of the extant literature reveals numerous indications that
procrastinators do indeed suffer from a negative self-concept in the form of
the perception of many negative attributes. Research has established that
procrastinators suffer from low self-esteem (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari,
1991a) and they tend to denigrate themselves (Muszynski & Akamatsu,
1991). Procrastinators also report lower self-efficacy (Ferrari, Parker, &
Ware, 1992; Tuckman, 1991) and a diminished sense of personal resourcefulness (Rothblum et al., 1986). In addition, procrastinators report higher
levels of self-consciousness (Ferrari, 1991a; McCann, Moretti, & Gavin,
1986) and self-handicapping (Ferrari, 1991a,b,c). Self-handicapping represents a general tendency on the part of the procrastinator to engage in
protective forms of self-presentation by providing an excuse that justifies
negative outcomes.
The pervasive association between procrastination and a negative selfconcept has been documented in several recent studies by Ferrari (1991a, b,
1992b). For example, Ferrari (1991a) compared 46 female procrastinators
with 52 female nonprocrastinators on a variety of self-concept measures. It
was found that the procrastinators had significantly higher levels of public

144

CHAPrER7

self-consciousness, self-handicapping, and social anxiety, along with

lower levels of self-esteem.
In a related study, Ferrari (1992b) administered the General Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986) and a battery of self-concept measures to a sample of 307 college students. Specifically, subjects completed measures of
perfectionism, self-presentation, self-consciousness, and self-handicapping.
Analyses showed that procrastinators were characterized by higher scores
on all of these measures. On the basis of these findings, it is possible to
construct a clear image- of the prototypical procrastinator. The typical
procrastinator is quite defensive about his or her shortcomings, especially
in situations that involve some public form of evaluation. It is likely that
this defensiveness stems from a diminished sense of self-worth that is
central to the procrastinator's self-image.
Recent research in our laboratory has sought to clarify the exact nature
of the self-concept deficits associated with procrastination and how these
deficits may contribute to problems in psychological adjustment. We have
tested several interrelated issues. First, in an attempt to incorporate
procrastination and mainstream depression theories, we have investigated
procrastination and cognitive biases involving the self and depression.
One line of research has tested predictions derived from Beck's (1967)
cognitive model. It is generally well accepted in the depression literature
that negative self-statements play an important role in the development or
maintenance of depression. According to Beck, depression is equated
with the presence of automatic negative thoughts that stem from a negative
self-schema. Beck hypothesized that these thoughts reflect perceived
inadequacies of the self across a broad range of stimuli and situations, as
well as negative thoughts about the future and the environment. On the
basis of interviews with severely depressed patients, Beck (1967) also
concluded that depression stems, in part, from the presence of unrealistic,
dysfunctional beliefs about the self. These dysfunctional beliefs involve
such themes as HI must be loved by everyoneHand HIt is important to be a
success at everything." Indeed, the case study of the depressed procrastinator, which was discussed earlier, is consistent with the view that
procrastinators may be particularly prone to negative automatic thoughts
and dysfunctional attitudes about the self.
Table 7-3 contains the results of a recent unpublished study in which
we tested some of these observations (Flett & Blankstein, 1993a). A sample
of 121 students completed Lay's (1986) GPS and the BDI (Beck, Epstein,
Brown, & Steer, 1979). In addition, these subjects completed the Automatic
Thoughts Questionnaire (ATQ; Hollon & Kendall, 1980), Form A of the
Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale (DAS; Weissman & Beck, 1979), and the
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (SES; Rosenberg, 1965). The ATQ is a 3O-item

145

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

TABLE 7-3. Correlations between Procrastination

and Measures of Adjustment and the Self-Concept
Procrastination
Study 1
Beck Depression Inventory
Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale (DAS)
DAS-Performance Evaluation
DAS-Social Approval
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
Study 2
Beck Depression Inventory
Beck Anxiety Inventory
Self-Concealment Scale
Self-Handicapping Scale
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
Beck Self-Concept Scale (SCS)
Beck SCS-Intellectual Ability
Beck SCS-Physical Appearance
Beck SCS-V1I'tues
Beck SCS-Work Efficacy

.35""
.41""
.24""
.15
.38""
-.31""
.39""
.28""
.21""
.58""
- .32""
- .45""
- .30""
-.31""
-.09
- .60""

'p < .05.

"p < .01.

measure of the frequency of negative, automatic thoughts about the self

that are reported by depressed people. The DAS is a 40-item measure of
the dysfunctional cognitions involving the self that are believed to predispose certain individuals to depression. According to Cane, Olinger,
Gotlib, and Kuiper (1986), this version of the DAS has two factors reflecting
performance evaluation (i.e., "If I do not do as well as other people, it
means I am an inferior human being." "If I fail partly, it is as bad as
becoming a complete failure.") and the need for social approval (i.e., "My
value as a person depends greatly on what others think of me. If others
dislike you, you cannot be happy."). Finally, the Rosenberg (1965) SES was
included as a measure of general self-worth.
The correlational findings are shown in Table 7-3. As expected,
procrastinators report a significant number of negative thoughts about the
self, along with low self-esteem and greater depression. The analyses of
the DAS factors were particularly revealing. As expected, procrastinators
tend to endorse dysfunctional beliefs. Separate analyses with the DAS
factor scores showed that procrastination is not associated with dysfunctional attitudes involving performance evaluation concern (r = .15, ns).

146

0iAPTER7

Howeve~ procrastination was associated with dysfunctional beliefs focusing on the need for approval from others (r = .38, P < .01). This latter
finding is especially noteworthy in that the measure of procrastination
used in this study makes no explicit reference to social interaction outcomes. These fmdings with dysfunctional attitudes underscore the need to
measure procrastination in social situations that are relevant to social
evaluation concerns. More generally, our fmdings suggest that procrastinators suffer from the negative thinking patterns about the self described
by Beck.
Other research in our laboratory has examined procrastination and the
self-concept from a broad perspective. Most studies of procrastination and
the self have either focused on negative self-appraisals (in the form of selfesteem and efficacy measures) or they have focused on strategies that are
designed to protect the self (in the form of self-handicapping and selfpresentation). In one recent study, we included multiple measures of selfevaluation and self-protection tendencies. Our primary purpose was to
test the hypothesis that procrastinators are characterized jOintly by negative self-appraisals and self-presentational concerns and that these characteristics are not redundant with each other. We tested the redundancy
issue by ,including the self-concept measures in a block of predictor
variables to determine which measures of the self could account for unique
variance in procrastination scores. In this study, a sample of 189 students
completed the CPS (Lay, 1986) and four self-concept measures: the SES
(Rosenberg, 1965), the Beck Self-Concept Scale (BSCS; Beck, Steer, Epstein, & Brown, 1990), the Self-Handicapping Scale (SHS; Rhodewalt,
1990), and the Self-Concealment Scale (SCS; Larson & Chastain, 1990). The
first two scales measure negative self-appraisals, while the latter two scales
measure the general tendency to protect the self from negative outcomes.
As noted earlier, the Rosenberg SES is a measure of general self-worth. The
BSCS (Beck et a1., 1990) is a 25-item measure of the tendency to view
oneself negatively with respect to a variety of personal attributes. This new
measure is scored such that lower scores on this scale reflect a more
negative self-concept. A recent series of factor analyses by Beck, Steer, and
Epstein (1992) showed that the scale has identifiable self-concept factors
representing intellectual ability, physical appearance, virtues/vices, and
work efficacy. The SCS (Larson & Chastain, 1990) is a recent measure of the
tendency to try to hide negative aspects of the self from others. That is, it
assesses the extent to which someone is secretive about embarrassing
aspects of the self. The SHS (Rhodewalt, 1990) has been employed in other
research on procrastination. It assesses the tendency to minimize the
negative implications of failure by creating excuses for oneself.
In addition to these self-concept measures, we also had subjects

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

147

complete the BOI (Beck et al,. 1979) and the BAI (Beck et al., 1988). We
included measures of anxiety and depression symptoms for two reasons.
First, we wanted to establish whether the link between procrastination and
the negative self is still detectable after removing variance due to levels of
psychological adjustment. We wanted to rule out the possibility that the
link between procrastination and the negative self is solely due to the fact
that both are associated with poor psychological adjustment. Second, we
wanted to examine the association between procrastination and depression after removing variance due to anxiety, as well as the association
between procrastination and anxiety after removing variance due to depression. It is widely acknowledged that anxiety and depression are
highly correlated in various populations (see Kendall & Watson, 1989;
Vredenburg et al., 1993). Partial correlation analyses enabled us to address
the issue of whether the psychological problems of procrastinators stem
primarily from a disappointment about the self in the form of depression
or a concern about threats in the future in the form of anxiety. The BAI
(Beck et al., 1988) is particularly appropriate for testing this issue because
its cont~nt has minimal overlap with the BOI (Beck et al., 1979) and it has
adequate psychometric properties when used with college students (Borden, Peterson, & Jackson, 1991).
The results provided further evidence of a pervasive association between procrastination and unfavorable ratings of various self-concept
dimensions. Procrastinators tended to exhibit a greater tendency toward
self-concealment, greater self-handicapping, low self-esteem, and a more
negative self-concept as assessed by the Beck Self-Concept test (BSCS; see
Table 7-3). Separate analyses with the subscales of the BSCS test showed
that procrastinators are especially negative in terms of self-appraisal of
work efficacy. However, they also have negative views of their intellectual
ability and physical appearance. It is important to note that the response
key of the BSCS test asks respondents to compare their own attributes to
the attributes of similar others. In essence, then, procrastinators are
making negative social comparisons in the domains of work, intellect, and
appearance. The tendency to make negative social comparisons across a
variety of domains is a common characteristic of people who are prone to
depression (Brewin & Furnham, 1986; Crocker, Alloy, & Kayne, 1988;
Swallow & Kuiper, 1988; Tabachnik, Crocker, & Alloy, 1983) and there is
some evidence to suggest that social comparison is relevant to an understanding of procrastination (see Ferrari, 1992b).
The results displayed in Table 7-4 represent evidence that these associations between procrastination and the negative self do not simply reflect
the common variance between depression and a negative self-concept. A
hierarchical regression analysis was conducted with procrastination as the

148

CHAPTER 7

TABLE 7-4. Hierarchical Regression Analyses

with Depression and Self-Concept Measures
as Predictors of Procrastination Scores
Variable
Depression block
SeH-concept block
SeH-conceaIment
SeH-handicapping
SeH-concept
SeH-esteem

R2change

Fchange

.15
.24

34.58"
18.31"

Beta
0.39

5.88

-0.06
0.48
-0.28
0.13

-0.97
6.08"
-4.04"
1.44

"p < .01.

outcome measure. Depression was entered as the first predictor, followed

by a block of predictor variables that comprised the self-concept measures.
The results showed that the self-concept predictor block accounted for
unique variance in procrastination scores, .with the scores on the SelfHandicapping Scale and the Beck Self-Concept Scale attaining significance, even though depression scores had already been entered into the
model.
Finally, as expected, examination of the zero-order correlations
showed that procrastination was associated significantly with both anxiety
and depression. Partial correlation analyses were then computed and it
was found that the correlation between procrastination and depression
remained significant after controlling for levels of anxiety (r = .29, P < .01).
However, the correlation between procrastination and anxiety was no
longer Significant after controlling for levels of depression (r = .05, ns).
These analyses suggest that the typical procrastinator focuses more on
dejection about past events and disappointment about past and current
deficits in the self rather than threatening events in the future (see Chapter
5). The fact that procrastination was more closely linked with depression
than anxiety is in accord with past observations (e.g., Beck, 1967) that
suggest a pervasive link between work inhibition and depression.

PROCRASTINATION, LIFE STRESS, AND ADJUSTMENT

Although procrastination was associated significantly with indices of
anxiety and depression in the research outlined previously, the moderate
magnitude of the correlations obtained between proO'astination and maladjustment indicates that a great deal of variance in adjustment outcomes

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

149

remains to be explained. One way to account fQr more of the variance is to

start to make some distinctions between different types of procrastinators.
Several researchers have demonstrated that procrastinators are not a homogenous group and that there are certain types of procrastinators who
should be more prone to emotional problems (see Ferrari, 1992c; Lay, 1987,
1988; McCown et al., 1989; Milgram, Gehrman, & Keinan, 1992; Schouwenburg, 1992). For instance, Lay (1987) utilized a modal profile analysis of
procrastination and pessimism scores to demonstrate that different types
of procrastinators may be identified. The optimistic procrastinator is characterized by a failure to complete tasks and the view that positive outcomes and task completion are still possible. In contrast, the pessimistic
procrastinator is characterized by not only a tendency to delay things, but
also a generalized and pervasive belief that attempts to complete tasks will
result in failure.
Similarly, a principal components analysis of procrastinators by McCown
et al. (1989) also identified certain types of procrastinators who should be
more prone to adjustment problems. In total, McCown et al. found two,
and possibly three, types of procrastinators. The first type (perhaps
composed of two subtypes) had significant loadings on a neuroticism
measure, but neuroticism did not characterize a third group of procrastinators.
Other relevant data have been supplied by Milgram et at. (1992) and
by Ferrari (1992c). Milgram et al. compared high and low procrastinators
who also varied in terms of their degree of upset about the procrastination
and found that anxiety levels were markedly higher among those individuals who not only engaged in procrastination, but who were also very
disturbed about their tendency to procrastinate. Finally, Ferrari (1992c)
provided evidence supporting the possibility that some procrastinators are
characterized by arousal motives, whereas other procrastinators are characterized by avoidance motives. These studies combine to suggest that
only certain procrastinators will be characterized by high levels of negative
affectivity. In contrast, a subset of procrastinators does not appear to be
troubled by their delaying behavior and they remain optimistic about the
future (also see Lay, 1988; Lay & Bums, 1991).
Research in our laboratory has focused on college-student procrastinators' appraisals of stressful events in an attempt to detail the link
between procrastination and stress, and to further distinguish troubled
and untroubled procrastinators. Two hypotheses have guided this research. OUT. first general hypothesis was that procrastinators, relative to
low procrastinators, experience higher levels of stress. A link between
procrastination and stress would be predicted on several grounds. Given
that stress involves low controllability of aversive stimuli, procrastinators

150

CHAPTER 7

should experience greater stress because they suffer from low perceptions
of self-control and self-efficacy. In addition, it is quite likely that procrastinators are preoccupied with the possibility of encountering aversive
stimuli. Stressful situations may come in the form of unrealistic social
expectations and punitive reactions of others to their own failure to
complete tasks (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992). A key aspect of
the stress-appraisal process is the expectation that aversive experiences are
about to be experienced (Girodo & Roehl, 1978; Girodo & Stein, 1978;
Shipley, Butt, & Horwitz, 1979; Spacapan & Cohen, 1983). The procrastinator's tendency to anticipate failure and to worry about problems in many
life domains should translate into higher levels of perceived stress.
Our second hypothesis was that procrastination interacts with life
stress to produce significantly higher levels of poor psychological adjustment. Indirect evidence for the second hypothesis was provided by McCown
et al. (1989). Their principal-components analysiS identified one group of
procrastinators who were characterized simultaneously by high levels of
procrastination, depression, neuroticism, and a sense of time loss. The
time-loss measure may be interpreted as a sign of stress in that this scale
measures the subjective feeling that time is out of one's control and the
organization of time is a common source of stress among students (Blankstein, Flett, & Koledin, 1991). These data prOvide support, albeit indirect, for
the existence of a group of procrastinators with high levels of stress and
depressive symptoms. McCown et al. (1989) did not examine whether
levels of procrastination and stress due to time loss interact multiplicatively
to produce higher levels of depressive symptomatology because this was
not the purpose of their study. Thus, it remains to be determined whether
the interaction of procrastination and stress factors accounts for a significant degree of unique variance in depression scores.
The research that we have conducted to test this issue has focused
primarily on the procrastinators' appraisals of daily-life stressors. One of
the most important developments in stress research over the past decade is
the proliferation of studies on daily-life hassles and adaptational outcomes.
The impetus for much of this work was prOvided by Kanner and associates
(Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer, & Lazarus, 1981). These researchers developed
the Hassles Scale, a measure of lithe irritating, frustrating, distressing
demands that to some degree characterize everyday transactions with the
environment" (Kanner et al., 1981, p. 3). Whereas past research in this area
focused on the experience of major life stress (e.g., Monroe, 1983; Sarason,
Johnson, & Siegel, 1978), the Hassles Scale consists of 117 minor stressors
that occur on a frequent basis. Hassles may involve such minor occurrences
as losing things, financial concerns, and even getting a traffic ticket.

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

151

Respondents to the Hassles Scale are asked to note the occurrence and rate
the severity of these daily-life hassles.
There is now extensive evidence of a significant relation between selfreported hassles and poor psychological and physical adjustment (e.g.,
Chamberlain & Zika, 1990; Delongis, Coyne, Dakof, Folkman, & Lazarus,
1982; Kanner et al., 1981). Furthermore, some studies have demonstrated
that daily hassles are more predictive of self-reported adjustment difficulties than are traditional measures of major life events (e.g., Delongis et
al., 1982; Kanner et al., 1981; Monroe, 1983).
Research in our laboratory with a variety of measures provides support for the first hypothesis-namely, that procrastinators are characterized by higher levels of stress. In one sample, we administered Lay's
(1986) CPS and measures of daily hassles, life events, and perceived stress
to a sample of 135 college students (54 men, 81 women). Specifically,
subjects completed the revised Hassles and Uplifts Scale (Delongis, Folkman, & Lazarus, 1988), the Life Experiences Survey (LES; Sarason et al.,
1978), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983). The revised Hassles and Uplifts Scale is comprised of 53 daily
events that can represent a source of daily pleasure or daily irritation.
Subjects rate each item as both a daily uplift and a hassle. The LES
measures the impact of positive life events and negative life events. The
student version, which was used in the present study, describes 55 life
experiences. It also provides five blank items for respondents to list recent
experiences which had an impact on their lives but are not included among
the 55 life experiences. Respondents are required to indicate which of the
events had occurred within the past year and to rate the impact of these
events on a 7-point scale ranging from Extremely Negative to Extremely
Positive. The measures of positive and negative life stress represent the
intensity of the events that have occurred during the past year, as determined by the subject'S subjective rating of experienced events. The PSS is a
14-item measure of self-reported stress during the past month. It has items
that assess subjective distress (i.e., "In the last month, how often have you
felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life?") and
items that assess stress due to an inability to cope (i.e., "In the last month,
how often have you felt that you were effectively coping with the important changes that were occurring in your life?") (Hewitt, Flett, & Mosher,
1992).
The results of this study are shown in Table 7-5 (see Sample 1).
Analyses of the data from the total sample showed that procrastination was
associated with significantly higher levels of daily hassles, negative life
events, and perceived stress. Procrastination was not associated with the

152

CHAPrER7

TABLE 7-5. Correlations between Procrastination

and the Measures of Negative and Postive Life Stress
Stress measure
Sample 1 (n = 135)
Daily hassles
Daily uplifts
Perceived stress
Negative life events
Positive life events
Sample 2 (n =_199)
Hassles-persistence
Hassles-impact
Hassles-coping ability
Hassles-upset
Depression

Total sample
.28**

.01

.27**
.20**
-.14

Men

Women

(54)

(80)
.24*

.33*

-.05

.35**
.37**
.02

(66)

.26**
.28**
.39**
.35**
.32**

.22
.38**
.41**
.34**
.31**

.05
.21

.04
-.06
(133)
.31**
.25**
.40**
.38**
.32**

'p < .05.

"p < .01.

positive event measures. Separate analyses by gender revealed that the

pattern of results was similar for men and women. However, the correlation between procrastination and negative life events was present for men,
but not for women. Overall, these data support the hypothesis that
procrastination and stress are related.
In subsequent research, we examined the association between procrastination and daily hassles in greater detail by conducting an initial test
of the hypothesis that procrastination and stress interact to produce greater
adjustment problems. In a second sample, we administered Lay's GPS, the
General Hassles Inventory (GHI), and the BOI to a sample of 199 college
students. The GHI is a new multidimensional measure of hassles that we
have developed to provide a comprehensive assessment of daily stress in
college students (Blankstein & Flett, 1993). Respondents must rate 29
frequent hassles in terms of four characteristics: (1) persistence of the daily
stressor; (2) impact of the daily stressor; (3) perceived ability to cope with
the daily stressor; and (4) degree of upset associated with the daily
stressor. This new scale was created for two reasons. First, there are many
advantages associated with the use of hassles scales that are designed
specifically for the college-student population rather than measures with
more general content (see Blankstein & Flett, 1992; Blankstein et aI., 1991;
Kohn, Lafreniere, & Gurevich, 1990). Second, it is generally accepted in
the literature that there is a need for measures of daily stress that provide a
more comprehensive assessment of the various dimensions of stress and
do not focus solely on the frequency of stress (see Lazarus, 1990).

153

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

The results from this sample indicated that there is an extensive

association between procrastination and general hassles among college
students (see Table 7-5). Procrastination was associated significantly with
all four hassles indices; procrastinators not only indicated that their daily
hassles were more persistent and had a greater impact, they also reported a
relatively lower ability to cope with these hassles, and a greater degree of
upset (see Sample 2 results in Table 7-5). A similar set of findings was
obtained for both men and women.
The interaction hypothesis was tested in a series of hierarchical
regression analyses with depression as the outcome measure. The main
finding that emerged from these analyses is that the interaction of procrastination and the reported persistence of the daily stressors did predict
significant variance in depression scores. This interaction is displayed in
Figure 7-1. As expected, there were substantial differences in levels of
depression reported by procrastinators with high versus low levels of daily

16
14
12

Q
~
w

IX:

10

D..
W

...

6
4
2
0

High

Low

PERSISTENCE OF GENERAL HASSLES

-+-

Low proaastination

-It-

High procrastination

FIGURE 7-1. 'Iiait procrastination by persistence of general hassles predicting depression.

154

CHAPTER 7

stress. The greatest adjustment difficulties were reported by procrastinators with higher persistence ratings of daily hassles.
These general findings have been replicated in another study with 224
college students. This study was somewhat different in that we focused
directly on procrastination and stress in academic situations. In addition,
we examined generalized distress as the adjustment measure rather than
depression. Two procrastination measures were included. The procrastination measures were Lay's GPS and our modified version of the PASS scale.
To reiterate, whereas Lay's (1986) GPS provides a general trait measure, the
modified PASS Scale provides lIuncontaminated" indices of the frequency
of academic procrastination, the extent to which academic procrastination
is a problem, and the associated levels of task aversiveness and fear of
failure. The stress measure was the Academic Hassles Inventory (AHI). We
developed the AHI to supplement our more general measure. This scale
requires respondents to rate the persistence and impact of common academic stressors in the college environment (e.g., workload, competition,
academic deadlines, professors' expectations, etc.). Subjects who respond
to this questionnaire also provide ratings of their coping ability and their
degree of upset. Finally, the outcome measure was the SymptomCheck1ist-90-R (SClr90-R; Derogatis, 1983). The SClr90-R has numerous
subscales that combine to provide a measure of general psychopathology.
The correlational results are displayed in Table 7-6. Examination of the
correlations between procrastination and adjustment showed that the
measure of general trait procrastination was correlated Significantly with
the measure of general psychopathology and with all of the stress measures,

TABLE 7-6. Correlations between the Measures of

Procrastination and Measures of Stress and Adjustment

LAY
Hassles-persistence
Hassles-impact
Hassles-upset
Hassles-coping
General psychopathology

.14

.30

PFREQ

PPROB

PTASK

PFEAR

.20

.29
.36

.31
.41
.SO
.50

.20
.28
.32

.35

.23

.42

.31

.44

.23

.24

.52
.26

.29

.38

.34
.26

n = 224 (131 women, 93 men)

Note: Correlations greater than .19 are significant at the .01 level of significance.

The following abbreviations were used: LAY (Lay's General Procrastination Scale),

PFREQ (Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students-Frequency), PPROB (Pr0crastination Assessment Scale for Students-Problem), PrASK (Procrastination Assessment
Scale for Students-Task Aversiveness), and PFEAR (Procrastination Assessment Scale for
Students-Fear of FaiJure~

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

155

with the exception of the persistence measure. Similarly, the measure of

the frequency of academic procrastination was correlated significantly
with all of the adjustment measures (rs ranging from .20 to .42). A
particularly robust association was detected between the extent to which
procrastination is a problem and the perceived ability to cope with academic stressors (r = .52, P < .001). These data suggest that the procrastinators who are most troubled by their own behavior also have very negative
views of their ability to cope with academic problems. From a practical
perspective, our findings combine to suggest that procrastinators could
benefit substantially from stress counseling that focuses on how to prevent
or combat distress (see Matheny, Aycock, Pugh, Curlette, & Silva Cannella, 1986). Interventions that are designed to improve problem-solving
confidence may be an important step in ameliorating problematic levels of
procrastination in academic contexts.
Subsequent regression analyses with our data provided partial evidence of the hypothesized interaction between procrastination and daily
stress. Analyses were conducted with general psychopathology as the
outcome measure. We found that evidence of this interaction could be
obtained, in that the interaction of the frequency of academic procrastination and the persistence of academic stress was able to predict significant
unique variance in general psychopathology scores. The interaction is
shown in Figure 7-2. Once again, the combination of high procrastination
and higher persistence ratings of hassles was associated with higher levels
of general psychopathology.
It should be noted that this interaction was not obtained when the GPS
was substituted for the PASS measure of the frequency of academic
procrastination. These findings are not too surprising in that it is more
likely that a sphere-specific measure of procrastination would interact with
a corresponding measure of academic stress to produce adjustment difficulties. These data highlight the fact that there are some important differences between procrastination measures, and these differences may influence the obtained results (see Chapter 3 on procrastination assessment
measures).
Overall, the research on procrastination suggests that this personality
variable is highly relevant to an understanding of adjustment in college
students. The available evidence indicates that higher levels of procrastination are associated with significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression, Procrastination is also associated with profound deficits in the selfconcept, both in terms of negative self-evaluative tendencies and the need
to protect the self from negative feedback. Moreover, most procrastinators
appear to lead stressful lives and the combination of procrastination and
persistent stress is problematic in that it is associated with severe adjust-

156

CHAPTER 7

120
110

>

100'

90

~
~

rl.

.....
~
w
zw
C)

80
70

60

50
40

30

Low

High

PERSISTENCE OF ACADEMIC HASSLES

-t-

Low procrastination

-It-

High procrastination

FIGURE 7-2. Academic procrastination by persistence of academic hassles predicting general psychopathology.

ment difficulties. Finally, self-report data suggest that procrastination is

involved in the coping process. Procrastinators suffer from negative appraisals of their ability to cope with daily stressors.

TOWARD A MODEL OF PROCRASTINATION

AND POOR PSYCHOWGICAL ADJUSTMENT
We have reported extensive evidence in support of the position that
procrastinators suffer from a host of adjustment problems, including
anxiety, depression, depressive cognitions, and negative views of the self.
If the procrastination field is to advance, it is important that researchers
begin to formulate theoretical models of the association between procrastination and psychological adjustment. At present, there is a relative

PROCRA5I1NATION IN DEPRFSSION AND ANXIETY

157

paucity of such models. A noteworthy exception is a model by Rothblum

and associates. In a recent chapter, Rothblum (1990) described an avoidance model of procrastination that was postulated originally by Solomon
and Rothblum. The essence of this model is that the procrastinator experiences increased anxiety as a deadline approaches. The procrastinator
decides to avoid the task and the subsequent relief from anxiety serves to
reinforce subsequent acts of procrastination.
Our own appraisal of this model is mixed. Oearly, the procrastination
field requires theoretical models that outline the expected association
among variables and the sequence of events. In this respect, the postulated
model by Rothblum and associates is a welcome addition to the literature.
Unfortunately, this model is not sufficiently comprehensive to provide a
sense of how procrastination appears to be involved in all aspects of the
adjustment process. The model is limited in that it does not include other
negative affective states, such as depression, and it does not discuss
related factors, such as coping styles. Perhaps more importantly, the
model appears to be more descriptive than explanatory. It focuses extensively on the factors that maintain procrastination, without adequately
addressing the factors that lead to the initial development of procrastination.
Our own preliminary model of procrastination and psychological
adjustment is displayed in Figure 7-3. This model is very preliminary in
the sense that little research has tested the antecedents of procrastination
and many assumptions included in the model are speculative at best.
Nevertheless, we provide the model in the hopes that it will promote
research on this important topic.
Our preliminary model is based on five interrelated hypotheses.
These hypotheses are the following:
1. Procrastination reflects a pervasive sense of uncertainty about the

2.
3.
4.
5.

self that is present early in life. This sense of uncertainty likely

stems from a developmental history of exposure to parental figures that fosters an anxious form of attachment.
This sense of uncertainty facilitates a desire in young children to
engage in social comparison. The process of social comparison is
debilitating and leads to chronic deficits in self-esteem.
Children respond to self-esteem threats by developing a personality style involving procrastination and related forms of avoidance
behavior.
This procrastination and avoidance behavior is functional and
adaptive for some children, but it is nonadaptive for most children.
The procrastinator who experiences stress will be especially sus-

158

CHAPTER 7

ceptible to emotional problems, and these problems will be exacerbated if the procrastinator has not developed appropriate coping
skills.
Each of these hypotheses is now briefly discussed in turn.
PROCRASTINATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-UNCERTAINTY

Many theorists in the procrastination field adopt a developmental

view that focuses on the role of early experiences in the formation of the
self-concept. Consistent with observations in the previous chapter, we
include an emphasis on the role of early parental experiences in the
development of procrastination.
It is our belief that the roots of procrastination stem from an early
sense of self-uncertainty. Where does this self-uncertainty originate? Developmental psychologists often discuss self-concept formation by referring to early experiences in one's family. Attachment theory focuses on the
initial bond that develops between the child and his or her primary
caregiver. The pioneering work by Bowlby (1973) and by Ainsworth,
Blehar, Waters, and Wall (1978) established that three different types of

Early

Welladjusted

attachment
experiences

Procrastination
and
avoidance

FIGURE 7-3. Developmental model of procrastination and adjustment.

PROCRASI1NATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

159

"infants could bejdentified. Securely attached infants feel that caregivers are
loving and responsive. They believe that others will be a reliable source of
comfort in stressful situations. In contrast, insecurely attached infants are
more likely to experience distress in the presence of others. Two types of
insecurely attached infants have been identified-avoidant infants and
ambivalent/anxious infants. Avoidant infants deal with distress by avoiding
contact with others. Interaction with others is painful for the avoidant
child, in part due to overly harsh parenting, so he or she tends to keep a
distance from others. In contrast, ambivalent/anxious infants have a strong
demand for attachment with others and this dependency on others stems
from exposure to inconsistent, nonresponsive parenting.
Recent research on attachment styles and relationship functioning in
adults has confirmed that these three attachment styles can be identified
(Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Moreover, these attachment styles are related
differentially to adjustment outcomes. Collins and Read (1990) examined
various samples of adults and established that it is the ambivalent/anxious
attachment style that is especially likely to be associated with self-esteem
deficits and a mistrustful view of others.
Research is only beginning to examine the developmental roots of
procrastination. We have administered a measure of attachment style and
three measures of procrastination to a sample of 127 college students (Flett
& Blankstein, 1993b). The attachment-style measure is a 13-item inventory
that provides separate measures of secure attachment, avoidant attachment,
and anxious/ambivalent attachment (see Simpson, 1990). The procrastination measures in this study were Lay's (1986) GPS and both subscales of the
first half of the PASS-the frequency of academic procrastination, and the
extent to which academic procrastination is a problem. The correlational
fmdings are shown in Table 7-7, where it can be seen that all three
procrastination measures were associated with the absence of a secure
attachment style, with the greatest association involving the measure of the
extent to which academic procrastination is a problem. Further analyses
showed that procrastination is associated with both an avoidant attachment style and an anxious/ambivalent attachment style. The most robust
association was between the extent to which academic procrastination is a
problem and anxious/ambivalent attachment (r = .48, P < .01).
Our data indicate that procrastination is associated equally with both
types of insecure attachment. Another study on work styles and attachment
types by Hazan and Shaver (1990) provides indirect evidence for a stronger
link between procrastinatory tendencies and an anxious/ambivalent attachment style. A discriminant analysis was conducted on the reported
work styles of avoidant versus anxiously attached subjects. The one item
that best discriminated the two groups was II difficulty finishing projects, "

160

CHAPTER 7

TABLE 7-7. Correlations between

the. Measures of Procrastination
and Attachment Style
Attachment style

LAY

PFREQ

PPROB

Secure attachment
Avoidant attachment
Anxious/ambivalent

-.20"

-.19"
.26""

-.31""
.31

.23
.15

.28

.48

n = 123 (97 women, 27 men)

.p < .05 .

p < .01.
Note: The following abbreviations were used: LAY (Lay's

General Procrastination Scale), PFREQ (Procrastination Assessment Scale for StudentsFrequency), and PPROB (Pr0crastination Assessment Scale for StudentsProblem).

with anxious/ambivalent types reporting this problem more often. These

data need to be replicated by subsequent research. The key point is that
there does seem to be a link between maladaptive attachment styles and a
chronic tendency to delay work.
Related research on the development of procrastination in the family
context has supported the view that procrastination is associated with
perceived exposure to overcontrolling and authoritarian parents (Ferrari &
Olivette, 1993; Voicu, 1992). Repeated exposure to punitive forms of
evaluation (Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992) should promote a
general form of avoidance behavior. In the next section, we present the
argument that developing tendencies to engage in procrastination are
exacerbated by social-comparison experiences in school settings.
PROCRASTINATION, SOCIAL COMPARISON, AND THE SELF

Our second hypothesis is that self-uncertainty and anxious feelings

that stem from an insecure attachment lead to an orientation to engage in
social comparison when children encounter achievement contexts. This
hypothesized link between self-uncertainty and social comparison is not
novel, in that it is a central aspect of Festinger's (1954) social comparison
theory. However, social comparison has seldom been the focus of procrastination research, with but few exceptions (Ferrari, 1991a; 1992c).
In our formulation, an insecure attachment is bound to have a negative
influence on the child's developing sense of self. According to a symbolic
interactionism view of the self-concept, exposure to an unresponsive or
unsupportive parental figure should lead to feelings of self-doubt and
uncertainty in the young child. According to Festinger (1954), people often

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXlE1Y

161

seek information about their abilities and opinions when they are in a state
of evaluative uncertainty. One way to obtain information about the self is to
engage in social comparison. That is, when a person is not sure of the
adequacy of his or her ability, or the correctness of his or her attitudes, that
person will compare performance levels or beliefs with those exhibited by
others. According to Festinger's (1954) similarity hypothesis, comparison
is most likely with people who are generally similar to the self in terms of
general attributes (i.e., gender, age, etc.).
Developmental analyseS of social-comparison processes have yielded
some important findings about the nature of social comparison. First, it
has been established reliably that meaningful social comparisons occur at
the age of 7 years and there are age-related increases in both interest and
the frequency of social comparison (Ruble & Flett, 1988). Second, most
individuals seek to compare with standard-setters (i.e., the highest possible scorers). Comparison with standard-setters has a high information
value because it establishes the upper limits of performance. Finally, social
comparison is a painful process for most individuals because comparison
with superior others highlights deficiencies in the self (Brickman & Bulman, 1977). Initially, most children are overly optimistic and unrealistic
about their abilities. Frequent social comparison in the process of selfsocialization causes many children to become more realistic about their
abilities as they develop an awareness of their relative standing. An
increasing awareness that they are not standard-setters is a factor that
contributes directly to lower self-esteem and harsh evaluations of the self
by some children (Ames, 1984; Marsh & Parker, 1984).
In short, we believe that procrastinators are uncertain about their
abilities so they seek social-comparison information, and this information
may be damaging to the self. Evidence that procrastinators engage in
negative social comparisons was provided by our study in which procrastinators completed the BSCS (Beck et al., 1990). As noted earlie~ procrastinators were particularly negative about their characteristics, relative to
the characteristics of others, in the domains of work efficacy, intellectual
abilities, and appearance. The achievement and appearance domains are
quite central to the developing self-concepts of adolescents (Harter &
Marold, 1994), so frequent negative social comparisons in these domains
should have a substantial impact on levels of adjustment.
PROCRASTINATION AND 1HE AVOIDANCE
OF DIAGNOSTIC INFORMATION

Our third hypothesis is that children respond to ego threats from

negative social-comparison feedback by developing a characterological

162

CHAPTER 7

tendency to be avoidant. The avoidance tendencies of children are well

documented. Studies on coping tendencies in young children show that
the predominant form of dealing with stressful situations is to become
avoidant (Altshuler & Ruble, 1989). A chronic tendency to engage in
avoidance behavior likely marks the beginning of procrastination as an
enduring personality trait.
Authors in the procrastination literature have noted frequently that
people try to engage in forms of self-protection when their personal
esteem is threatened. One common method is to avoid tasks or information that promise to provide feedback with negative implications for
characteristics of the self. Just as depressed individuals avoid socialcomparison information (Flett, Vredenburg, Pliner, & Krames, 1987), children who are sensitive to the implications of negative social-comparison
feedback will likely seek to protect their self-esteem by avoiding diagnostic
information about the self. An unwillingness to complete tasks is one way
of avoiding comparative information.
Recent research does provide support for the view that procrastinators
have a tendency to avoid information about the self. Initial evidence of a
link between procrastination and the avoidance of self-relevant information has been provided in research investigations conducted by Ferrari
(1991b,c). In one self-report study, Ferrari (1991a) compared high and low
procrastinators on questionnaire measures of identity style and attention
to social-evaluation information. Ferrari found that procrastinators were
highly sensitive to social-evaluation information, as indicated by relatively
high scores on measures of self-consciousness and self-handicapping.
Additional results indicated that this sensitivity was manifested in a
greater tendency to avoid evaluative information, as assessed by Berzonsky's (1989) measure of identity style.
In a subsequent experiment with the same subjects, procrastinators
and nonprocrastinators were given the opportunity to obtain information
about their cognitive abilities. Subjects were given the option of selecting
items from various tasks. The task items varied in terms of how informative they were about self-characteristics (high versus low) and their level
of difficulty (easy versus hard). Diagnosticity and difficulty level were
manipulated by describing the items in terms of the number of other
students who could correctly solve them. Analyses of the task-item choice
results showed that procrastinators were more likely than nonprocrastinators to avoid diagnostic items that could have negative implications about
the self.
There is little doubt that self-uncertainty, sensitivity to socialcomparison information, and the avoidance of diagnostic feedback are not

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

163

the only factors that contribute to the development of procrastination.

However, the importance of social comparison cannot be understated, in
that it is a factor that is tied directly to self-concept development.
OPTIMISTIC VERSUS PESSIMISTIC
PROCRASTINATION IN PERSONAL ADJUSTMENT

Once a person has developed a tendency to procrastinate, a critical

factor is that person's generalized expectancies. As noted earlier, researchers in this field have been able to distinguish optimistic and
pessimistic procrastinators (e.g., Lay, 1988). We feel that this is a critical
and valid distinction that has important implications for the adjustment
process. Whereas the optimistic procrastinator will be relatively invulnerable to adjustment problems, the pessimistic procrastinator will be highly
susceptible to adjustment difficulties.
A critical question is why do some procrastinators develop this sense
of optimism and have positive biases involving the self, whereas other
procrastinators develop a sense of pessimism? Research that is designed to
explain this distinction is essential. Some researchers might wish to
ascribe these individual differences to characterological, and indeed, genetic variables. However, our own view is that several acquired factors
contribute to optimism versus pessimism. One important factor is the
procrastinator's developmental history of success versus failure. Some
procrastinators may be rewarded for their lack of effort and this may
facilitate an optimistic sense of self-deception. Other procrastinators are
less fortunate. These individuals experience negative consequences, in
part due to their own delaying behavior. It is possible that some procrastinators are not able to escape evaluative situations entirely and they are
confronted repeatedly with negative social-comparison feedback.
It is also likely that evaluative standards play some role. Procrastinators with realistic performance expectations should encounter some degree of success. In contrast, procrastinators who strive to attain unrealistic
performance standards are likely to fail and may experience feelings of
dejection because of their inability to meet these standards (see Chapter
6). Finally, a third factor of importance is whether the young procrastinator
experiences life stress and situations that foster the sense of a lack of
personal control. Some children are exposed continuously to situations
that allow them to develop a sense of personal mastery, while other
children are exposed to situations that highlight their lack of personal
control (see Ames, 1992). We have seen that perceived exposure to stressful, uncontrollable situations is a characteristic that is reported by most

164

CHAPTER 7

procrastinators and it is a factor that combines with procrastination to

produce higher levels of psychological distress.
COPING WITH PROCRASTINATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS

Once procrastinators experience subjective feelings of stress, they

should be especially prone to feelings of depression and anxiety. The
depression reflects a sense of disappointment about failures in the past,
whereas the anxiety reflects worry about the threat of future failures. Once
procrastinators experience subjective distress in the form of anxiety and
depression, their method of coping with this distress becomes important.
Although there have been few attempts to study procrastination and
coping styles, it is reasonable to assume that procrastinators respond to life
stress with a maladaptive coping style, involving the avoidance of tasks
rather than a task-oriented problem-solving approach. An extensive literature indicates that the inability or unwillingness to use a task-oriented
coping style when confronted with a personal problem leads to further
emotional distress in most instances (see Blankstein, Flett, & Batten, 1989;
Blankstein, Flett, & Watson, 1992; Endler & Parker, 1990b).
The link between procrastination and maladaptive coping seems
obvious, but it has not been the focus of extensive empirical research thus
far. Our own research suggests that the link between procrastination and
maladaptive coping is quite robust. Recently, in another study, we examined procrastination, coping, and depression in a sample of 156 college
students. Subjects completed three measures of procrastination (Le., the
Lay scale, PASS frequency of academic procrastination, and PASS measure
of problem procrastination), a multidimensional coping inventory, and the
BDI. Importantly, subjects completed the BDI at a second testing session 2
months later, so that we could examine changes in depressive symptoms
over time.
Dimensions of coping were measured with the Coping Inventory-for
Stressful Situations (CISS; Endler & Parker, 1990a). The ass is a 48-item
self-report measure that assesses three primary coping dimensionsnamely, task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance-oriented coping.
Also, as noted earlier, the avoidance scale has two subscales measuring
distraction and social diversion. Typically, research indicates that taskoriented coping is an adaptive strategy in terms of facilitating positive
adjustment, whereas emotion-oriented and avoidance-oriented coping are
maladaptive strategies (Endler & Parker, 1990b; Hewitt, Flett, & Endler, in
press).
The results of the correlational analyses are shown in Table 7-8. It can
be seen that there is a strong association between procrastination and the

165

PROCRASfINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

TABLE 7-8. Correlations between the Measures

of Procrastination and the Measures
of Coping Style and Depression

Coping style
Task-oriented
Emotion-oriented
Avoidance-oriented
Distraction
Social diversion
Depression
BDI depression-Time 1
BDI depression-Tune 2

LAY

PFREQ

PPROB

-.41 ....
.29**
.16
.17*
.10

-.36**
.25**

-.30*"
.25**

.31**
.27**

.08

.20*

-.04

.33**
.29**

.07

.22*

-.06
.26**
.24**

n = 156
'p < .05.
"p < .01.

Note: The following abbreviations were used LAY (Lay's General Pr0crastination Scale), PFREQ (Procrastination Assessment Scale for
Students-Frequency), and PPROB (Procrastination Assessment Scale for
Students-Problem).

absence of task-oriented coping. That is, procrastinators appear unwilling

or unable to engage in problem-focused attempts at coping with daily
problems. Instead, the correlational results suggest that procrastinators
engage in emotion-oriented coping and avoidance in the form of distraction. These types of coping are maladaptive, especially when a distressed
person is in a relatively controllable situation that can be addressed.
Consistent with our previous findings, procrastination was associated
with greater depression at each of the timepoints. A hierarchical regression analysis showed that procrastination measured at Time 1 did not
predict unique variance in depression scores at Time 2, after removing the
variance associated with depression at Time 1. Howeve:[~ the coping measures assessed at Time 1 did predict unique variance in depression scores at
Time 2, despite the fact that 54.5% of the variance at Time 2 had been
already predicted by Time 1 depreSSion. The coping-predictor block accounted for an additional 3% of the remaining variance. Examination of
the individual predictors within the coping block showed that depression
tended to increase among those people who relied on personality styles
involving emotion-oriented coping and diversion. It is noteworthy that
both of these coping orientations were associated positively with procrastination. Although procrastination itself may not predict changes in depression over time, procrastination may exert some indirect causal role in
depression through its association with maladaptive forms of coping.

166

CHAPTER 7

The relative unwillingness of procrastinators to engage in taskfocused efforts to overcome stressful situations may be due, in part, to
procrastinators' lack of confidence in their problem-solving ability. As
described earlier, our research has detected an association between procrastination and lower self-reports of coping ability. This finding is very
noteworthy, in that researchers who study social problem solving have
suggested that a lack of problem-solving confidence tends to undermine
actual coping attempts (Butler & Meichenbaum, 1981). In the present
instance, procrastinators who feel that they lack the necessary coping
resources are unlikely to confront their problems and make little effort to
complete their tasks or change the situation.
The tendency for procrastinators not to rely on problem-focused
forms of coping should be reflected in their help-seeking behavior. In
addition to examining procrastination and coping styles, research should
compare procrastinators and nonprocrastinators in terms of their willingness to seek help for their problems. Our research on personality factors
and help seeking indicates that people who are concerned about unrealistic social evaluations from others are less likely to seek help for their
problems. Given that procrastinators are highly concerned about negative
social evaluations and have a demonstrated tendency to engage in selfconcealment, it is likely that they would also be unwilling to seek help
because of the shame involved in admitting personal inadequacies. At
present, no research has examined procrastination and help seeking.
However, it is probably no coincidence that procrastination is linked with
depression in college students, and very few depressed college students
seek help (Vredenburg, O'Brien, & Krames, 1988).

SUMMARY AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

The purpose of this chapter has been to demonstrate that procrastination is a personality factor that is associated broadly with anxiety, depression, and negative views of the self. We provided evidence indicating that
procrastination is associated consistently with anxiety and depression,
and that the link between procrastination and the negative self is robust
and can be detected, even after controlling for levels of anxiety and
depression. We also reported evidence showing that procrastination is
associated with life stress, and individuals who are characterized jointly
by procrastination and persistent life stress tend to experience high levels
of self-reported distress. Finally, it was demonstrated that procrastinators
report maladaptive coping tendencies.
We hope that the research described and the model outlined serve as

PROCRASTINATION IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

167

impetus for future research on procrastination and adjustment. It is an

important topic, and it is evident that many issues remain to be tested. In
addition to the points outlined, it is vital that researchers examine whether
the link between procrastination and maladjustment generalizes to other
populations, and whether procrastination measures predict affective reactions in naturalistic situations. We are confident that future research in this
area will enhance our understanding of the procrastination construct and
provide information that can be applied directly to the treatment of
emotional distress in many individuals.

CHAPTERS

THE ROLE OF
PERSONALITY DISORDERS
AND CHARACTEROLOGICAL
TENDENCIES IN
PROCRASTINATION

Throughout this volume we have noted that procrastinators differ in

emotional, cognitive, and behavioral domains compared to nonprocrastinators. Research fmdings reported in several chapters indicate positive
relations between procrastination and a wide variety of variables such as
depression, forgetfulness, disorganization, dysfunctional impulsivity,
sensation-seeking, perfectionism, noncompetitiveness, and decreased energy and self-control.
Individuals who report frequent procrastination have also been noted
to have low-esteem, decreased self-confidence, and less need for cognitive
complexity (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1989, 1991c, 1992c). Additionally,
experimental studies reveal that chronic procrastinators engage in exaggerated self-handicapping of their task performances (Ferrari, 1991b), avoid
self-reliant diagnostic information (Ferrari, 1991d) and even recommend
severe reprimands for poor performance observed in fellow procrastinators (Ferrari, 1992a).
A major purpose of this chapter is to examine common mechanisms
that may explain this wide variety of maladaptive symptoms, attitudes,
169

170

CHAPTERS

and behaviors. An attempt is made to determine whether these hypothesized mechanisms relate to elevated rates of procrastination observed in
persons with personality disorders, as discussed in Chapter 1.

THE ROLE OF ANXIETY AND FEAR

Some researchers cite anxiety as a primary motive for chronic procrastination ijohnson & Bloom, 1993; McCown, Petzel, & Rupert, 1987; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). Other researchers have argued that it is not
anxiety per se, but instead anxiety or fear pertaining to task-performance
deficits that contributes to procrastination. As discussed in several chapters (Chapters 2, 5, 6, and 7), many clinicians have proposed that frequent
procrastinators desire to protect a Nvulnerable self-esteem." In this view,
procrastinators act from a cognitive schema that views their worth as based
solely on their ability regarding adequate task performance. For such a
person, the self-concept may fluctuate considerably because it is primarily
determined by how well a specific task is performed. Through delaying
task completion, the procrastinator impedes judgements of personal performance; hence, potentially ego-damaging judgements of true ability are
avoided. This protective self-esteem strategy is thus motivated by anxiety
and fear regarding obtainment or maintenance of some performance
standard, rather than a more generalized trait anxiety.
Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter 5, trait procrastinators experience higher levels of rejection-related emotions than nonprocrastinators.
Concurrently, agitation-related emotions appear to be somewhat less characteristic. Although Lay interprets these findings as deemphasizing the
importance of anxiety-based processes in the etiology of procrastination,
they may also suggest that only a specific subtype of neurotic symptomsnamely, sensitivity to rejection-is related to procrastination and not
neuroticism or anxiety per se.
A frequent observation in line with Lay's work regarding rejectionbased sensitivity and procrastinators is the observation by clinicians (e.g.,
Burka & Yuen, 1983; Knaus, 1973) that procrastinators demonstrate an
irrational fear of success. An individual who performs well on a task may
expect to consistently sustain some presumed ability at that task, thereby
increasing the possibility of public and/or private humiliation should that
ability decline. For individuals who are hypersensitized to rejection, these
effects could be devastating. Thus, social anxiety plus an exaggerated fear
of failure or success may prompt some individuals to delay task completion in order to preserve the status quo of social approval and ego
involvement.

ROLE OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

171

PROCRASTINATION AND PERSONALITY DISORDERS

As indicated in Chapter I, there is now an emergent body of evidence
linking procrastination to several distinct personality disorders. Based
upon the previous discussion, we might anticipate more procrastination in
those personality disorders characterized by symptoms of anxiety and
fear. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III-Revised (DSM-ill-R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987), personality disorder typologies are
grouped or "clustered" together according to constellations of interrelated
symptoms. For example, Cluster A personality disorders (idiosyncratid
eccentric) are described as "the odd cluster" because they include cases
that are eccentric, awkward, or odd, such as the schizoid and schizotypal
disorders. On the basis of data presented in Chapter I, there appears to be
no relation between procrastination and personality disorders included in
this cluster.
Ouster B personality disorders (dramatideccentric) include antisocial
and narcissistic disorders, and this cluster is typically characterized by
lively mannerisms in social interactions (Turkat, 1990). Data presented in
Chapter 1 indicates that procrastination scores are positively related to
scales from the Personality Disorder Questionnaire-Revised (PDQ-R),
which measures Cluster B personality d~sorders. The precise variable(s)
responsible for these elevations is presently unclear. However, work from
Johnson and Bloom (1993, in press), Lay (Chapter 5), and Schouwenburg
(Chapter 4) suggests that a common dimension may be a personologic lack
of conscientiousness. Further work is needed to assess common etiologic
factors across disorders in this cluster.
Ouster C pathologies of the DSM-III-R are grouped together largely
because of the shared characteristics of anxiety and fear. Individuals with
these disorders have high rates of anxiety and tension, as opposed to
Clusters A and B. Among the personality types included in Ouster C are
passive-aggressive (PAPD) and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders
(OCPD). Data presented in Chapter 1 was inconclusive regarding the relation
between these personality disorders and procrastination. Although much
remains to be known regarding personality disorders and procrastination,
several studies have examined the role of passive-aggressive and obsessivecompulsive tendencies, mediating variables, and frequent procrastination.

PROCRASTINATION AND PASSNE-AGGRESSNENESS

The DSM-ill-R describes the passive-aggressive personality disorder
as characterized by the Hpervasive pattern of passive resistance to de-

172

CHAPTERS

mands for adequate social and occupational performance .... The resistance is expressed indirectly rather than directly. . . . this disorder is based
on the assumption that such people are passively expressing covert aggression" (p. 356). Individuals with this disorder are prone to express their
anger indirectly through stubbornness, forgetfulness, and procrastination.
In fact, two major diagnostic criteria for passive-aggressiveness are
procrastination-that is, putting off things that need to be done so that
deadlines are not met-and avoiding obligations. In short, frequent procrastination and avoidance appear to be important components to passiveaggressive disorders.
Despite some reservations from the committee that assembled DSMIV (APA, 1994), we believe that ample construct validity exists for this
diagnosis. For example, McCann (1988) found that persons diagnosed as
having a passive-aggressive personality disorder demonstrate a stubborn
resistance to fulfilling the expectations of others, are erratic and inefficient
in their work, and frequently feel gloomy and despondent. Other experts
more directly label persons with this diagnosis as being procrastinators
(Millon, 1981). The attitudinal features of passive-aggressiveness include
cynicism, skepticism, and a strong sense of disbelief in others' opinions
(Drake, Asler, & Vaillant, 1988; McCann, 1988).
Generally, theoretical accounts support the notion that passiveaggressive persons restrict the direct expression of anger and hostility,
probably due to factors related to fear and anxiety for such expression
(Biaggio & Godwin, 1987; Small, Small, Alig, & Moore, 1970). For example,
Drake, Asler, and Vaillant (1988), and McMahon and Davidson (1985)
reported that passive-aggression is most frequently diagnosed among
middle-age men with alcoholic tendencies, a group known for frequent
inhibition of angry impulses. Defferbacker, McNamara, Stark, and
Sabadell (1990) found that anger suppression is common among college
students who sought counseling at a university campus, apparently
because of social proscriptions related to overt hostility. Jette and Remien
(1988) stated that among Hispanic geriatric patients passive-aggressive
behavior is a means to resist institutionalization, again perhaps because
overt displays of hostility are likely to be punished. Protter and Travin
(1982) also found frequent passive-aggressive behavior, including anger
suppressions, among young adult criminal offenders convicted of violent
crimes, apparently because these persons are in social situations which do
not allow expression of violence or anger.
Apart from work discussed in Chap.ter 1, we know of no studies that
use a psychometrically reliable and valid measure of passive-aggressiveness
to explore its association with procrastination. Because of concern regarding diagnostic reliability (also expressed by the DSM-IV committee of the

ROLE OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

173

APA), we decided to directly examine the relationship between suppressed anger and procrastination, rather than to measure passive aggressiveness dichotomously. Our principle instrument was the Anger Expression Scale developed by Spielberger, Krasner, and Solomon (1988). The
scale assesses "anger-out," the direct expression of anger toward other
persons or objects; "anger_in," a suppression of hostility; and "anger
control," the ability to deal constructively with anger. Passive-aggressive
persons would be expected to demonstrate higher scores on the Hanger-in"
scale. If procrastination were a component of passive-aggressive tendencies, it was expected that procrastination and "anger-in" expression would
be related. These studies and results are reported later in this chapter.

PROCRASTINATION
AND OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE TENDENCIES
In the DSM-III-R, the obsessive-compulsive personality disorder
(OCD) is described as stubborn, perfectionistic, and inflexible. Additionally, individuals with this disorder are characterized as being workaholics and overly conscientious, with pronounced tendencies to be withholding in both affection and material gifts. It is common for such
individuals to complain that they are not organized enough or that they
procrastinate too much (Turkat, 1990). Two major criteria for classification
of this disorder are an apparent perfectionism that interferes with task
completion, and indecisiveness, manifest through decision making that is
either avoided or postponed (American Psychiatric Association, 1987).
Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (an Axis II personality disorder) is different from obsessive-compulsive disorder (Axis I disorder) in
that the symptoms and difficulties are less severe. We will not examine the
differences between these two pathologies, but will confine our discussion
to patterns of obsessions and compulsions in general and their frequency
among nonclinical and clinical populations. The remainder of this chapter
presents findings from three studies designed to explore the relationship
between passive-aggression, obsessive-compulsive tendencies, and chronic
procrastination.
STUDY

Method

Participants. There were a total of 262 college students (211 women,

51 men) who volunteered for Study 1. The mean age for this sample was
18.4 (SD = 0.6). These students were lower division students (Freshmen

174

CHAPfER8

= 82%) enrolled in introductory psychology, who received extra credit for

participation.

Psychometric Scales. All inventories were converted to 5-point scales

(1 = Low, 5 = High) for consistent range in variability across measures. No
significant gender difference across scales was obtained, so data were
combined across gender.
Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AIP; McCown & Johnson, 1989a).
This 15-item scale assesses an individual's tendency to delay the beginning
and/or completion of tasks. Procrastination scores were obtained by summing across response items (7 items reverse-scored), and high scores
indicated frequent procrastination (see Chapter 3 for items and a detailed
discussion of its psychometric properties). Validity studies indicate that
high scores have been related to inefficient time management, and to
delays in returning completed scales, filing income tax returns, and
shopping for Christmas gifts (Ferrari, 1992a,b; 1993a; McCown & Johnson,
1989c). Ferrari (1992c) reported that among college students, AIP scores
loaded on a tendency to avoid self-relevant cognitive information, indicating that the AIP assessed an avoidance-procrastination motive.
Lynfield Obsessional/Compulsive Questionnaire (Allen & Turne~ 1975).
This is a 20-item self-report variant of the Leyton Obsessional Inventory
(Cooper, 1970), designed to assess obsessive-compulsive personality
traits. Respondents rate each item of the Lynfield twice for two subscales:
first for "resistance" to obsessional thoughts, and second for the degree
that compulsions "interfere" with everyday functiOning. High subscale
scores reflect obsessional and compulsive tendencies, respectively. Sample
times include the following: "Do unpleasant or frightening thoughts or
words ever keep going over and over in your mind?" "Do you often have to
check things several times?" '~e you fussy about keeping your hands
clean?" Studies on the validity of the Lynfield are incomplete and inconsistent, although reliability comparisons of the Leyton scale and normal
populations have ranged from. 72 to .77 with retest reliabilities of .76 to .77
for the obsessive and compulsive subscales, respectively (Snowden, 1980).
Despite its shortcomings, however, the inventory has enjoyed extensive
use and is more comprehensive than other measures.
Anger Expression (AX) Scale (Speilberger, Johnson, Russell, Crane,
Jacobs, & Worden, 1985). This 24-item self-report has three subscales for
assessing individual differences in the expression of anger-that is, anger
toward others or objects (anger-out: "I say nasty things"); suppressive anger

ROLE OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

175

(anger-in: "I boil inside, but do not show it"); and control of anger expression and experiences-as well as a total anger-expression score ("I keep my
cool") that provides a general index of the frequency with which anger is
expressed. Anger expression is calculated as a combination of scores on the
anger-in, anger-out, and anger-control scores. The coefficient alphas for
these scales range from.72 to .89 with college students. Speilberger (1988)
reported that the validity of this scale is sufficient for research purposes.

Perfectionism Cognition Scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991c). This 25-item

inventory examines the perfectionistic thinking patterns that individuals
may experience in their daily lives. High scores, obtained by summing
across responses, reflect perfectionistic, even obsessive, thinking, (e.g.,
"I've got to keep working on my goals," "I must be efficient at all times").
The psychometric characteristics of this measure are not well established,
yet the developers report an internal reliability coefficient in excess of .80
with college-student samples (Hewitt & Flett, 1991c), and studies support
its validity with clinical and nonclinical samples (Ferrari, in press).
Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960).
This 33-item scale was developed to describe highly desirable social behaviors aimed at presenting a favorable impression-that is, social desirability (SD). Scored in the direction of high SD, 15 items are reverse-scored.
Used extensively in personality assessment, the inventory has an internal
consistency of .88 and retest reliability (1 month) of .89.
Procedure
All inventories were completed during a 65-minute class session (M
completion time = 53 minutes), 5 weeks into a 12-week semester. The
questionnaires were randomly ordered to avoid ordering effects. The
inventories were introduced as a set of questions on a "person's reaction to
situations." Each volunteer was administered a consent form, a set of
scales, and a computerized answer sheet. Participants were asked to read,
sign, date, and return the consent form, place all responses on the answer
sheet, and to complete all scale items anonymously. At the end of the
semester, students were told details about the study.
Results and Discussion

Correlational Analysis. To assess the relationship among these personality variables with a nonclinical sample, a simple correlational analysis was performed between scale scores. Table 8-1 presents the correlation

176

CHAPTERS

coefficients between the major scales and their subscales. Avoidantprocrastination tendencies were significantly related to anger-scale scores
and unrelated to each of the other measures.
In contrast, scores on the obsessive-compulsive scales were significantly related to anger-in, anger-out, anger-expression, perfectionistic
cognition, and social desirability. Perfectionistic cognition was related to
anger measures, and social desirability was related to all scales except
frequent procrastination.
It appeared that with college students, frequent procrastination was
not related to obsessive thinking, yet was related to anger or aggressive
tendencies. The low correlations between procrastination and anger, of
course, temper strong interpretation of these results. However, these
results suggest that procrastination is related to passive-aggressive expression of anger, as initially hypothesized.

Factor Analysis. A factor analysis of scale scores was performed to

determine how frequent avoidant procrastination loaded with obsessivecompulsive and anger-expressive personality styles. Two principal factors
with eigenvalues greater than 1 were extracted, with 59.6% of the total
variance explained. After the initial-factor extractions, the common factors
were rotated by a varimax transformation to produce orthogonal factors.
Rotated Factor 1 was related to Factor 2 at -' .39. Table 8-2 shows the
loadings of each personality variable for all 262 students. On the first
factor, obsessions and compulsions loaded high, with perfectionistic cognition loading greater than a cutoff of .40. On the second factor, procrastination loaded highest, with anger expression and social desirability also
loading greater than .40. Based on this data, frequent avoidant procrastination is not a component of obsessive-compulsive personality styles
among nonclinical individuals. The possibility that individuals with
obsessive-compulsive tendencies spend much of their time procrastinating
on tasks because of their recurring thoughts and repetitive actions was not
supported in this study. However, procrastination does seem to playa role
with anger expression. Thus, claims that chronic procrastination may be a
form of passive-aggression seem plausible. Passive-aggressive individuals
may procrastinate as a way of expressing anger toward others. Noncllnical
populations may use procrastination as a passive-aggressive means of
defending themselves against social anxiety.
It is still possible that some forms of procrastinating behavior (other
than avoidance) are related to obsessive and compulsive lifestyles. According to the DSM-III-R, indecision is a component of obsessive-compulsive
tendencies. Previous research revealed that indecision may be conceptualized as decisional procrastination (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1991b;

(.82)
.088
.099
.195**
.204**
.194*
-.034
.114
(.80)
.788**
.191*
.226**
.249**
.440**
.247**

Obsession

(.88)
.202**
.237**
.189*
.441**
.250**

Compulsion

(.74)
.982**
.841**
.347**
.273**

Anger
IN

n = 262 Significant levels .p < .01 p < .001

Note: Coefficient alphas with the present sample are presented in parentheses along the diagonal.

Avoidant procrastination
Lynfield/obsession
Lynfield/compulsion
Anger-IN
Anger-Our
Anger-expression
Perfectionistic cognitions
Social desirability

SeH-reportmeasure

Lynfield

(.79)
.856**
.377**
.298**

Anger
our

(.85)
.274**
.247**

Anger
expression

(.86)
.341**

Perfectionistic
cognitions

Intercorrelates between Major Personality Scores with Total Student Sample 1

Avoidant
procrastination

TABLE 8-1.

(.61)

desirability

Social

:::}

.....

crJ

~tl1

178

CHAPI'ER8

TABLE 8-2. Loadings of Two Rotated Factor Patterns

(Standard Regression Coefficients) and Commonalities
Variables

Factor I

Factor

Avoidant procrastination
Obsessive thoughts
Compulsive behavior
Anger expression

-.126
.874"
.87000
.247
.705.338

.787"
.087
.075
.675.144
.471-

~ectionisticcogndtions

Social desirability

Commonality
(.635)
(.772)
(.763)
(.517)
(.518)
(.372)

n = 262. = factor loading ... 40

Janis & Mann, 1977) and is related to avoidant procrastination (Ferrari,

1992c). Furthermore, the measurement of obsessive and compulsive tendencies in Study 1 may have been hampered by the psychometric limits of
the Lynfield scale. Therefore, a second study, with a subsample of participants from Study 1, was conducted, in which several additional psychometric inventories were completed.
STUDY

Method

Participants. A sample of 136 college students (114 women, 22 men)

who participated in Study 1 completed a seCond set of scales for the
present study. The mean age of this subsample was 18.2 years (SD = 0.5),
and most were lower division students (Freshman = 77%), similar to
Study 1. All inventories were converted to 5-point scales (1 = Low, 5 =
High).
Psychometric Scales. Among the scales completed was the Decisional
Procrastination Scale by Mann (DPS; 1982). A reliable and valid measure of
indecision, the inventory is a 5-item scale embedded among five other
measures of conflict-coping patterns (see Janis & Mann, 1977), yielding a
31-item inventory. High scores on the procrastination scale indicated a
tendency to put off decisions by doing other tasks. Procrastination items
include the following: HI delay making decision until it is too late" and HI
put off making decisions." The scale has a Cronbach alpha of .80 and retest
reliability of .69 (Effert & Ferrari, 1989), and with the present sample, a
coefficient alpha of .78. DPS scores from this measure have acceptable
validity, as discussed in Chapter 3.

ROLE OF PERSONAUTY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

179

Of the existing self-report inventories, the Compulsive Activity

Checklist (CAC; Freund, Steketee, & Foa, 1987) is one of the most widely
used questionnaires to assess repetitive, ritualistic behaviors among
obsessive-compulsive individuals. Participants in the present study completed this 38-item scale, which has moderate retest reliability (.68) and
high internal consistency (.91). On this questionnaire, subjects are asked
to rate the extent to which they engaged in such acts as switching lights on
and off, locking and closing doors and windows, or cleaning activities.
Studies indicate that the scale has appropriate construct, discriminative,
and concurrent validities (Cottraux, Bouvard, Defayolle, & Massey, 1988;
Freund et al., 1987; Steketee, 1990; Sternberger & Burns, 1990).
Procedure
Approximately 3 weeks after completing the set of inventories described in Study 1, a subsample of students were asked to volunteer (for
extra credit) to complete a second set of scales during regular class time.
Students agreeing to participate were distributed a folder containing a
consent form, set of scales, and answer sheet. After signing and dating the
consent form, participants completed the DPS and CAC checklists, as well
as several other scales (see Ferrari, 1992d), in random order. Coded sheets
facilitated matching responses from Study 1.
Results and Discussion
In order to provide a complete "picture" of the relation between
procrastination and obsessive-compulsive tendencies, certain scales from
Study 1 were recalculated using just the participants from Study 2. These
measures included avoidant procrastination, obsessive and compulsive
tendencies, and perfectionistic cognitions. As in Study 1, there was no
sigluficant gender difference on each of the self-report personality measures used with this subset of students. Consequently, all further results
were performed collapsing across gender and computed with the total
sample of 136 students.

Correlational Analysis. Table 8-3 presents the simple correlation coefficients between scores on these personality measures. Both avoidant and
decisional procrastination were significantly related, consistent with previous research (e.g., Ferrari & Emmons, 1994, in press). However, avoidant
procrastination was not significantly related to any measures of obsessional thought (i.e., Lynfield Obsessional Subscale and Perfectionistic
Cognitions scores), or compulsive behaviors (i.e., Lynfield Compulsive

n = 136. Significant levels. 'p < .01 "p < .001

.446....
.089
.135
.101
.021
.022

1.00

Avoidant
procrastination

.014
.129
.237*
.154
.145

1.00

Decisional
procrastination

.710....
.087
.063
.395....

1.00

Obsession

.272"
.299"
.341 ....

1.00

Compulsion

Lynfield

.677*"
.214....

1.00

Checker

.051

1.00

Washer

Compulsive

1.00

Perfectionistic
cOgnition

Intercorrelates between Major Personality Scores with Student Subsample for Study 2

Avoidant procrastination
Decisional procrastination
Lynfield/obsession
Lynfield/compulsion
Compulsive-checker
Compulsive-washer
Perfectionistic cognitions

Self-report measure

TABLE 8-3.

00

.....

ROLE OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

181

Subscale and CAC scores). Decisional procrastination was significantly

related only to compulsive-checking behaviors. Togethe~ these results suggest that among a nonclinical sample, using several obsessive-compulsive
measures, procrastination behavior motivated by an avoidance tendency
was not related to obsessive-compulsive tendencies. However, decisional
procrastination (indecisiveness) was related to checking rituals. Neither
avoidant nor decisional procrastination was significantly related to perfectionistic cognitions.
Although this result is consistent with Study 1 for avoidant procrastination, it is interesting that indecision was not related to perfectionistic
thoughts. Previous studies found that indecision was related to cognitive
failure (an inability to process relevant information) and a tendency
toward forgetfulness and memory loss (Effert & Ferrari, 1989). However,
Clark et al. (1993) found that indecisives (as compared to decisives) were
able to respond to stimuli with similar response times. Nevertheless,
indecisives do search information differently than decisives when they are
faced with decision-making tasks (Zelinsky et al., 1994). Based on these
results and the present study, it remains unclear why some individuals
experience frequent indecision, while their thinking ability does not seem
to be the result of obsessive thoughts regarding perfectionism.
Furthermore, scores on the Lynfield Obsession Subscale were not
significantly related to repetitive checking or washing behaviors, but were
significantly related to perfectionistic thoughts. Lynfield Compulsive Subscale scores, in contrast, were significantly related to compulsive checking
and washing behaviors, as well as perfectionistic cognitions. Additionally,
scores on the compulsive-checking and perfectionism cognition scales
were significantly related. These results provide some support for the
validity of these scales to assess the reoccurring thoughts and repetitive
acts experienced by nonclinical populations. The fact that all scales were
not interrelated was not surprising because individuals with obsessions
may not necessarily be compulsive, and compulsive individuals may not
necessarily experience obsessive thoughts (Griest, Jefferson, & Marks,
1986). Thus, these results indicate that nonclinical samples may not experience obsessive and compulsive tendencies, yet the construct validity of
these measures with nonclinical samples was supported.

Comparing Extreme Scores.

A comparison between extremely high

and extremely low obsessive-compulsive individuals was done to assess
whether they differed significantly on procrastination and other variables.
Using combined Lynfield Subscale scores as the criteria for obsessivecompulsive tendencies, individuals who scored one standard deviation
above the group mean on the obsessive subscale and on the compulsive

182

CHAPI'ERS

subscale were categorized as "high oes." Individuals who scored one

standard deviation below the group mean on both the obsessive and
compulsive subscales were categorized as '1ow oes." Table 8-4 presents
the mean scores for high and low oes on each of the personality measures
in Study 2.
As one might expect, there was a significant difference between high
and low oes on Lynfield Obsessive Subsca1e scores (t (31) = 11.95,
P < .001), and compulsive subscale scores (t (31) = 14.3, P < .001).
Therefore, this split of participants produced samples which differed in
their reporting of obsessive and compulsive tendencies. In addition, high
oes reported significantly more compulsive checking behaviors (t (31) =
1.69, P < .05), and compulsive washing behaviors (t (31) = 1.81, P < .05),
than low oes. High compared to low oes also reported significantly
more perfectionistic cognitions (t (31) = 4.3, P < .001). These results
indicate that with a nonclinical sample, individuals who report frequent
obsessive and compulsive tendencies also claim high rates of repetitive
acts and perfectionistic thinking. These results support the previous correlational analysis and other research with nonclinical obsessive-compulsive
populations (e.g., Frost & Sher, 1989; Frost, Sher, & Geen, 1986; Sanavio &
Vidotto, 1985; She~ Frost, & Otto, 1983).
High oes (as compared to low oes) did not report significantly more
procrastination motivated by avoidance tendencies. This fact replicated the

TABLE 8-4. Mean Scores on Personality

Measures for High and Low ObsessiveCompulsive College Students
in Subsample of Study 2
Extreme Lynfield
obseSSive-compulsive scores

Low

High

Self-report measure
Lynfieldlobsession
Lynfieldlcompulsion
Compulsive-checker
Compulsive-washer
Perfectionistic cognitions
Avoidant procrastination
Decisional procrastination

(n

= 15)

64.25
68.50
21.92
33.42
78.42
35.50
16.67

(5.86)
(5.57)
(5.27)
(7.06)
(19.49)
(9.64)
(3.2S)

(n = IS)
32.75
32.19
IS.65
28.59
49.94
33.94
12.53

Note: Values in parentheses are standard deviations.

(2.41)
(2.29)
(6.05)
(7.13)
(14.40)
(11.19)
(4.78)

ROLE OF PERSONAUTY DISORDERS IN PROCRASI'INATION

183

correlational results from Study 1 involving the entire sample, and with the
present subsample demonstrated that avoidant procrastination, obsessions, and compulsions were not related tendencies. Thus, it appears that
behavioral procrastination to avoid threatening situations is not an important factor to obsessive and compulsive tendencies with nonclinical populations. However, high compared to low OCs did report significantly more
indecisiveness, or decisional procrastination (t (31) = 1.74, P < .05). This
factor suggests that decision-making is either avoided or postponed by
individuals who report obsessive-compulsive tendencies in their daily
lives. Furthermore, to the extent that the high OCs in the present study
were similar to clinical samples of OCPDs, it suggests that indecisiveness
may be an important component to clinical obsessive-compulsive clients as
suggested by the DSM-ill-R.
STUDY

Study 3 was performed with a clinical sample to further explore the

role of both avoidant and decisional procrastination with obsessivecompulsive personality disorder (OCPD). Based on the results of Studies 1
and 2, one would expect avoidant procrastination to be unrelated to
obsessions and compulsions. Howeve~ the DSM-ill-R claims that procrastinatory behaviors are associated with OC personality disorders. Therefore, it is possible that high rates of avoidant procrastination would be
reported with a clinical sample of OCPDs. In addition, it is expected that
high rates of indecisiveness would be reported by clinical OCPDs, as
suggested by the DSM-ill-R and as reported with nonclinical high OCs in
Study 2.
Method

Participants. A total of 16 men and 25 women, diagnosed by a

psychologist or psychiatrist with OCPD participated in this study. The
mean age for this sample was 42.6 years old (SD = 11.9). On average,
clients reported nearly 8 years of therapy with individuals claiming onset
of OCPD tendencies during childhood (64.1% younger than age 14 years).
Procedure and Psychometric Scales. The OCPD clients were recruited
from several sources in central New York State. All responses were recorded anonymously and through mail contact.
Demographic items included the respondent's age, gender, length of
time (in years) in therapy for OCPD, and the earliest age of onset for
symptoms. Participants were asked to complete both sections of the 40-

184

0IAPTER8

item Lynfield Obsession/Compulsive Questionnaire (Allen & Turner,

1975), Mann's (1982) 5-item Decisional Procrastination Scale, and McCown
and Johnson's (1989a) IS-item Adult Inventory of Procrastination.
Results and Discussion

Correlational Analysis. Among this sample, self-reported obsessions

and compulsions were significantly related (r = .88, P < .001). Indecisiveness, or decisional procrastination, was significantly related to obsessional
thinking (r = .33, P < .05) and to compulsive behaviors (r = .49, P < .01).
Decisional procrastination also was significantly related to avoidant procrastination (r = .31, P < .05). No other significant correlation between
scores on the self-reported scales were obtained.
The fact that obsessive and compulsive scores were significantly
related within this clinical sample is consistent with the DSM-III-R. As
expected, decisional procrastination was significantly related to obsessive
compulsions among the clinical population. This result provides the first
empirical support for the diagnostic utility of indecision as a characteristic
for this pathology. The fact that avoidant procrastination was not significantly related with obsession or with compulsions suggests that it is an
independent concept from these other constructs. In short, avoidant procrastination appears to be a viable independent construct. Furthermore,
the fact that decisional and avoidant procrastination were significantly
correlated with this clinical sample suggests that procrastination tendencies among DCs may involve cognitive and behavioral components.
Comparing Mean Scores with Students in Study 2. Scores on the obsessive, compulsive, indecision, and avoidant-procrastination scales were
compared between the DC clients and the extreme-low (n = 18) and
(n = 15) DC students discussed in Study 2. This comparison was performed to assess whether or not self-reported procrastination frequencies
occurred at different rates among clinical and nonclinical populations. A
series of t tests between means by the extreme-low OC student samples
(see Table 8-4) and the DCPD clients was performed. The DCPD clients
reported significantly greater obsessional thinking (M = 58.9, SO = 15.7;
t (57) = -6.48, P < .001) and compulsive behavior (M = 57.6, SO = 13.6;
t (57) = -9.49, P< .001) than the extreme-low OC student population. The
DCPD clients and the extreme-low OC students were not significantly
different in self-reported avoidant procrastination (client M = 18.1, SO =
5.2; t (57) = -5.10, P < .001). Together, these results suggest that with
"normal," nonclinical individuals, DC tendencies may be less pronounced.
Moreover, it appears that individuals with few DC tendencies may not be

ROLE OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS IN PROCRASTINATION

185

different from individuals with OCPD pathologies in avoidance procrastination. In contrast, as expected, clinical OCPDs may be more indecisive
than nonclinical individuals.
Furthermore, t tests between the extreme-high OC students and the
OCPD clients were performed on each of the four self-report measures.
(See Table 8-4 for the extreme-high OC students' mean scores). Interestingly, there were no significant differences between the students' and
clients' mean scores for obsessional thinking, compulsive behavior, decisional procrastination, and avoidant procrastination. These results suggest
that the extreme-high OC students were similar in personality profile to
the OCPD clients with respect to these measures. It is possible that the
student sample may be developing (or have developed) OCPD, or this is
perhaps simply an artifact of a college-student sample. Among the present
client sample, most individuals reported symptoms at an early age, well
before traditional college students may be reporting symptomatic pathology.

GENERAL CONCLUSION
In summary, in this chapter we discussed personality disorders and
characterological factors in procrastination. Three studies designed to
assess the role of frequent procrastination in Cluster C personality styles
were presented. Study 1 found that among a sample of college students,
behavioral procrastination motivated by avoidant strategies was significantly related to and loaded with anger expression, particularly anger-in
tendencies. However, avoidant procrastination was not significantly related to or loaded with obsessive-compulsive (OC) tendencies. In short,
frequent behavioral procrastination to avoid tasks and situations may be a
form of passive-aggressive behavior but not of obsessive-compulsive behavior.
In Study 2, a subsample of these nonclinical participants from Study 1
completed measures of compulsive behavior and indecisiveness, or decisional procrastination. Again, avoidant procrastination was not significantly related to compulsive-checking behavior. Extreme-high compared
to low OCs among this student sample reported significantly more
compulsive-checking/washing behaviors, and perfectionistic cognitions.
They also were significantly different in decisional procrastination, but not
in avoidant procrastination, suggesting that nonclinical OCs report experiencing indecisiveness.
Study 3 involved clinical OCPD volunteers asked to report on their
procrastination frequencies. Among this clinical sample, obsessions and
compulsions were significantly related to decisional- but not to avoidant-

186

CHAPTERS

procrastination tendencies, again supporting the diagnostic criteria found

in the DSM-III-R. Thus, for two Cluster C personality styles, frequent
procrastination plays a different role in each type. Procrastination frequency motivated by avoidance was relevant to passive-aggressive behavior, as expected by the DSM-III-R, but not to obsessions and compulsions.
Decisional procrastination, in contrast, was relevant to obsessive-compulsive
styles among nonclinical and clinical samples, as expected by the DSM-III-R.
It appears that some forms of procrastinatory behavior are relevant to
personality styles discussed under Cluster C disorders of the DSM-III-R.
Of course, the present studies have limitations. For example, passiveaggressive and obsessive-compulsive tendencies were assessed on only
one or two scales. In fact, these tendencies were assessed by only selfreport measures. Future research should include a converging number of
scales and include measures other than psychometric scales. In addition,
no clinical sample of passive aggressives was used in any of these studies,
limiting statements concerning procrastinatory behavior to nonclinical
samples. Studies eXamining behavioral indices of passive aggression and
frequent procrastination among clinical samples are needed. Also, it is not
known what role procrastination plays in other Cluster C avoidant disorders. Nevertheless, this study does suggest that frequent procrastination
does play a role with some symptoms that are typical of some Cluster C
personality disorders cited in the DSM-III-R.

CHAPTER 9

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC
PROCRASTINATION IN
COLLEGE STUDENTS

The purpose of the next two chapters is to present suggested clinical

guidelines regarding interventions for the treatment of decisional and task
procrastination. Unfortunately, only a very small literature exists that
includes outcome data regarding the treatment of procrastination. Many of
these studies remain unpublished, existing either in dissertations or in
other sources (e.g., manuscripts that have not been peer reviewed, requests for funding, and internal evaluation data). The reason for this is
because procrastination-treatment programs are usually not designed for
research purposes. Data, if collected at all, is obtained for program
evaluation or other internal needs. There is an absence of double-blind
attention-placebo trials, which are usually considered necessary to establish demonstrated efficacy of a treatment. Because of the lack of comprehensive outcome studies, many of our treatment recommendations rely on
clinical experience. Other interventions draw on our unpublished work,
which spans the past several years. We admit that at times our methodology is less satisfactory than we would like. Our hope is that these clinically
derived interventions can eventually be subjected to empirical testing.

META-ANALYSIS AND THE ETHICS OF INTERVENTION

In the absence of double-blind attention-placebo outcome research,
psychotherapy outcome researchers often recommend the use of meta187

188

CHAPTER 9

analysis to determine whether specific interventions have substantial

effectiveness (Rosenthal, 1984). A meta-analysis performed by our group
located 15 outcome studies, excluding our own data. This comprises an
aggregate client number of 234 people, all high school or college students.
li'eatment was primarily cognitive-behavioral oriented and educational,
with an emphasis on time-management skills. These studies indicated an
overall-treatment effect of .47 standard deviations (50s) improvement in
the treated groups, as compared to untreated groups. Following the
suggestion of Jacobson and wax (1991), clinically significant improvement
occurs with a treatment effect of about .5 50s or greater. In other words,
existing treatments for procrastination are barely meaningful clinically, at
least as demonstrated with the very limited data that we now have, and
compared to the treatment of other disorders (Saunders, Howard, &
Newman, 1988).
An early reviewer of this manuscript was critical of empirically based
practitioners and theorists who would discuss and advocate treatment in
the absence of convincing outcome data. An ethical dilemma for practitioners is whether they should attempt treatment for psychological problems when no treatment has demonstrated an effectiveness. However,
when no convincing body of outcome data exists, psychotherapeutic
interventions are appropriate if they are guided by reasonable psychological theory. While reasonable and scientifically grounded theory is certainly
not a replacement for comprehensive outcome data regarding treatment
efficacy, our philosophy is that theoretically based treatment is legitimate
in the absence of data if the treatment is rational and appears promising. In
other words, the lack of positive outcome data should not convince the
practitioner that the treatment of procrastination is useless or unwarranted.
This is not only an ethical issue for treatment providers, but it also is
important inasmuch as third-party reimbursers are increasingly basing
their approval of service delivery on demonstrated efficacy of specific
treatments (Haas & Cummings, 1991). We have already seen several
examples in which treatment providers are denied third-party payments
because they cannot point to well-established methodology for changing
the behavior of procrastination. As treatment plans come under increasing
scrutiny by managed-care professionals and paraprofessionals, this distressing trend is likely to continue.
This increasing scrutiny often places the practitioner in an ethical
dilemma. He or she can choose to diagnose the client with more "acceptable" and standard nomenclature, such as depression, simple phobia, or
anxiety disorder. These are common syndromes for which well-recognized
psychological treatments are known and generally accepted by third-party
participants. Without such a well-understood label, the procrastinator may

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

189

be denied treatment, based on the fact that his or her problem is either not
serious enough to warrant intervention or because there are no demonstrated methods that have proven useful for treating this syndrome.
However, the therapist often must be somewhat dishonest and perhaps
even unethical in applying these psychiatric labels. On the other hand,
when the therapist states that the client's primary problem is procrastination, he or she is likely to encounter reimbursement problems or severe
limitations on treatment length. This is true even in college-counseling
centers, where many students initially present to clinics with the problem
of not being able to complete their assignments. Oients who are not given
standard psychiatric diagnoses (or are given so-called NV Code diagnoses") are often shunted into brief study-skills training interventions,
despite the fact that these clients may have long-standing problems that
are likely to be ineffectively handled by educational modalities.
Oients who are diagnosed with formal psychiatric nomenclature may
receive a more appropriate level of services but often risk stigmatization.
For example, in one college-counseling center, any student who received a
psychiatric diagnosis was automatically referred to a psychiatrist for
further evaluation. This was simply the protocol and no exceptions were
made. Many students found this process irrelevant, demeaning, or stigmatizing, and simply failed to return for follow-up sessions. As a result
many procrastinating students who could have benefited from psychological intervention were denied this opportunity.
We have no solutions for these diagnostic or labeling problems,
difficulties which will undoubtedly swell as mental health services are
increasingly scrutinized and rationed. Often this service-utilization review
is handled by inappropriate reviewers. Our only suggestion is that practitioners must be prepared to document the clinical significance of problems
caused by procrastination in the lives of their clients. They must then be
able to present a theoretically reasonable set of interventions. Since a
scientific understanding of procrastination is beginning to emerge, we are
now able to suggest potentially effective methods of intervention that
might modify this behavioral syndrome.

HOW THEORETICAL ACCOUNTS OF PROCRASTINATION

INFLUENCE TREATMENT STRATEGIES
Our goal for successful intervention is to enhance the .47 SDs rate of
improvement found with the treatment of procrastinators. Ideally, we wish
to raise it to a level associated with psychotherapy for other problems, such
as anxiety or depression, where the effect size is approximately .8 or

190

CHAPTER 9

greater (Smith, Glass, & Miller, 1980). To attempt this goal we will employ
the theoretical accounts of the etiology of procrastination discussed by
various authors in this volume, who have indicated that this dysfunctional
pattern can be due to a variety of causes. However, foremost among these
are two independent profiles of behavior: 1) neurotic avoidance, associated
with fear, anxiety, and overarousal; and 2) a lack of conscientiousness, which
may also include an exaggerated, sensation-seeking pattern associated
with underarousal, especially when deadlines approach for desirable goals.
Most of the interventions we propose in the present and following
chapter involve attempts to modify these two dysfunctional patterns.
However, these two patterns (which are not mutually exclusive) do not
account for all cases of procrastination that a clinician will encounter.
Consequently, a careful psychological and behavioral assessment is recommended before beginning any treatment, a contention that we will reiterate frequently.
.
These two chapters discuss assessment and treatment strategies for
three distinct classes of procrastinators: (1) college and (perhaps) high
school students; (2) adult/nonstudents; and (3) "atypical" cases of persons
who procrastinate only on very definable tasks, such as completing doctoral dissertations and income taxes, visiting relatives, or other circumscribed behaviors. These three classes represent distinct categories in
which specific treatment interventions can be best tailored. These interventions may include behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, and psychodynamic therapies, depending on the type of procrastination, its severity,
and the degree of discomfort it causes in the client. Assessment strategies
also differ between these groups, depending in part on the base rates of
other disorders that can mask as procrastination. For example, as a general
rule, adult procrastinators require more rigorous psychological, and in
some cases, medical evaluation, as discussed in the next chapter. Group
therapy, in contrast, seems particularly helpful for college students and not
particularly useful for nonstudents.

THE TREATMENT OF COLLEGE-STUDENT

PROCRASTINATION: AN OVERVIEW
Clients we discuss in this chapter are college students, a population
shown in Chapter 1 to demonstrate a very high degree of procrastination.
Many of the interventions for college students are theoretically relevant to
other groups as well, and may be modifiable for nonstudents. Our experience and data treating procrastinating college students comes from supervising or consulting with more than twenty college-counseling centers.

191

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASI'INATION

These include urban community colleges, major universities, and small

colleges. Essentially, these colleges and universities represent a crosssection of contemporary higher education in North America. From these
sites we collected data on over 311 students who entered treatment for
procrastination as self-referrals, and 226 students referred by others (e.g.,
an academic dean or an instructm; generally as a condition of continued
institutional involvement). This is probably the most comprehensive and
diverse study ever of college-student procrastinators, and some of our
results may be of value in assisting the clinician in determining appropriate treatments.
REFERRAL TYPOLOGIES

Students who seek help for chronic academic procrastination usually

have reached their help-provider by one of two mechanisms. They may be
self-referred, that is, motivated to seek help because they, or perhaps their
family and friends, realize that they are not performing up to their abilities.
Or students may be more formally referred, having encountered trouble
due to their poor academic performance, class tardiness, or in some cases,
inability to pay tuition or return library books in a timely fashion. We refer
to this second group of students as other-referred, despite the fact that such
students may have expressed relevant thoughts about seeking treatment in
the past or may have actually sought help for their procrastination at some
time.

Table 9-1 shows the characteristics of students who were self-referred

for treatment of procrastination. (Standardized test scores include only 168
of these participants, since these tests were not available for community-

TABLE 9-1. Characteristics of Students

Who Voluntarily Seek 'Iieatment for Procrastination
(SD Difference from Home College Mean)
Grade point average
SATs or ACfs
~

Parent's income
High school grade point average
Number of hours spent in extracurricular activities
Number of hours spent commuting or working
n = 206

'Standardized scores include 168 students

.p (two-tailed) < .OS
"p (two-tailed) < .01

- .38....
.19*
.il
.02
-.06
.22
- .12

192

CHAPrER9

college subjects.) Because Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SAT) or Achievement

Tests (ACT) and grade point averages vary across settings, these numbers
have been adjusted to reflect standard deviations above or below the
institutional mean, as suggested by Cohen (1977).
Students who are self-referred for procrastination problems are
slightly brighter than average students, but tend to have substantially
lower grade point averages than their peers. In other words, these students
are underachievers, showing a discrepancy between their ability and their
grades. These students typically do not seek treatment until the junior
year, by which time the lack of academic punctuality may have done
irrevocable harm to career plans.
Among students who self-refer for treatment there is a slight (.22) but
significant correlation between the point in their academic years when
they attempt professional treatment and standardized test scores. Brighter
students tend to wait longer before seeking help, probably because they
are more adept at last-minute cramming and task completion. As academic courses become more difficult, it is increasingly necessary for such
students to spend time studying. When they find that they cannot, or do
not know how to study, and that last-minute efforts are no longer effective,
they may then seek treatment.
When students voluntarily seek professional consultation regarding
procrastination, this help-seeking action is usually an indication of admission of a serious problem. The students have recognized that they habitually put things off and that this is having a detrimental effect on their
academic and personal lives. By the time such students become involved in
the counseling system process, there have often been problems in other
areas of their lives. For example, such students may have reduced social
supports, because their inability to balance academic and social schedules
may make them erratic in fulfilling obligations to friends. In one case that
the authors worked with, a student was avoided almost completely by her
friends during the week preceding exam time because "they know I
haven't done any work all semester and they know I'm going to be a
'basket case.'" This avoidance by her friends made the student even more
anxious, which increased her depression, further increasing her procrastination.
Occasionally, some students will show gross misperception regarding
the amount of time necessary to put into satisfactorily completing course
work. Often these students can be treated rapidly and highly successfully,
once they learn what is expected of them in the college environment. For
example, one of the authors treated a very bright (WAIS-R IQ = 127;
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised) third-year undergraduate
business major who was beginning to demonstrate increasingly poorer

193

TREAlMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

academic performance. The young man had transferred from a junior

college the previous year, but found academic life in a major university
more demanding. The student apparently never realized that anyone had
to study and believed that "if you don't get it after reading it once and
being in class you won't get it at all." This attitude had been promoted (or
perhaps we should say, had failed to be extinguished) because the young
man lived with his family and away from other college students. He simply
had limited exposure to other young students at the university. This young
man's entire academic history from elementary school on involved the
strategy of mastering material by reading it only once, without notes,
questioning, or other appropriate processing for memory consolidation.
Fortunately, this student was able to quickly learn appropriate study
methods and finished his senior year with excellent grades.
Students who are other-referred might be expected to represent an
even more serious clinical picture. Our data suggests this is partially true.
Table 9-2 shows the demographic and academic factors related to otherreferred students. (No data is included on community-college students,
because in our site, such students were rarely referred to mandatory
academic counseling.) These students have lower grade point averages
and standardized test scores, and also tend to be somewhat younger than
self-referred students. However, they do not differ significantly in their
procrastination scores from self-referred students. This finding suggests
that the academic ability, as measured by standardized tests, acts as a
preventative factor in students seeking formal intervention for procrastination. Students who encounter academic trouble earlier do not do so
because they have a greater tendency to procrastinate. They simply have
less ability or other resources. Optimally, academic counselors might wish

TABLE 9-2. Characteristics of Students

Who Are Referred by Others
to Seek Treatment for Procrastination
(SD Difference from Home College Mean)
Grade point average
SATs or ACTs
Age
Parent's income
High school grade point average
Number of hours spent in extracurricular activities
Number of hours spent commuting or working
n = 311
'p (two-tailed) < .05
"p (two-tailed) < .01

- .52**
-.21*
-.09
- .26**
-.31**
.17
.14

194

CHAPTER 9

to screen students for procrastination at the beginning of their collegeacademic careers. Students with other disadvantages that may impair
performances, such as those from culturally impoverished environments,
might also be fruitfully screened in such a manner.
ASSESSMENT AND OBTAINING A HISTORY
OF THE COLLEGE-STUDENT PROCRASTINATOR

In the next chapter we will discuss the importance of the clinical

interview and also of psychological testing in ruling out major psychopathology that might be masquerading as task or decisional avoidance.
Generally, this extensive "rule-out" procedure is less of a concern with
college students. However, major psychopathology, such as debilitating
anxiety or depression, is not uncommon in college procrastinators. Therefore, it is extremely important to obtain an adequate history of the
presenting problem and of any other psychological or psychiatric difficulties that the client may have. In our opinion, no college student should be

treated for procrastination, even in a group setting, without screening for anxiety
and depression. The only exception to this is students who participate in a

nonclinically oriented time-management seminar, described later in this

chapter. Given the case with which a psychometrically valid instrument
can be employed to screen college students for psychopathology, there is
very little reason for the clinician not to exert the brief effort involved in
this valuable, and occasionally instrumental, assessment.
Typically, we suggest using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory (MMPI), or its new revision, as an appropriate screening instrument. The MMPI takes between 45 minutes and 2 hours for college
students to complete. We usually have the MMPI scored and simply scan
the profiles for t scores over 2.5 SD (Le., > 75). Students who score higher
than this somewhat arbitrary cutoff on any of the clinical scales are
referred to individual therapy. An exception is the F scale, a validity scale
that may be elevated when students first seek help for their behavioral
problems, and the K scale, which is usually seen as a positive sign of
defensiveness (Graham, 1987). Other students may be appropriately referred for group treatment, providing there is nothing in their histories to
suggest the need for more intensive therapeutic modalities.
After students complete the MMPI, we attempt to obtain a general
psychosocial history which emphasizes procrastination, but which is not
limited to this topic. Collecting a case history is complicated by the fact
that students may not have been aware of longstanding procrastination
behaviors until placed in a socially and academically challenging environment. Procrastination is more likely to be a salient issue only for the young

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

195

adult, becoming an important developmental issue as the student encounters a more rigorous workload. Regardless, the case history will include
questions regarding how long procrastination has been a problem for the
student, the degree to which he or she feels it impairs grades, and,
perhaps most importantly, what the student has attempted to do about his
or her behavior in the past. Not infrequently, students who seek treatment
for procrastination may be in psychotherapy elsewhere, and obviously the
two treatments must be coordinated. The interviewer should also ask
typical questions regarding psychological or psychiatric problems. Students with a clear psychiatric history are often inappropriate for the group
treatment that we describe later but may do quite well in a time-limited
therapy aimed at addressing specific procrastinatingj,ehaviors.
Obvious "rule-outs" with the clinical interview involve low intellectual
functioning, dyslexia, focal-neuropsychological deficits (such as visual
apraxia), thought disorders, or severe personality disorders. The careful or
concerned clinician who suspects cognitive problems administers a WAISR to every client, since it is not only a definitive intellectual assessment
tool, but also a good neuropsychological screen (Leazak, 1983). Although
we do not know the incidences of neuropsychological impairments in
college-student procrastinators, our clinical impression is that it is not
infrequent. A pattern that we have seen in about 20 cases involves attention
and concentration problems on the WAI5-R and an MMPI profile indicative
of increased anxiety. Such students are probably better referred to a
neuropsychologist for evaluation and in our (limited) experience do not do
well in either group or individual problem-focused treatments.
The case studies below indicate the usefulness of a thorough psychological work up, conducted by an experienced clinician.
Sean, a first semester senior at a large Midwestern university, consulted
with his college-counseling center regarding his inability to study. "I
just can't get the hang of it this semester. . . . I'm just putting it off too
much." Sean's first academic year had been disastrous. While a student at a more prestigious Eastern college before transferring, he
barely maintained a passing average. "I just didn't seem to fit in there
the whole year," he offered as an explanation. Having transferred
closer to home, his grade point average was maintained at a perfect 4.0.
"I'm just really energized being near home, my family, friends, everybody, you know. But this time I'm just losing my.energy."
Psychological testing reiterated what the clinical interview had
already suggested: Sean was severely depressed. Furthermore, there
was evidence of a cyclothymic personality disorder and a familial
history of manic depression. A later interview revealed that Sean was
able to crudely manipulate his moods through the process of missing
sleep, a technique known to interfere with norepinephrine reuptake,

196

CHAPTER 9

and thereby influence manic symptoms (Leonard, 1992). By avoiding

sleep for a night or two, Sean could induce a hypomanic episode,
facilitating a more intense degree of studying than he otherwise could
manage in the depressive state that had become more chronic for him.
Sean was referred to a psychiatrist and started on lithium carbonate
with excellent results. He reported no further problems procrastinating.
Judith was a 19-year-old student of outstanding intellectual potential
who had been class valedictorian in her high school. She sought
referral from an educational counselor for her persistent inability to
study material in a timely manner. Despite the fact that her SAT score
had been in an enviable range, she was currently in the bottom quartile
of her college class.
An initial interview by a college counselor suggested that she
might benefit from a time-management class conducted through the
Continuing Education office. "She just seems like a typical student
with time-management issues," the counselor noted. However, a consulting psycholOgist suggested that Judith receive psychological testing because her "time-management problems" seemed incongruous
with her outstanding high school scholastic history. Psychological
testing with the MMPI suggested presence of an alcohol F,Oblem,
which the client readily and somewhat naively admitted when directly
questioned. The client's drinking patterns were addressed in treatment
and she responded well to therapeutic intervention.
In this case the client's procrastination was due to the fact that she
spent a good portion of her waking hours quite intoxicated. Once she
gained control of her drinking, her intellectual potential was evident
and the remainder of her academic career was outstanding. An interesting addendum of this case is that the client successfully applied to
medical school, despite her early academic problems. She has now
completed medical training and is a psychiatric resident.

GENERAL TREATMENT PHIWSOPHY REGARDING

COLLEGE-STUDENT PROCRASTINATION
Once other potential psychological factors that may be causing the
student difficulty have been ruled out, the treatment of choice for procrastinators is a program designed to address individuals' specific patterns of
task avoidance. A general overview is as follows: Persons whose pattern is
neurotidanxiouslfearfullavoidant/overaroused benefit from procedures
designed to reduce anxiety. Persons who are unconsdentious/sensationseekinglimpulsive/antiauthoritarian/underaroused benefit from a treatment designed to boost concern and forethought, though not necessarily

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

197

anxiety. Since both traits are hypothesized to be normally distributed and

orthogonal, it is possible for procrastinators to be both impulsive and task
avoidant. These persons require the greatest skill to treat, since the
clinician must assist them in simultaneously reducing anxious arousal and
increasing goal-oriented arousal.
CHANGING COGNITIVE MIsCONCEPTIONS: A KEy TREATMENT
STRATEGY FOR ALL TYPES OF PROCRASTINATION

Regardless of typology, a common treatment involves challenging and

changing cognitive distortions and misperceptions. Knaus (1973), Ellis
and Knaus (1977), and others (e.g., Rorer, 1983; Grecco, 1985) commented
regarding the cognitive misconceptions that procrastinators usually display and the etiological role that cognitive misperceptions play in causing
procrastination. We do not wish to argue that cognitive processes are
themselves causal. They may simply be a covariant or a pathway of other
processes, such as an acquired or innate sensitivity to rejection. More data
is needed to address this issue. Regardless, and as in the case of depression, such reactions are mediated by cognitive processes. By changing the
cognitive misperceptions we are more apt to change the behavior.
Based on clinical experience we have found a number of cognitive
distortions to be frequent in most procrastinators, regardless of their
subtypes. Probably the most universal (our "Big Five") are as follows:
1. Overestimation of the time left to perform a task.
2. Underestimation of time necessary to complete a task.
3. Overestimation of future motivational states. This is typified by
statements such as "I'll feel more like doing it later."
4. Misreliance on the necessity of emotional congruence to succeed in
a task. Typical is a statement such as "People should only study
when they feel good about it."
5. Belief that working when not in the mood is unproductive or
suboptimal. Such beliefs are typically expressed by phrases such
as "It doesn't do any good to work when you are not motivated."

Also, as mentioned previously, students, particularly those with

formerly good academic ability, may also have misconceptions regarding
the necessity for studying. For example, it is not uncommon for students
transitioning either to college or to graduate school who have been very
successful in the past to believe that studying is unnecessary for "truly
intelligent" people. As one student recently voiced: "If you don't get it the
first time in class you won't get it at all.... At least, that's been my
experience. "

198

CHAPTER 9

TABLE 9-3. Cognitive Distortions Associated

with Anxiety-Related Procrastination
Cognitions involving lack of self-efficacy
It's hopeless to complete this task.
It's too late to complete this task.
I could never get the task done to my or my teacher's satisfaction, so why bother now?
I'm not smart enough to do this task.
I'm too tired to do this task well, so why bother?
I'm too uptight (nervous or tense) to get this task done.
I'm too inept to get this work done.
I've missed so many opportunities so far, so why should I bother?
People of my (race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc.) can't do this type of work.
Cognitions involving avoidance
I'll do it tonight, so I don't have to worry.
I'm very good at getting things done at the last minute, so I don't have to worry.
If I don't think about doing this task, I won't have to worry as much.
I need to distract myself before I perform this task.
I won't get this task done unless I relax first.
I'm just too stressed to work.
I can't work my best until certain times (so I won't start now).
I can't work without (a specific person, study room etc.) being available.

Table 9-3 shows a list of other common cognitive misperceptions or

distortions. In our experience and also congruent with our theoretical
notions, distorted cognitions involve two groups of thoughts. The first
group involves those that increase anxiety about a task at hand, thus
leading to a feeling that it is futile to attempt task completion. Naturally,
these predominate in persons whose procrastination is characterized by
fear or anxiety, or a general lack of self-efficacy. The second group of
cognitions involve those that act to reduce anxiety, such as "1'11 do it
tonight, so I don't need to worry," or "I'm really very good at getting
things done at the last minute." These types of cognition are more
prominent in persons who are not as conscientious as they should be.
The key to our therapeutic strategy is to teach procrastinators to
challenge these cognitive distortions (Safran, Vallis, Segel, & Shaw, 1986;
Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). Either an individual therapy session or a
group format may be an appropriate vehicle to instruct clients in cognitive
restructuring. Choice for change may depend on other client aspects, such
as the presence of any coexisting psychopathology such as depression or
severe anxiety. The sections below highlight strategies for implementing
cognitive therapy with college-academic procrastinators meeting in a
group format. This method focuses first on challenging anxiety-producing

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

199

cognitions, and second on cognitions associated with a lack of conscientiousness and with impulsivity.
In discussing the treatment interventions that we advocate (to follow)
we note that we have failed to fmd a significant difference in outcome
between persons who are self-referred and other-referred. However, our
clinical impression is that other-referred students often have more emotional and psychological problems, conditions that we feel counterindicate
group-therapy treatment. For example, they are more likely to demonstrate
elevations on the MMPI or other objective psychological tests. While we
are not certain why this is true, it does argue for the use of a careful
psychological assessment for most persons who seek treatment for procrastination.

MODIFYING COGNITNE DISTORTIONS

AND THE ANXIOUS PROCRASTINATOR
As indicated in Chapter 2, many students who procrastinate are
exceSSively anxious. It makes theoretical sense that treating generalized
anxiety, either pharmacologically or behaviorally, might have a therapeutic
effect on reducing procrastination. To date, we have tested this hypothesis
with 25 students in a pre-posttest design. However, our data indicates that
reducing anxiety per se has no significant effect on procrastination scores.
An exception is when anxiety becomes debilitating, as seen in the following case study:
Jean was a first-generation Asian-American doctoral student in the
first semester of medical school. Jean's undergraduate course work and
grade point average had been extremely good; however, she had been
led to believe that medical school was impossibly difficult. Jean described herself as "always anxious," but noted that the anxiety was
always "manageable." This manageability began to change during the
first semester of graduate school.
Anxiety quickly began to interfere with her ability to concentrate
and she began putting off important tasks. As her anxiety began to
increase, so did her task avoidance, further fueling her anxiety. By the
time she entered treatment at a university counseling center, Jean had
begun obsessively ruminating about her course work, repetitively
asking the same questions to her classmates about assignment dates
and study strategies.
It was clear to the therapist that Jean's anxiety had surpassed the
point where it could be managed on an outpatient basis. She was
briefly hospitalized and given a course of benzodiazepines to provide
an immediate calming. Once these symptoms were manageable, it

200

CHAPTER 9

was possible to work on her misconceptions regarding academic

assignments and to teach Jean general techniques for reducing anxiety.
Jean eventually finished out the year and later, all her course work, and
obtained an MD.

Use of this case study is not meant to suggest that benzodiazepines

are a routine and appropriate treatment for chronic procrastination. There
is rarely any excuse for clients to be allowed to become as anxious as Jean
became. The host of cognitive and behavioral techniques for chronicanxiety reduction do quite well if applied in time. These may include any
of the following: cognitive self-statements, deep-relaxation training, visualization with relaxation, or any of the other popular anxiety treatments
discussed by Barlow (1992). However, each treatment should be designed
with the goal in mind of increasing frequency and concentration of academic effort. The continuation of the previous case study illustrates how
this can occur in the context of anxiety treatment.
Once Jean returned to her classes she met weekly with a therapist.
During the first interview her pattern regarding upcoming assignments became very clear. Typically, Jean would become extremely
anxious, often much too anxious to concentrate. Usually, this anxiety
was triggered by cognitive distortions that had little basis in reality,
such as the self-statement that "I'm too retarded to learn this stuff" or
"Women can't possibly learn this hard science." Soon after thinking
these thoughts Jean would try to distract herself with nonacademic
activities, such as watching television or listening to music. This
approach, of course, was a form of procrastination and ultimately
increased her anxiety.
With her therapist's help Jean was quickly able to list all of the
upcoming course requirements, such as papers and exams. Despite a
great deal of anxiety, she was able to design an appropriate schedule
that would allow sufficient time for studying. She was then taught a
number of relaxation techniques to practice before and during her
study time, which was set for a certain number of hours each night.
Finally, Jean was able to reduce the number of irrational and anxietyprovoking cognitions that she held, such as that she was destined to
fail or that she was not as intelligent as other students because of her
ethnic status. Jean later cited the cognitive aspects of her treatment as
the most important for her successful "recovery."

Obviously, it would be of great value if we could conduct a clinical trial

comparing relaxation training alone to cognitive therapy for treating
chronically anxious procrastinators. At this time we do not have this type
of data. However, our clinical experience, as well as the posttherapy
interviewing of successfully treated clients, seems to indicate that cogni-

TREAlMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

201

tive challenges of irrational fears are perhaps the most important aspect of
treatment for the typically anxious procrastinator. We recommend the use
of cognitive interventions for treating these irrational thoughts whenever
they are encountered as the primary treatment of anxiety-related procrastination toward goal-focused behavior. This is not to argue that other
methods of anxiety reduction are inappropriate or unhelpful. However,
cognitive-behavioral interventions are usually presented as the most helpful aspects of treatment by former clients who have successfully completed
treatment.
In our experience, the reduction of anxiety should proceed in tandem
with plans to achieve specific, measurable, behavioral goals. Frequently,
specific items of anxiety that cause avoidance can be easily identified, such
as an upcoming test, applying for college or graduate school, or in the case
of adults, paying income taxes. The next useful step is often to reduce the
aversive task into nonoverlapping components, which once completed
may signal that the goal is nearer. Table 9-4 shows the components
generated for a procrastinator regarding an upcoming history paper that a
student that we treated could not accomplish. We have labelled this
procedure, simply, as "Developing a Task Plan."
Notice that the tasks are divided into simple steps that are clear and
are nonoverlapping. Silver (1974) maintains that a tendency of procrastinators is to perseverate on portions of the task they feel they can perform, to
the exclusion of other aspects. By developing some specific components,
this tendency is circumvented. Note also that the components have specific criteria by which the client and others will know that the task is
completed, thus reducing self-deception. Where dates are flexible, it is
important to assign concrete deadlines that are"in plain black and white."
Finally, note how potential cognitive ''blocks'' associated with anxiety are
anticipated, so that they will not be a source of unpredictable anxiety.

COGNITIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR

THE LOW-CONSCIENTIOUS PROCRASTINATOR
As indicated in Chapters 4 and 5, a major source of variance in the
behavior of academic procrastinators is explained by their lack of conscientiousness, their increased impulsiveness, or apparent sensation-seeking.
As Lay states in Chapter 5, "It may simply be that such individuals are
especially immune to the 'ought' aspects of their everyday world." Our
goal, therefore, is to increase the salience of these "oughts" and thereby
increase the procrastinator's conscientiousness.
To date, little is known about methods of altering conscientiousness,

202

CHAPTER 9

TABLE 9-4. An Example of a Task Plan

for Mr. A. (19-yeal'-old college student)
Task and components
I.

Apply for fInancial aid for next year

A. Get information packet from school office
B. Complete information packet
C. Talk to parents about fInancial aid
D. Get parents' tax returns mailed to me
E. Return packet to fInancial aid office
E Call to make sure that packet got there

Due

When done

12/1
11/4
1115
11/9
11117
11124
11128

1112
1115
11/9
11/13
11123
11128

Problems that I expect to have in completing these tasks and what I can do about them:
1.
2.

Calling my parents is something I don't like to do. My dad yells at me. I

can be prepared for the fact that he is a jerk.
I never have stamps and because of this I usually let mail pile up. This
might be because I don't like standing in lines. I can get stamps in the
Union building when I get change for video games.

Task and components

II.

Apply for summer internship at forensic lab

A. Call to get information
B. Write appropriate resume
C. Write cover letter
D. Get Professor H. to write recommendation
E. Write Ustatement of goals
EMail package
G. Double check on Professor H.
H. Call to see if material arrived

Due

When done

12/1
11111
11/14
11/15
11/16
11117
11118
11/24
11/25

11110
11/15
11115
?
11/17
11/18
11/24
11126

Problems that I expect to have in completing these tasks and what I can do about them:
1.
2.

I get nervous writing because I feel I don't write well. I guess I can use the
word processor and grammar checker.
I don't want to bother Professor H., even though I know this is part of his
job. I should just go ahead and do it. He won't bite and if he does, that's
his problem, not mine.

despite the overwhelming importance of this personality factor in a

number of psychological problems (Costa & Widiger, 1994). More is known
about methods of changing impulSive behavior (McCown, Johnson, &
Shure, 1993) and successful methods primarily involve cognitive interventions. Consequently, we suggest that the tt:eatment of choice for underarousedllow-conscientious procrastinators center on changing irrational
beliefs regarding task completion.
A strategy that seems initially appealing (especially to the inexperienced therapist who has treated very few procrastinators) is simply to raise
the anxiety of this underaroused group. The authors once consulted with a

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

203

group of fraternity brothers who managed to reduce some of their academic lateness by constructing progressively larger signs that highlighted
the dates on which classroom assignments were due from each fraternity
member. We instructed the group to increase the salience of cues, and
hence their prominence and anxiety-inducing qualities, as the necessary
goal dates drew closer. The students involved in this project reported
feeling more "anxiety" about deadlines. However, it is not clear whether
they simply meant that they gave more forethought to these dates or if they
actually worried more about them. The technique was successful, but this
may have been due to the fact that the fraternity faced a suspension from
the college if grades did not improve!
From our clinical experience we can state that" scare tactics" have the
typical efficacy that they do in other areas of behavioral change-usually
little or none. This is especially true when the procrastinator has mixed
traits of low conscientiousness and high anxiety. Scolding, cajoling, threatening, or other lay techniques also appear equally ineffective. More
promising are strategies to get the procrastinator to assess more realistically the optimal time necessary to begin a task that he or she wishes to
complete and to challenge cognitions which might interfere with this
accurate assessment.
One occasionally effective strategy for the early stages of changing
the behavior of unconscientious procrastinators is to get them verbally to
commit to an estimate of how long it will take them to complete a task or
study for a specific upcoming event. The therapist records this information
and when it is disconfirmed in the future (since it usually takes much
longer to complete a task than these people estimate) the therapist uses
this information to begin to challenge other irrational beliefs of the client.
Similarly, an identical strategy can be employed for procrastinators who
cannot manage time adequately because of problems with "overcommitments." They can be asked to specify in advance the likelihood that a given
set of activities (e.g., going out to dinner with friends, doing laundry,
copying some school notes, studying for a biology test) will be successfully
completed in a limited time period. When it is pointed out to clients that
they have overestimated the number of activities that can be performed in
an interval, the therapist can then "mount an attack" against the irrational
beliefs, armed with the data generated by these time misestimations.
The most effective therapeutic style with the unconscientious procrastinator is a firm yet understanding, reality-oriented approach emphasizing
the existence of a pattern of self-deception. As in other forms of cognitivebehavioral therapy, insight and self-generated excuses are of no particular
value. From time to time it may be necessary to remind clients of their
educational goals in order to prevent demoralization because previously

204

CHAPTER 9

cherished beliefs are slowly altered. A convenient method in which these

cognitions can be challenged in a therapeutic manner is presented in the
next section.

GROUP THERAPY FOR ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATORS:

THE to-SESSION STRUCTURED MODEL
We have developed a 10-session structured treatment program for
academic procrastination. Entitled uDoing It Now," this program makes
use of the interventions discussed previously, applying them in a manner
that is appropriate for both anxious procrastinators and underarousalJlowconscientious persons. In a study with 67 students completing the 10-week
course of Doing It Now (out of a total of 74 students who participated in at
least the first session), the mean change in scores on the Aitken Procrastination scale was .35 greater than a general academic-skills workshop of
similar length, the latter having an effect size of .35 greater than a notreatment wait list. In other words, the treatment provided in Doing It Now
has an effect size of .70 over no treatment, an outcome which compares
relatively favorably to the effects of psychotherapy for emotional problems. 1
The content of each session of the 10 sessions of Doing It Now is
specified below. The sessions are designed to include persons who have
been prescreened for psychopathology and do not have MMPI scores
higher than 2.5 SD (t = 75) on any of the major clinical scales or the
MacAndrew scale (except the F and K scales). The rationale for these
selection criteria should be clear. We do not want our sessions to tum into a
group therapy of persons with Axis I or Axis IT diagnoses. The presence of
such people might also damage the ability of other clients to relate freely
with each other and the group therapist. Oients with additional psychopathology are referred to individual therapy and are not treated in group
context.
Each session of Doing It Now runs about 80 to 90 minutes, including a
10-minute break. Typically, such sessions are held outside of the collegelip. an additional study conducted with 23 students, 10 sessions of brief psychodynamic

psyChotherapy (N = 15) had an effect size of .21 for the variable of change in procrastination
scores. While this effect is significantly greater than 0, it is not especially high and suggests
that psychodynamic psychotherapy, at least in its brief form, is relatively ineffective in
eliminating procrastination. Obviously, more work is warranted in this area before this
conclusion can be supported with stronger evidence. Regardless, it fits our clinical observations that general approaches to psychotherapy fail to have a specific effect on procrastination and that more dedicated treatments are necessary.

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

205

counseling center, to help destigmatize their content and to encourage

attendance. Throughout the sessions, the tone we attempt to set is one of
lighthearted yet respectful concern on the part of the counselors or therapists for the problems that procrastinating students face. We prefer to work
as a coeducational team, since it is less stressful and tiring for two
therapists to work together, as is the case in many therapy groups.
However, there is no reason that a single therapist cannot complete the
sessions, or that each group must be led by persons of both genders. It is
important that each session involve a homework component, since completion of the homework assignment is an integral part of treatment. Since
there may be frequent between-session phone calls regarding these homework assignments, cotherapists can reduce the burden on each other and
help prevent therapist ''burnout.''
Session 1 begins by having students complete an objective measure of
procrastination, such as the Aitken Procrastination Inventory, or the Adult
Inventory of Procrastination, both of which were discussed in Chapter 3.
Students then score their own responses to the procrastination inventory,
but are encouraged to keep these responses private. There may be a
tendency for some unconscientious procrastinators to brag about who has
the highest scores, relishing in their elevated status as the most dysfunctional among their peers. Our intent is to avoid this type of interstudent
competition, since it fosters a noncooperativeness and a flippant attitude
that may be disruptive at later times during the lO-week program.
Following this, a 20- to 3~-minute overview is presented by the
cotherapists, illuminating common aspects of procrastination. These include discussion of two major reasons people procrastinate: overanxiety or
fear, and low conscientiousness. Students are then asked to pick one
behavior that they procrastinate and discuss it in a group format, usually
with no more than three or four other students. After a break, students
reassemble to discuss the importance of self-monitoring of behavior.
Students then agree to monitor a specific behavior that they have discussed in group with others, such as putting off returning library books,
studying, or paying income taxes. The instructions are simply for them to
note each indication of the number of times they actually are aware of
putting the behavior off.
Session 2 opens with a brief dialogue by the therapists stating that they
b~lieve that on the basis of their previous experience, most students will
not have completed their homework assignments. Students are usually
astounded to hear this, especially those who fit this prophecy. In our
experience, less than half of persons complete the homework assignment
and there may be quite a bit of shame regarding this incompletion. To cope
with this shame, a general concept from Alderian Therapy (Manaster &

206

CHAPTER 9

Corsini, 1982) is introduced. There is no shame associated with failing to

complete a homework task. However, no excuses will be accepted for such
failure. The therapists reiterate that this will be the general philosophy for
the remainder of the course: "No excuses. No BS!"
Students who have completed homework assignments are asked to
share their results. The therapists next discuss the role of dysfunctional
cognitions associated with procrastination. Numerous examples are presented. Following a brief break, students return to discuss specific dysfunctional cognitions that interfere with their lives. The homework assignment involves students monitoring their procrastination cognitions by
having them simply list 10 or more of them during the following week.
Session 3 begins with a further discussion of dysfunctional cognitions.
Students are given a series of vignettes regarding people who do not
complete tasks in a efficacious manner. Students are then divided into
groups and are asked to identify potential cognitions that the subjects of
the vignettes might hold and are asked to speculate on how these cognitions might hypothetically interfere with the development of completing
tasks. After a break, students are instructed in the rudiments of relaxation
training, actually participating in group practice of relaxing. Students are
also instructed in how to rate their anxiety on a Likert-type scale, and are
given an appropriate handout for this self-rating. This week's homework
assignment involves students being instructed to record when they are
anxious about completing tasks and subsequently to rate each incident of
anxiety for severity on a Likert-type scale.
Session 4 begins with the sharing of homework-assignment results and
additional in-class training in relaxation methods. For homework, students
are asked to practice relaxation training at least once a day during the next
week. Mer a break, students role play a number of vignettes regarding
the use of relaxation for stressful tasks. Enthusiasm in this session is
usually quite high and students typically depart feeling that they have
mastered a very practical skill.
Session 5 opens with a brief sharing of how students have practicedand occasionally used-relaxation training. During this session, students
are introduced to the idea that much of their procrastination is a response
to anxiety-provoking situations, specifically situations where people feel
they do not have any self-efficacy,a psychological term obviously meaningful to readers of this book, but one which is discussed for students in
terms of "self-confidence." Graphic illustrations are shown to illustrate
that anxiety produces avoidance, which produces further anxiety. Mer a
break students are introduced to the concept that procrastination may also
be related to overconfidence about being able to complete a task in a timely

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

207

fashion. A few brief exercises are completed regarding the estimation of

intervals of time. The homework assignment involves having students
estimate how long it will take them to complete a specific task and then
actually recording how long it takes them to complete the task, in addition
to continuing to practice relaxation training.
Session 6 opens with a sharing of homework results from the previous
week's assignment. Usually, students are astounded to find that their
peers-like themselves-have grossly underestimated the time it took to
complete academic assignments. A general rule is then introduced: Budget
100% more time for a task than you think it will actually take! The
therapists discuss the implications of this rule and students offer practical
situations in which they can apply it. After a break, students return to plan
activities for the next week. Individually, they identify some imminent
tasks needing completion and then estimate the time it may take to complete these tasks. They are next instructed to double this time interval and
to actually complete the tasks the following week.
Session 7 begins with students sharing the results of the previous
week's homework. They next discuss how irrational cognitions change
their alteration of accurate time estimates. At this point, therapists illustrate how irrational cognitions can cause a person to decrease the time
believed essential to completing a task or cause th~ person simply to avoid
thinking about a task altogether. Numerous illustrations are presented and
examples from the students' lives are solicited. After a break, the proposition that irrational cognitions may cause a person to avoid thinking about
the details of a project is presented. In addition, the tendency of procrastinators and anxious people to perseverate on portions of a task that they
feel they can complete is presented. Students then individually name a
behavior that they are procrastinating and break down the goal into
constituent parts, estimating the time to complete each part. The homework assignment involves completing the task examined in class.
Session 8 begins by students discussing the impediments to completing their tasks in a timely fashion. Usually, some common themes occur
(e.g., disturbances from roommates, leisure wishes, daily hassles, "forgetting," and demands from parents or work). In each case students are
reminded that if they had budgeted sufficient time for the tasks, then these
problems would be easily surmountable. After a break, students are asked
to highlight on a worksheet the three events that they postpone the most in
life and to construct a behavioral plan that highlights the parts involved in
each.
Session 9 opens in the now customary fashion by having students
share their homework results. Typically, students are able to complete

208

CHAPI'ER9

about 50% of their assigned projects and usually during this group there
is a sense of despair when they realize that there are only two sessions left
and the procrastination is not "cured." At this point, the counselors
reiterate that success against procrastination is a habit and that all habits
take time to solve. Students are then asked to identify impediments to
reducing procrastination and to plan an active strategy helpful in combating these impediments. After a break, students outline long-term goals for
the next 3 months and identify impediments, time needs, and milestones
similar to Session 7. There is no homework for this session, but students
are encouraged to think about what they have learned in the course.
Session 10 involves a "wrap-up" of the previous weeks and a sharing
session regarding the tasks that students realistically believe that they will
complete during the next 3 months. Material from the previous sessions is
briefly repeated and students are encouraged to present testimonials
regarding the changes that they have made in their lives and are planning
to make. Students are also encouraged to contact each other for support
at the end of a specific period.
Follow-up: No formal booster sessions have been implemented to date.
However, at 3-,6-, and 12-month intervals, students are readministered the
procrastination inventory presented earlier. At 3 months the treatment
effect, compared with wait-listed persons, was .52, and it was essentially
the same at 6 months (.44). At a 12-month period it actually improved
slightly, to .51, for reasons that are not clear. We believe that booster
sessions would assist clients in preserving therapeutic gains and might
actually help them to continue to improve even in the absence of treatment.

INDMDUAL THERAPY FOR PROCRASTINATION

Data on 31 self-referred procrastinators indicate a comparable effect
size of .64 for persons in individual therapy that followed the 10-session
cognitive-behavioral change model of Doing It Now discussed previously.
The differences between effect size of persons in group therapy and
individual therapy were not significant, nor were there significant differences in the number of students who dropped out of individual therapy as
compared to group therapy. Presently, we do not have data on the longterm effects of individual therapy compared with group treatment. However, we might expect individual treatment to display a bit more gradual
reduction or erosion of gains, inasmuch as clients in this form of treatment
do not have the close peer support and camaraderie that seems helpful in
preserving behavioral change regarding task completion. From an efficiency viewpoint, group therapy is also preferable, and for typical cases of

TREATMENT OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION

209

student procrastination there is probably little justification for individual

treatment.
Individual therapy is probably indicated, however, whenever students
have a concurrent DSM-III-R Axis I or Axis IT disorders. Obviously, the
clinician will choose to depart from the structured format and treat
whatever disorder is at hand. As presented, our data suggest that generic
psychodynamic psychotherapy has a slight treatment effect on procrastination, but that this is probably not enough for effective treatment. In the
next chapter we discuss individual therapy in more detail, and although
the discussion largely concerns adults, it is relevant to students as well.

A TWO-SESSION INTERVENTION
We have also experimented with a very brief, abridged version of the
Doing It Now treatment for group intervention. This method involved two
80- to 90-minute workshops that can be presented at the start of an
academic year or at the start of the second semester. The workshops are
appropriate for a much larger audience, perhaps upwards of 40 people,
and also may be used preventatively for high-risk students (such as
returniilg older students who may not be sure of their ability to complete
tasks on time, or students from disenfranchised backgrounds).
The abridged method of Doing It Now dispenses with group exercises
and a substantial portion of the personal sharing involved in the longer
modality. Students complete a procrastination inventory during the first
session and score it. They then receive a lecture about two different types
of procrastination-anxious avoidance and low conscientiousness. The
first session closes with students receiving a handout and being lectured
on cognitions that foster anxiety or nonconscientiousness. There is no
break in this lecture. Students are then instructed to go home and identify
some of the dysfunctional cognitions that influence their procrastination.
The second meeting begins with a brief sharing of some of the
dysfunctional cognitions that students have identified during the previous
week. Students are then taught methods of challenging the cognitions for
reasonableness and accuracy. Students break up into groups and participate in helping each other criticize one another's procrastinating cognitions.
This abridged version of Doing It Now has been tried with 106
students and has an effect size of .32, which is not significantly different
from the nonspecific effect found in psychotherapy, or the effect found in a
traditional study-skills workshop of 10 sessions. It is, however, much more
economical, in that it only requires approximately 3 hours of treatment

210

CHAPTER 9

instead of approximately 15 hours. Furthermore, because the interventions

are brief, nonthreatening, and not likely to exacerbate anyone's level of
psychopathology, prescreening of participants for prior mental-health
problems is generally not required. At this time, additional work continues
on evaluating the efficacy of both the shorter and full versions of Doing It
Now, as well as experimenting with specific techniques designed to
increase the effect size of treatment.

CHAPTER

10

TREATING ADULT AND

ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

In Chapter 9 we presented a theory-based, structured therapeutic program

aimed at reducing procrastination. This time-limited program was primarily relevant to treatment of procrastinating college students. The premises
regarding the etiologies of procrastination that we introduce in this book
were used to shape the content of those interventions. Specifically, we
stated that procrastination is most typically caused by two distinct and
apparently independent etiologies: (1) neurotic overarousal, which causes
task avoidance because of anxiousness or fear associated with undertaking
specific projects or class assignments; and (2) a lack of conscientiousness
associated with not giving sufficient forethought to deadlines, underarousal regarding upcoming goals, and possibly also impulsiveness. We
also presented some preliminary outcome data suggesting that the brief
interventions highlighted in the preceding chapter had some efficacy over
and above an attention-placebo treatment group, traditional psychotherapy, or a simple study-skills training group.
The contention of the present chapter is that adult procrastination may
have a different etiology than that typically found in students exhibiting
apparently similar behavior. The differences between typical student pr0crastination and other forms highlighted in this chapter warrant a distinctive, often broader treatment strategy, encompassing a number of additional therapeutic modalities. Whereas procrastination in college students
is treated primarily with behavioral and cognitive methods, in this chapter
we will discuss the use of other therapeutic modalities, including psychodynamic psychotherapy.
In discussing procrastination occurring in adults, nonstudents, and
211

212

CHAPTER 10

also in cases of student procrastination that do not fit into the model
presented in Chapter 9, we have even less outcome data than the unsatisfactory amount available for the treatment of college-student procrastination. Essentially, we have only clinical records and case histories to
delineate factors associated with treatment success and failure. Until systematic, empirical studies are conducted, limited and unscientific clinical
accounts are the best we can offer. The empirically oriented psychologist is
certainly apt to feel disappointment, if not complete skepticism, at some of
our statements and suggestions. Where we do not have data, we will
advocate that interventions be based on well-established psychological
theory, inasmuch as possible. As we have stated throughout this volume,
serious research is needed regarding the efficacy of various treatment
strategies for procrastination. We hope this chapter will not only be useful
for clinicians, but also be a heuristic to suggest areas where thorough
outcome research is needed.

RELEVANT THEORETICAL ORIENTATION

One problem with adult procrastination is determining which set of
theories is the most pertinent to apply. With the student procrastinator, our
theoretical options were generally limited to interventions relevant to the
domains of behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, and social-learning therapies. With adult procrastinators, our choices are forced to be much
broader, drawing on psychodynamic constructs and interventions, as well
as methodologies that are generally more comfortable for empirically
oriented therapists.
"TYPICAL" AND '~CAL" ADULT PROCRASTINATION:
THE CRITICAL DIsTINCTION

In Chapter 9 we differentiated between what we term "typical" and

"atypical" procrastination. We define typical procrastination as procrastination that fits into the patterns of neurotic avoidance (overarousal) and!
or lack of conscientiousness (underarousal). (It should be recalled that it is
possible for persons to fit into both patterns at the same time.) We believe
that this combination of apparently independent causes accounts for the
majority of clients seen in student-counseling centers. When clear patterns of either or both of these behavioral syndromes emerge, the range of
treatment strategies outlined in the previous chapter are also appropriate
for adults, despite their status as nonstudents.
Our clinical experience suggests that cognitive-behavioral and behav-

TREATING ADULT AND AIYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

213

ioral interventions similar to those advocated in the previous chapter are

probably the treatment of choice and can be applied parsimoniously,
perhaps in as few as 10 sessions, and almost always in under 25 hours of
psychotherapy. This does not mean that we can "cure" all instances of
procrastination in 25 or fewer sessions. Instead, there seems little value in
extending treatment with this particular modality if the client's symptoms
have not shown some improvement.
As in the case of student procrastinators, treatment for nonstudents
should incorporate suitable interventions for the target symptoms of
anxiety and/or lack of conscientiousness. In other words, anxious task
avoiders should receive treatment to reduce their anxiety. Unconscientious, impulsive persons should receive treatment to modify the patterns
of their own particularly dysfunctional behaviors. Fortunately, there is an
abundance of outstanding literature available on the behavioral and
cognitive-behavioral treatment of anxiety, which will not be repeated here
(i.e., Barlow, 1992). It is assumed that the clinician who treats adult
procrastinators has familiarity and mastery of the basic techniques appropriate for the behavioral and cognitive-behavioral treatment of anxiety
disorders, methods which are often incorporated into the treatment of
procrastination. The clinician who treats the anxious adult procrastinator
should be comfortable performing systematic desensitization, flooding,
cognitive-behavior modification, successive approximation, and other
commonly applied operant techniques. All of these interventions are
designed to reduce the overarousing anxiety that is common with a
specific subtype of procrastinators, and in our experience each of these
techniques has been used successfully on many occasions with both
college students and adults.
However, lack of conscientiousness seems to be a much more common
route toward procrastination with adult populations, at least with those
who have sought treatment with us. One reason may be that the college
environment has more immediately punitive consequences for task failure, encouraging anxious procrastinators to be overrepresented in the
college-age group. In addition, the anxiety associated with task avoidance
extinguishes itself by the time persons move from college age into young
adulthood. In any case, "disconscientiousness," as we sometimes wish to
call it, seems to categorize many more adults who seek treatment for
chronic procrastination. As we have noted in the previous chapter, behaviors related to disconscientiousness include impulsiveness, antiauthoritarianism, and, we believe, cortical underarousal, apparently one involving a
neural system independent of the limbic overarousal observed in anxious
procrastinators. We further hypothesize that such persons are not able to
delay gratification (d. Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), so that beginning a task at

214

CHAPTER 10

a time closer to its deadline reduces the time spent without reward.
Furthermore, such persons frequently are not sufficiently aroused by cues
in their environment, so they do not begin a task at the optimal time to
guarantee the maximal possibility of completion.
Unfortunately, conscientiousness and its behavioral antithesis characterized by the lack of this trait, has only recently emerged as a factor of
serious personality research (Costa & McCrae, 1989; Costa, McCrae, &
Dye, 1991). There are no controlled studies at this time that demonstrate
empirically valid methods of increasing this trait. Consequently, our
treatment goals for this group of clients are less theoretically based than
with anxiety-related procrastination. In the absence of good literature,
again, we have to rely on clinical interventions based substantially on
observations.
The following case study highlights the manner in which a clinical
formulation stressing the causes of chronic "typical" procrastination is
important in adult clients. It illustrates the manner in which the therapist
used information regarding the client's conscientiousness and anxiety to
establish a treatment plan that was successful.
Suzanne was a 43-year-old consultant to the fashion industry, who
contacted one of the authors after reading about our work in a popular
publication. Suzanne stated that, ?JJ. my life I've had problems getting
things done. It's not that I'm scattered or not motivated. I just don't get
things done in time .... It's getting worse now that I'm working for
myself. In college I started going to the counseling center to get some
help but I was smart enough that I could wait until the last minute and
not get in trouble. Now, every time I postpone something it costs me
money .... I'm desperate. If I don't do something quick my business
will fold."
In other areas of her life Suzanne had a pattern of "bohemian
casualness" that bordered on blatant disregard for the feelings of
others. For example, she would promise a friend that she would stop
by her house, and think nothing of showing up 4 or 5 hours later. She
loved to live "on the spur of the moment," stating that the only people
who have to make plans in life are "those who don't trust fate." She
never paid her bills on time and considered social obligations "merely
tentative until something better comes along."
Prior to treatment, Suzanne was administered an MMPI and the
NEO-PI [N (neurotic) E (extrovert) 0 (open to experience)-PI (personality
inventory)] (Costa & McCrae, 1989). The latter is a well-established
instrument which measures conscientiousness and neuroticism directly. Suzanne's MMPI scores indicated mild depreSSion and anxiety,
with a possible tendency toward substance abuse. However, her NEOPI scores showed clear evidence of a lack of conscientiousness and also

TREATING ADULT AND AlYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

215

of a high level of trait neuroticism. Suzanne fit into both of the patterns
of "typical" procrastinators in that she was both unconscientious and
also anxiously avoidant.
Suzanne was treated with 21 sessions of cognitive-behavioral
therapy, which attempted to change her lack of conscientiousness and
increase her empathy for others. She was also taught relaxation techniques and methods of challenging anxiety-provoking cognitions.
Several sessions were spent on encouraging her to develop self-reward
strategies for achieving incremental goals. Finally, Suzanne's tendency
to use procrastination as an excuse for failure (i.e., self-handicapping)
was challenged and she learned not to make excuses for her avoidance
behaviors.
The results were a decrease in her Adult Inventory of Procrastination (see Chapter 3) score from 2.3 SD above the mean to 1.6 SD above
the mean. Although she noted that she still has a tendency to want to
put things off, she stated that now she has been more able to cope with
this deficit. "1'11 tell you, I kick myself in the butt each time so that I
don't do it." Suzanne's procrastination is sufficiently under control so
that she has encountered fewer work-related problems. Mostly, the
behavioral problems that she now has involve her personal life,
"mostly getting my oil changed in my car and getting the library books
back on time."
While we would not claim that this client has been "cured" of her
tendencies to procrastinate, both empirical testing and the client's own
self-reports suggest that she has obtained substantial symptoms reduction.

Similar to the treatment of students who are extremely unconscientious, our general strategy with adults who demonstrate this type of
procrastination is multifocal. It involves some of the following components:
1) increasing environmental cues regarding upcoming deadlines; 2) decreasing cognitions that foster impulsiveness and underestimation of task
demands; and 3) increasing self-rewards associated with completing tasks.
As with college students, treatment is not designed to increase anxiety per
se. Threats, punishment, cajoling, and other "lay" methods work about as
well when the therapist applies them as they do for the boss, spouse, or
friend. Instead, the strategy is to increase awareness of aspects of the task
that demand attention, primarily through cognitive-behavioral means, or by
instructing the client in methods of self-reward and behavioral management.

GROUP TREATMENT
Within group therapy, treatment of "typical" adult procrastinators is
no different then that for college students. However, we have been ineffec-

216

CHAPTER 10

tive in treating adult procrastinators in a group-therapy format. The attrition rates of clients are simply too high, and unlike students, who are
usually very motivated to overcome their procrastination due to poor
grades, adult clients are very likely to simply skip important group
sessions. In the experiences we have had with group treatment of procrastinators, at least 80% of participants (out of 40 treated in four different
groups) missed 3 or more meetings out of 12 sessions. More than 50% of
subjects missed half the sessions. Obviously, such attendance makes it
impossible to conduct meaningful group work.
With this in mind, we now advocate that treatment of adult "typical"
procrastination proceed primarily within the context of individual therapy.
In this type of modality, missed sessions are not as critical, since they can
be rescheduled and the special attention afforded to individuals in one-toone therapy often seems helpful in maintaining clients' motivations. Exceptions, such as family treatment of procrastination, or group treatment
for dissertation procrastination will be detailed next.

THE LENGTH OF TREATMENT

FOR "TYPICAL" ADULT PROCRASTINATION
A pertinent question that we are frequently asked is "How long will
therapy for adult procrastinators take?" In these times of managed care,
brief therapy, and time-limited mental-health services, such a question is
critical. As yet, there are no controlled studies of short- versus long-term
procrastination treatment. Therefore, we are not able to say with any
empirical coimdence how long treatment should take. Our own experience
suggests that the length of time procrastinators must remain in treatment
before they obtain substantial symptom remission depends on a host of
factors, as it does for any clinical condition. These factors include the
client's motivation, other personal issues and life stressors, social supports,
and concurrent psychopathology which might be present. However, as
stated earlier, we believe that most cases of "typical" procrastination
treatment that are uncomplicated by any other mental health or psychiatric
concerns can be substantially improved in between 12 and 25 sessions of
individual cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, with possibility of benefit
diminishing rapidly after 25 sessions. Because of the apparent high rate of
relapse, we recommend that at least one-fourth of the sessions be devoted
to booster sessions scheduled at progressively longer intervals. Howeve~
controlled studies are needed to determine the optimal frequency of these
sessions.
Note that these session numbers are higher than the 10 sessions

TREATING ADULT AND ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

217

suggested for group treatment of students. One reason for this disparity
involves the different time allocations in individual versus group treatment. Typically, individual psychotherapy sessions run 45-50 minutes,
once a week. Group sessions run about 80 minutes. A second reason is that
for adult procrastinators, whose mean ages are usually higher than those
of students, there may be a much longer history of procrastination. The
behavior is more ingrained, less dystonic, and therefore the behavior may
require longer treatment to cause substantial modification.

CASE STUDY: A TREATMENT PLAN

FOR TYPICAL ADULT PROCRASTINATION
The following case study is another example of how the treatment of
procrastination in adults may be quite similar to that of college students.
The client, Harvey, was a 37-year-old systems analyst who contacted
one of the coauthors following a radio show regarding psychological
aspects of procrastination. Shortly afterward, his attorney also contacted the author. Harvey had failed to pay income taxes for 4 years and
also failed to get his car insured in a timely manner, violating state law.
He was in serious legal trouble, having run afoul of the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS). He also had his license to drive revoked due to
noncompliance with his state's insurance regulations.
Harvey was given psychological testing to rule out major forms of
psychopathology and was also referred to a physician for a comprehensive physical. No physical abnormalities were present and the
physician referred Harvey back to the psychologists for further testing
and treatment.
Psychological testing indicated that Harvey was very anxious and
avoidant, but he did not meet diagnostic criteria for any specific
psychiatric disorder. The Adult Inventory of Procrastination was also
administered and indicated that Harvey scored two standard deviations from the adult mean in his procrastinating behavior. A NEO-PI
showed that Harvey was very neurotic, but also quite conscientious.
During the first interview, the therapist determined that Harvey
demonstrated a pattern of avoiding tasks, but only doing so when a
deadline was imminent. Harvey's anxiety, which normally was manageable, rose quite rapidly, even extraordinarily, when a deadline was
near. At these times his anxiety became almost phobic in its intensity,
making him think that he was "going crazy." Consequently, Harvey
was forced to avoid any tasks with rigid deadlines that he could not
control. Among the tasks that Harvey classified in this category were
taxes-hence, his problems with the IRS.
Although Harvey's history had relevant psychodynamic aspects,

218

CHAPTER 10

such as his need to control the situation and the overcontrol his father
had on his family, the treating psychologist categorized Harvey's
procrastination as "typical" and attempted to treat the overwhelming
contributing symptom of anxiety.
Harvey was taught relaxation therapy. Some of his anxiety regarding upcoming tasks was extinguished using classical methods of
systematic desensitization. This desensitization/extinction process
took eight sessions. The next four sessions involved Harvey learning to
challenge cognitions that caused him to increase avoidance behavior.
Two "wrap-up" sessions concluded the therapy, and two booster
sessions were administered at 6-month intervals.
Harvey was able to work out his problems with the IRS and with
the state motor vehicle agency. He has had no problems paying taxes
since treatment, though he does note that, "Unless I kick myself in the
rear I will get back into that old avoidance trap." He still practices
relaxation training daily and has found his work performance improving in a number of areas.

INTEGRATING THE TREATMENT OF TYPICAL

PROCRASTINATION INTO GENERAL PSYCHOTHERAPY
Often, it will become apparent to the clinician that procrastination is a
relevant problem only after the client has been in treatment for some time
and a number of other therapeutic issues are present in the client-therapist
interaction. Frequently psychotherapy will continue after the problem of
procrastination is resolved, with a list of other difficulties being uncovered
and deemed worthy of attention by both the therapist and the client. For
example, while the treatment of procrastination is ongoing, clients may
identify interpersonal or marital difficulties as affecting them and continue
to desire additional therapeutic intervention.
The attention to other therapeutic needs is obviously appropriate,
ethical, and simply good clinical practice as long as the client's initial gains
regarding procrastination are not allowed to fade. Therapists who practice
a psychodynamic framework frequently shift modalities into a more
insight-oriented treatment after initial problems regarding procrastination
are solved. When such therapists engage in this type of shift following a
successful treatment for procrastination, they must be prepared to "work
behaviorally" again when the need arises regarding the client's tendency to
procrastinate.
In our clinical experience, the psychodynamic approaches to treatment of "typical" procrastination are usually not warranted. Psychological
theory indicates a better rationale for cognitive-behavioral and behavioral

TREATING ADULT AND ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

219

interventions. Psychodynamic therapy does have its place in the treatment

of procrastination, but not in our experience for cases that are related to
anxiety or a lack of conscientiousness. In order to reduce problems
associated with transference and shifting therapeutic roles, many people
who work psychodynamically prefer to refer typical procrastinators to
more cognitive-behavioral therapists.
We also believe that when treatment is deemed appropriate and timely
by the therapist, procrastination should be the major focus of treatment. In
other words, as one client put it, "It's a good idea just to concentrate all of
my energies on this one area." Too often, clients' treatment interventions
are nebulous, too all-encompassing, too diffuse. For the procrastinator,
treatment does not seem to work unless it is specific and highly focused.
Therefore, we argue that procrastination should only be treated when the
client has sufficient time and resources to devote to a successful therapy
course, and when there are no more immediate mental-health problems
that warrant prior intervention. This, obviously, involves careful psychological screening, a topic we shall return to later.

PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY AND PROCRASTINATION?

Harvey's case is characteristic of typical procrastination because it
involves anxiety that interferes with the capacity to complete tasks in an
orderly and timely fashion. One question we are often asked involves the
use of medications. The reasoning, usually voiced by psychiatrists, is
simple: If a substantial portion of procrastination is due to anxiety,
wouldn't use of an anxiolytic undercut the anxiety sufficiently so that
"talk" therapies would no longer be necessary?
Although this approach sounds as if it might produce a plausible
treatment in theory, it has not been our clinical experience that procrastination is helped by anxiolytic drugs. In fact, these drugs usually make the
client worse, probably by decreasing anxiety too much and fostering in the
client an "I couldn't care less" attitude. There are, however, a few exceptions. Persons who are avoidant and in a chronic state of emotional arousal
may benefit from acute-anxiety reduction. An example was the student
Jean in Chapter 9. However, our experience suggests that drugs rarely have
a helpful impact on decision-related avoidance-. They may help persons
with discrete task-avoidance behaviors, such as fears of confronting inappropriate social behavior of others. They seem to do little for persons who
"just don't get around" to paying their taxes or getting their license plates
renewed.
Longer term maintenance on anxiolytics is probably even more con-

220

CHAPTER 10

traindicated for the treatment of procrastination, inasmuch as benzodiazepines are associated with increased behavioral disinhibition (Leonard,
1992), and therefore may make procrastination much worse. We hypothesize that benzodiazepines may be associated with an increase in procrastination by controlling too much anxiety, including that necessary to signal
an upcoming deadline that requires action. Needless to say, a lack of
conscientiousness and impulsiveness may also be associated with abuse
potential for prescription drugs.
One exception to skepticism regarding antianxiety agents may be the
novel non-benzodiazepine anxiolytic buspirone, a partial serotonergic
agonist with limited euphoriant, disinhibitory, and muscle-relaxing properties (Taylor, 1988). Buspirone appears to have no abuse potential. One
client that we tested (but did not treat) reduced procrastination by one-half
a standard deviation without psychotherapy while on the standard dosage
of 10-mg buspirone three times a day. Buspirone also has antidepressant
effects, which may have contributed to this apparent treatment improvement,
although the nonspecific (i.e., placebo) effects must also be considered.
Presently there are a number of second-generation benzodiazepines
in development and testing phases (Hindmarch, Beaumont, Brandon, &
Leonard, 1990). These drugs differ from the commonly known first generation drugs of this class in their selective-receptor subsensitivity. If animal
models are a prediction of human psychopharmacological effects, these
new drugs appear to produce anxiolysis without producing euphoria,
although the degree of their selectivity and specificity is still questionable.
These new and experimental drugs may hold some promise for treating
avoidant procrastination, although again, much empirical work is needed
to ascertain their efficacy in this domain.
Another question concerns the use of medication for depression and
whether pharmacological treatment of depression eliminates or affects
procrastination. This question is especially relevant when the procrastitJ.ating behavior seems to be related primarily to an onset of depressive
symptoms. Obviously, treatment of depression almost always takes precedence over the treatment of procrastination. Depression is potentially life
threatening. Procrastination is only life threatening when people have a
serious undiagnosed or diagnosed medical disorder for which they postpone treatment. One reason we strongly advocate adequate psychological
testing of persons entering treatment with a symptom of "procrastination"
is that many of these people may be depressed and could benefit from
medication and specific cognitive-behavioral techniques. However, there is
no evidence that procrastination without the absence of depressive symptoms is enhanced by use of antidepressants, at least the common tricyclics

TREATING ADULT AND A1YPICAL PROCRASTINATION

221

(Le., nortriptyline, amitriptyline, imipramine, etc.). We do not have

enough experience with the newer antidepressants (e.g., fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertriline), or even with the classic monoamine oxidase (MAO)
inhibitors such as phenelzine to note whether they are of value in treating
procrastination. MAO inhibitors ostensibly have a profile suggesting potential use with unconscientiousness procrastination, inasmuch as they
may reduce impulsive behaviors occasionally accompanying depression
(Leonard & Spencer, 1990). Again, more data generated from wellcontrolled studies is needed.

ASSESSMENT: THE NEED FOR A FULL HISTORY

Throughout this chapter we have discussed the necessity for a careful
psychological assessment. We realize that a majority of mental health
clinicians do not routinely include psychological testing in their treatment
planning. This includes psychologists, as well as other mental health
personnel, and perhaps this trend has been increased by the reluctance of
third-party payers to reimburse appropriate psychological testing. However, as was the case with students who seek treatment for this behavior,
psychological testing with objective measures is almost always indicated
before treatment for procrastination begins. In fact, procrastination in the
nonstudent adult is even more worthy of the effort involved in psychological assessment because it is potentially more problematic and of greater
concern than it is with students. This is true for two reasons. First, if this
behavior suddenly occurs without any substantial previous history, the
clinician should be concerned about other, more serious psychiatric or
physical diagnoses causing the procrastinating behavior. Depression, obviously, is a prototypical cause for concern. Procrastination is a relatively
stable trait and its sudden emergence in the otherwise well-functioning
adult suggests the potential existence of other, perhaps more serious
disorders, including physical disorders.
Second, if the trait has been long-standing and somewhat stable, then
the procrastinator apparently has been coping with it by him- or herself
relatively successfully for quite some time. Inevitably, he or she had
learned a number of dysfunctional behaviors to compensate for this lack of
punctuality and treatment may be much more difficult than if it were
begun with a young person. For example, a procrastinator may have
learned how to manage life relatively well by avoiding responsibility for
lateness by shifting the blame on others. He or she may also be adept at
feigning or actually becoming ill when deadlines approach. The number of

222

CHAPTER 10

dysfunctional coping strategies employed by procrastinators is seemingly

endless and the longer the behavior has been present, the more the
likelihood that these behaviors will themselves complicate treatment. Past
history is usually not on the therapist's side when procrastination occurs in
adults, and it is likely that the client will have reached a tenuous coexistence with his or her work, family, and friends regarding punctuality.
There is also the concern that a sudden change in the ability to
complete tasks in a punctual manner may be related to organic factors or
psychiatric syndromes. This is especially possible regarding syndromes
that present with a rapid manifestation of symptoms, such as acute
depression or mania. Occasionally, persons with dementia will present to
a mental health professional complaining of an inability to make decisions,
or a tendency to put off actions that they once found easy to perform
Gohnson & McCown, 1995). The practitioner who treats these "organic"
problems as "psychological" risks a serious and potentially disastrous
misdiagnosisl that may very well be fatal. Therefore, we argue that great
care needs to be taken when assessing procrastination, especially in
adults. When diagnosis is in doubt, such as in the case of a client with an
uncertain history or of one who is not sufficiently articulate, the practitioner does well to seek a referral for the "rule out" of organic factors with a
physician who is amenable to working with the mental-health therapist.
The following case study illustrates why a careful history is necessary
to assess a variety of potential causes of procrastination:
Robert, a 35-year-old advertising consultant, presented to a therapist
following his boss's concerns with his inability to finish projects in a
timely fashion. Robert had been employed with this particular advertising agency for 6 years. His performance had always been outstanding. However, during the last 3 months he had begun missing many
important deadlines, for no good reason. He denied a previous history
of procrastination or of any health problems and had no history of
other psychiatric or psychological problems.
The clinician gave Robert an MMPI, but the symptom pattern
revealed simply a cluster of vague medical problems and mild-tomoderate distress over them. However, the clinician was very concerned about the client's sudden onset of symptoms in a previously
well-functioning person. She suspected that this sudden onset of
lIn our experience, the reverse type of misdiagnosis also occurs all too frequently. A chronic
procrastinator, a person with a clear longtime pattern of major task avoidance, will seek a
consultation with a general practitioner, physician, or psychiatrist who will diagnose him or
her as being depressed. Pharmacological treatment-often fluoxetine, though occasionally a
tricyclic antidepressant-will be tried, but to no avail. Usually the patient is referred for
psychoanalytic treatment at this point, an expensive and usually inappropriate treatment.

TREATING ADULT AND ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

223

symptoms suggested an underlying physical problem. A neurological

examination and accompanying magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
studies revealed a large meningioma, a nonmalignant tumor of the
material that covers the brain, causing pressure on the patient's frontal
lobes. This noncancerous tumor was successfully removed surgically
and the patient made a satisfactory recovery. His procrastination subsequently abated several months after the tumor was excised. He is
now back at his job and doing quite well at work, although subsequent
neuropsychological testing indicates some residual memory deficits.

Rapid onset of procrastination may also be related to a more serious

psychopathology. While this is true in college students, our clinical impression is that it is even more likely in adults. Therefore, probably the
most important question in assessing procrastination is to determine its
history and longevity. A sudden inability to get tasks completed in a
punctual manner without any previous history of such problems in adult
nonstudents is generally of more concern. The following case illustrates
the necessity of persons treating procrastination to have competent clinical
skills and to be prepared to employ traditional psychological testing
whenever they think necessary to rule out more serious problems.
Genna, a 27-year-old nurse specializing in managed-care review, consulted with a psychologist regarding her increasing anxiety regarding
completion of tasks at work. She had no previous history of psychological problems and a recent medical workup revealed nothing contributory to her mental status. However, a detailed inquiry by an
experienced clinician indicated that Genna had paranoid feelings
about her present supervisor and feared that if she finished any task at
work her supervisor would criticize her harshly. This was true despite a
previous satisfactory history with the supervisor and no work-related
problems. However, Genna had few close friends and a history of
abrupt changes of telephone number and address. More extensive
psychological testing was suggested, and results of this testing
showed clear evidence of paranoid schizophrenia.
Appropriate treatment, including psychotherapy and a small dose
of antipsychotic medication, reduced the symptoms until they were
manageable and provided minimal interference with the client's life.
At present the client continues to be involved in ongoing treatment and
other areas of her life are starting to become more satisfactory. Naturally, therapy did not go completely smoothly, because the client had
extreme difficulty in forming a treatment alliance and trusting her
therapist. However, slow progress has been continued, with the client
working hard to resolve personality problems that apparently had
been undiagnosed until her mental health consultation regarding her
work problems.

224

CHAPTER 10

STRESS AND PROCRASTINATION:

AN OFTEN OVERLOOKED LINK
Our clinical work also suggests that a potential cause of procrastination in persons without a previous history of this behavior may be a rapid
change in life-stress levels. As discussed in Chapter 7, stress may playa
causal role in procrastination. People who are under atypical stress levels
may tend to put things off, and if they have never encountered substantial
personal stresses before, this behavior may appear quite novel and distressing. One effective treatment for this type of procrastination, obviously, is to reduce the level of life stressors inasmuch as possible. In the
current economic climate of corporate North America and Europe, where
economic downsizing is making persons fortunate enough to have jobs
work harder and longer hours, it may be impossible for the therapist to
assist the client in removing the relevant stressors. In this case the therapist
is forced to assist the client in whatever way he or she can in managing the
stress and daily hassles that are becoming so endemic to modem life.
Reduction in life stressors may also, and somewhat paradoxically,
cause a tendency toward task incompletion. We note that some persons
seem only to be able to perform punctually when experiencing high levels
of stress. When this stress is reduced to what most of us would consider a
more humane level, these persons find themselves unmotivated and
cannot meet deadlines in a punctual manner. The following case study
illustrates this behavior:
Gerry was a 47-year-old attorney with "Type X' personality tendencies.
Professionally, he was extraordinarily successful, though his frequent
bouts with angina were beginning to interfere with his constant need
to give himself fully to every task. On the advice of his cardiologist,
Gerry attempted to reduce many of the stressors in his life. Naturally,
he zealously pursued the recommended program of behavioral-stress
management with the same intensity that he pursued other activities.
On the surface he was quite successful in reducing his daily hassles,
disruptions, and social stressors. However, he found that once he had
less stress in his life he had "too much time" and, consequently, wasted
excessive hours to the point where tasks were not completed in a timely
fashion. His boss began to complain about his work.
Because of this new problem in his life, Gerry consulted a psychologist. Behavioral treatment aimed at reducing the procrastination
was instituted with excellent results. Gerry was taught when to look
for certain Signals that a task needed completion and then to reward
himself for completing each component portion. In this manner, Gerry
was able to regulate his life in a much more effective manner and was
able to remain punctual, despite the decreased daily stressors.

TREATING ADULT AND AlYPICAL PROCRA5l1NATION

225

TO PROCRASTINATION
AND CONCURRENT SUBSTANCE ABUSE
'~DDICTION"

Some people seem to need the satisfaction of completing a task at the

last minute in order to become sufficiently motivated. Many of these
persons will report a "high" or "rush" following task completion at the last
minute (see Ferrari, 1992c). We suspect that what is occurring is an
increased norepinephrine turnover associated with exhaustion and lack of
sleep, perhaps with some release of endogenous opiates. Somewhat similar phenomena have been studied in animals quite intensely (Maie~ 1986)
and are labeled "stress-induced analgesia." Recently, some researchers
have also applied the concept of stress-induced analgesia to humans (e.g.,
McCown, Galina, Johnson, DeSimone, & Posa, 1993) and are exploring the
manner in which people manipulate their environments to cause or
heighten a stressor that for whatever reason is experienced as pleasurable.
Others may prefer a more cognitive interpretation of the above phenomena involving the boosted or exaggerated sense of self-efficacy that
comes from "beating it down to the wire." When a person is able to do
something at the last minute that his or her peers usually require much
longer to accomplish, the procrastinator often (in attribution terms) would
augment his or her self-esteem (what laypersons call"an ego boost").
Regardless of whether causation is "physiological" or "psychological, "
in some cases persons actually seem to become addicted to the cycle of
procrastination: frantic last-minute efforts, late task completion, and postcompletion relief. Sometimes the use of alcohol or other drugs complicates
the clinical situation. During the 1970s it was not uncommon to find many
professionals procrastinating work-related tasks, only to complete them
while under the influence of amphetamines. During the 1980s the same
pattern was repeated, only with cocaine. Indeed, the procrastination
seemed to serve as an excuse for cocaine bingeing in otherwise non-drugusing adults, a phenomena we have labeled /lauto-mediated" substance
abuse. A great many professionals became addicted to cocaine in this
manner.
During the 1990s alcohol has probably replaced cocaine as the complicating drug involved in the pattern of procrastination. Students and
professionals will frequently postpone complex and difficult activities until
the last minute and then, after frantic efforts involving extraordinary sleep
deprivation and much personal stress, they will complete the task-but
just barely. Following task completion, an intense period of "partying"
involving disinhibitory behavior (e.g., drinking and sexual activities) may
occur that would not occur in other circumstances.
For example, in our clinical practice we have noted that some young

226

CHAPTER 10

attorneys attempting to become partners are often notorious procrastinators regarding completion of key legal briefs. Following two or three "all
nighters" occurring just before the briefs are needed, the task is barely
completed by deadline. (Some of our colleagues in mental health sciences
also demonstrate this same pattern regarding submission of peer-reviewed
grants!) Alcohol has a prominent role in this disinhibition and drinking
binges can last many hours or days. Often they are accompanied by other
drug use or more casual sex than the revelers would typically endorse.
Naturally these reinforcers make this pattern of procrastination all the
harder to treat successfully. The added bravado that occurs in people who
believe that they are "smart enough to beat it to the wire" complicates any
attempt to break these unproductive habits.
As a result, many procrastinators develop concomitant substanceabuse problems. Chronic substance abuse further increases procrastination as part of a vicious cycle. In this situation, both procrastination and
substance-abuse problems need treatment, a fact often overlooked by
addiction counselors and substance-abuse specialists.

ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION
Atypical procrastination is defined as brief, episodic procrastination
occurring in a person who has previously not had a history of this behavior
when other potential causes for task delays (e.g., psychopathology) have
been ruled out. The prototypic example is dissertation procrastination. In
atypical procrastination one or two factors are almost always present.
Usually a monumental task has been imposed on a person without
appropriate guidelines or mechanisms for feedback to determine whether
the behavioral steps are correct. Hence the procrastinator engages in the
behavior first discussed by Silver and Sabini (1981)-namely, he or she
"maintains the procrastinating field" and perseverates on portions of the
tasks that he or she feels it is possible to perform satisfactorily. For example,
in dissertation procrastination, the student may perform enormous and
inappropriately large literature reviews, simply because this is something
the student knows he or she can do well and probably has had several
rewarded experiences performing. Or, the student may construct such a
detailed outline that the actual writing of the dissertation never occurs.
Second, the task usually has some prominent meaning in the person's
life. Like a dissertation, it may be a rite of passage, whereby the student
leaves the safe world of academia for the hostile world outside of the
university. Although we are reticent to invoke the notion of a dynamic,
unconscious thwarting of task completion for a major rite of passage, it

TREATING ADULT AND ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

227

seems very often that many persons when faced with a defining challenge
are unconsciously unable to complete the necessary task. More psychoanalytic clinicians might wish to evoke unresolved childhood traumas as
explanatory concepts, and despite the fact that these hypotheses are probably impossible to support with data, they often seem to fit the clients'
clinical presentation (Summers, 1990).
Dissertation procrastination, unlike other forms of procrastination, is
actually more common among conscientious students. In unpublished
data, we found a correlation between the amount of time to complete a
dissertation and conscientiousness (as measured by the NEO-PI) of .21
(n = 126), P < .05. While this correlation is not particularly high, it is
notable in that it goes against the direction found in typical procrastination
where lack of conscientiousness correlates with higher procrastination
scores.
The task avoidance experienced by dissertation procrastinators is
usually very upsetting for the persons involved because they do not have
the substantial experience with uncompleted tasks that the typical procrastinator has. The usual personality style is one of conscientiousness, perhaps excessively so. Not being able to complete a task is very alarming and
implies a loss of control. It is precisely for this reason that this behavior is
so distressing to the procrastinator. A surprising number of previously
high-functioning graduate students actually seek mental health intervention regarding their dissertation procrastination.
Green (1981) has shown that dissertation procrastination can be
treated in a group setting. Although we do not have any experience
treating dissertation procrastination in a group setting, we have supervised students who were treated for it in individual psychotherapy. Seventeen of19 students were able to complete their dissertations with nondirective, supportive psychotherapy, involving 5 to 25 sessions. Interestingly,
three of these dissertations won awards or professional accolades, indicating the degree of conscientiousness or perfectionism that dissertation
procrastinators usually exhibit. The two students who did not complete
their dissertations were both very unconscientious, as indicated by their
scores on the NED-PI.
In general, our approach for coping with this type of procrastination
involves both cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic intervention. Cognitive interventions are used to challenge the perfectionistic tendencies of
these individuals. Psychodynamic interpretations are offered for the symbolic meaning of completion of the task at hand and perhaps the fear of
succeeding independently. These "clinical hypotheses" are presented gingerly and offered as tentative formulations. If the student does not endorse
them, we do not force the issue. Some students seem particularly en-

228

CHAPTER 10

amored with psychodynamic explanations. Others, especially in the

harder sciences, do not seem to be so attracted and such interpretations
may simply distract the student from the task at hand. Clinical judgment is
needed to ascertain the client's level of resistance toward interpretations.
The sometimes-typical stance in psychoanalytic circles of waiting for the
client to voice and then to accept an insight regarding the symbolic aspects
of his or her procrastination is not supported by our clinical experience.
Nor, in our opinion, should students who are experiencing dissertation
procrastination be persuaded to enter time-consuming and emotionally
draining self-explorational therapies until the dissertation is completed.
PSYCHODYNAMIC TREATMENT FOR ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

Regardless of our caveats, some clinicians have found psychoanalytic

theory to be among the useful frameworks for treating procrastination. An
example of the psychoanalytic framework applied to the apparently successful treatment of a chronic dissertation procrastinator was furnished in a
well-known case by Arlow (1989).
Tom, a 30-year-old junior professor at an Eastern university could not
finish his dissertation. According to Arlow, he was all but complete,
except for the finishing touches on a few notes and on oral defense.
However, try as he could, he was not able to complete the task. He also
could not maintain a satisfactory intimate relationship with his fiancee
and squabbled with her constantly.
From a clinical perspective, a number of other aspects of Tom's
behavior are interesting. He was obviously above-average in verbal
intelligence and did exceptionally well in the early grades of school. He
believed that only "grinds" have to study and work hard, a pattern that
followed him through life, causing him to avoid serious study. He
seemed to have a number of autonomic symptoms, being quite shy
and fearful as a child, and emotionally labile and prone to daydreaming as an adult. When he had to recite in class, he experienced extreme
autonomic responses that were unlike those of other students.

Arlow, an analyst, saw this problem conceptualized as follows:

A (dissertation) examination represented to him a bloody competitive struggle
in which one either kills or is killed. It also had the unconscious significance of a
trial where one is pronounced innocent or guilty. To pass the examination was to
be permitted to enter the counsel of elders, to have the right to be sexual, to
have a woman, and to become a father. . .. Unconsciously he felt he could not
become a husband or father as long as he was in analysis, which meant to him
as long as his father was alive. Accordingly, successful termination of treatment
had the unconscious significance of killing his father. Fear of retaliation for his
murderous wishes against authority figures intensified. His impotence grew

TREATING ADULT AND A1YPICAL PROCRASTINATION

229

more severe: Unconsciously he imagined that within the woman's vagina was
the adversary who would kill or mutilate him. (1989: pp. 49-50).

While there are many facts in Tom's case that suggest alternative
interpretations based on other, perhaps more cognitive-behavioral constructs, it is noteworthy that the patient did indeed complete his Ph.D.
after treatment by Dr. Arlow, and the treatment seemed to be successful.
When procrastination occurs suddenly and in very delimited areas in
a person's life, we often find utility in framing our hypotheses in a
psychodynamic fashion. We find it a useful framework to hypothesize that
some unknown and unconscious aspect regarding the event's completion
is distressing and consequently, the person strives, always unconsciously,
to avoid task completion. Therefore, in treating atypical procrastination it
is often useful to establish the meaning of what an event symbolizes for an
individual. The following case study highlights this:
Susan, Hack, and Eric were three very bright siblings in their mid-30s.
Susan had failed her doctoral dissertation orals exams three times.
This occurred despite the fact that her course work had been excellent
in graduate school and she was well respected by her peers and
teachers. Hack was a recent graduate from a medical-residency pr0gram. Twice he failed his boards. Eric had been a Phi Beta Kappa
graduate with degree in chemical engineering. 'fry as he could, Eric
could not Uget it togethe~ to apply to graduate school.
All three persons entered individual therapy at various times,
each with different therapists. Their therapeutic "issues" were quite
similar. The children's father had been a very intelligent chemical
engineer, who, due to a lack of fortune and opportunity, was never able
to rise above a BS degree. The mother had even less formal education,
despite the fact that she was very bright. Although both parents
ostensibly championed education for their children, both parents were
clearly annoyed by the greater achievements of their children, and
frequently disparaged the fact that their children received more formal
schooling than either of them. Although these comments were often
made in a seemingly lighthearted manner, they were made consistently during the children's graduate careers.
Brief psychodynamic therapy helped each adult child identify a
pattern of wanting to fail for the reason of not threatening their
parents, whom they loved deeply. The children received between 20
and 50 sessions of dynamically oriented psychotherapy, during which
time they were able to meet their educational objectives. Several years
later, Susan completed her Ph.D. degree in neurochemistry and received a tenure-track position at a university. Hack eventually decided
to change career emphasis and now is a physician in a small town, "a
decision much more congruent with my temperament, compared to

230

CHAPTER 10

the big-city lifestyle I thought I needed." Tom was able to successfully

apply to graduate schools and now has completed his dissertation.
Although he exhibited some dissertation avoidance and procrastination, he is now in the final stages of this endeavor and plans a career in
research in a corporate setting.

In psychodynamic therapy for procrastination, our intent is to identify the hidden meaning of achievement-related events for the procrastinator. Invariably, an achievement-related event confficts with a fear of
achievement, often with the fear of achievement only coming out during
brief psychotherapy. Clinical impressions seem to suggest that conffict
often involves an authoritarian parent figure who usually has ambivalence
regarding the adult child's achievement (see Ferrari & Olivette, 1993, 1994),
although this observation is simply our impression and needs legitimate
research. Our technique is a general, explorative, time-limited model
similar to the one advocated by Strupp and Binder (1984).
Sometimes procrastination is limited not simply to specific tasks, but
instead to tasks assigned by specific persons. For example, a person may
have no problem completing a task until it is assigned by a boss or someone
who reminds the procrastinator of a significant person in his or her past. A
common example of this occurs regarding adult children of alcoholics.
Although few characteristics have been uniquely identified with this
group, previous research (McCown, Carise, & Johnson, 1991) has established that elevated procrastination is common. This is not surprising. It is
easy to imagine an environment where the child is punished for completing any activity, regardless of how conscientiousness his or her performance was. Often, such adult children appear to become hypersensitive
to rejection from authoritative figures and hence demonstrate avoidance
regarding task completion. The following case study illustrates this:
John was a manager at a local branch of a national hardware chain. His
work was consistently conscientious. He had been rapidly promoted
from his status as floor clerk up through the ranks and appeared very
much "on the fast track." He was just about to be promoted to regional
manager, an unheard-of accomplishment for a young man of 27.
Prior to this promotion, John was forced to spend a great deal of
time at the corporate headquarters in another city. There he had to
interact with older males whom he "instinctively" disliked. He later
found himself having difficulty completing any of the tasks that these
older managers told him to do. He would deliberately stall their
completion for days at a time, threatening his promotional status and
perhaps his very job.
When John sought treatment, he was 300 miles from his home
town and due to remain for only a few more weeks. He had no insight
whatsoever into any of his behavior and was convinced that Hall these old

TREATING ADUIl' AND ATYPICAL PROCRASTINATION

231

men are being big fat assholes to me, though I don't really know why."
Four weeks of twice-weekly sessions of psychodynamically oriented psychotherapy allowed John to develop the hypothesis that he
behaved poorly around older men because of his hatred toward his
father, an abusive and alcoholic authoritarian. Regardless of John's
accomplishments, they were not enough for his rigid, never-grateful
dad. When John realized the source of his anger, his demeanor
immediately changed and he went from being hostile to feeling hurt
and scared. However, John became overconscientious about carrying
out his superiors' commands, to the point where it would potentially
interfere with other aspects of his life.
Upon returning home, John followed up on his previous therapist's recommendations for continued treatment. He spent about 24
sessions in individual therapy, generally focused on his anger at his
father. Today his problem is substantially resolved and he has not
demonstrated any inappropriate procrastination regarding directives
from older men.

Ambivalence about achievement has been well documented in women,

but it also occurs with men. Often this takes the form of dissertation
procrastination, where a previously very high-functioning person suddenly cannot complete a discrete task. Almost always this is a task
associated with a rite of passage, often a dissertation, as we discussed
previously, but sometimes also an examination (such as a medical licensing
exam or specialty-board or bar exam). The following case study indicates
such an example with a female physician:
Donna was a 34-year-old neurologist at an East Coast university who
failed her specialty boards on two occasions. This occurred despite the
fact that she clearly had outstanding ability, having graduated from an
Ivy League school and made ADA, the national medical honor society.
The analyst stated that she would probably require several years of
treatment, which left Donna feeling more disparate. At the insistence
of her departmental chair, she consulted a psychiatrist, who, being
unable to suggest any pertinent interventions, referred her to a psychoanalyst. At the insistence of her friend, Donna next consulted with
a psychologist experienced in the treatment of procrastination.
Donna was administered an MMPI and a clinical interview.
Donna appeared very anxious, but only when she spoke about her
upcoming exams. Other than this she seemed quite calm and well
adjusted. There was no evidence of thought disorder or any other Axis
I or IT difficulties from the MMPI. Importantly, there was also no prior
history of any type of test anxiety, an important personality variable to
rule out in the case of any type of examination-related procrastination
or academic failure.
The clinician hypotheSized that Donna's repeated failure had to
do with a fear of success and of ultimate independence that passing her

232

CHAPTER 10

boards would bestow on her. Donna was presented with this interpretation, but initially denied it vehemently. The therapist, not wishing
to challenge her resistance, instead began working with her on behav-ior goals, attempting to teach Donna a number of relaxation skills that
might prove necessary if she were to successfully study for the upcoming exams.
Four sessions into treatment Donna changed her demeanor and
announced, nyou know, I've been thinking about what you told me
about fear of failure and all. I think it might be true." Donna then
related a story regarding the fact that all of her life she had studied to
distract herself from the fact that she felt she was not physically
attractive and too fat. While other girls and young women were dating
or enjoying a social life, Donna hid in her room with her books,
essentially overachieving to fill her blank, empty evenings.
The therapist then offered an interpretation: Passing of the specialty boards was the final major test that Donna would take in life. She
would then have no reason left to spend evenings and weekends
studying. She would then have to confront her feelings about being
lonely and unattractive.
When offered this interpretation Donna began to cry. She then
stated, nyou know, it's just like you've reading parts of my mind I've
been afraid to admit to anyone." Within several sessions Donna began
to form the hypothesis that her compulsive studying was interfering
with her passing of the boards. She decided to pursue a different
strategy: relax, study less, and take things as they come.
Donna eventually passed the boards and even began dating. She
remains in treatment to deal with her negative self-image, but the
quality of her life has improved substantially.
UnfortUnatel~ there are few guidelines to determine when a more
psychodynamic treatment for procrastination is appropriate, compared to
a more traditional or cognitive-behavioral treatment. Our rule of thumb is
Simple, although perhaps not always accurate: If there is a history of
procrastination, cognitive-behavioral and behavioral interventions are appropriate. If the behavior is discrete and involves a specific event or person,
a more psychodynamic framework may be necessary to explore the meaning that the event has for the person and its associations with prior
significant events or people.

FAMILY TREATMENT
Family treatment may be indicated if there is more than one person in
the family who procrastinates, or if the procrastination seems to be maintained by reinforcers occurring in family interaction. For example, it is not

TREATING ADULT AND A1YPICAL PROCRASTINATION

233

atypical to find a bright child encouraged to delay completing his homework by one of his or her siblings who are jealous of superior ability or
attention bestowed on the academically more talented youth. Parents often
muddle the situation even more by punishing the child who suggests task
avoidance, thus inflaming an already volatile situation (McCown & Johnson, 1993). Family therapy can teach parents more appropriate strategies of
intervention designed to reduce the level of sibling competition and
sabotage.
Family therapy may be helpful when one or more parent has a
problem with being unconscientious and not completing tasks on time,
and the parent or parents' behaviors affect other family members (L'Abate
& Bagarozzi, 1993). Brief, problem-oriented interventions, such as those
advocated by McCown and Johnson (1993), may be effective in convincing
the procrastinating parent that his or her behavior is deleterious to the
family. When the parent refuses or is incapable of behavioral change,
family therapy can be invaluable in helping shift the burden of responsibility to other persons in the family system who may be more responsible.
Perhaps the best indication for family therapy is when one or more
family members consistently procrastinate necessary or preventative medical treatment. Sometimes such persons will have a history of anxiety or
depression. More frequently, they may also have a concurrent personality
disorder. Regardless, they avoid physicians and other medical personnel,
much to the dismay of their families and friends, to say nothing of the
healthcare professionals they peripherally encounter.
Brief family therapy is often helpful in getting these persons to take
more responsibility for their own bodies and their health-related behaviors. The approach by Johnson and McCown (1993) involves empowering
families to take responsibility for their own behaviors. Johnson and
McCown (1995) have applied this model directly to medical patients with
very good results. Often, one or two family meetings with ill family
members may be sufficient to convince them that their family cares about
their well-being and that their medical procrastination is hurting people
who care about them. When family dynamics become more complicated,
or if the family has a history of longer term family dysfunctioning, referral
to a practitioner with expertise in family treatment is probably warranted.

CONCLUSION
Adult procrastination is often substantially different from that encountered in college students. It often requires different treatment strategies and longer interventions. The clinician must be able to use a number

234

CHAPTER 10

of therapeutic modalities, including behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, and

psychodynamic. Psychological testing is almost always helpful, and occasionally physical problems must be ruled out. Competence as a clinician
does not guarantee that treatment will be effective. However, a lack of
clinical skills almost certainly guarantees that treatment will be unsuccessful.
We pointed out that brief, episodic task-d.elay and avoidance tendencies, labeled atypical procrastination, may require a different therapeutic
emphasis than reoccurring, "lifelong" procrastination, called typical procrastination. Atypical procrastination may best be treated by a psychodynamic approach in order to explore why procrastination as a lifestyle
may best be treated by a cognitive-behavioral approach in which the
individual is taught effective strategies to prevent a procrastination cycle.
Individual, group, and family therapy, as well as assessing other dysfunctionallife patterns (e.g., drug use), also should be considered.
In summary, we tried to outline different treatment options for therapists who treat adult procrastination. We relied on case histories of clients
we have treated as examples to highlight these options. However, we
continue to advocate that well-designed and carefully conducted treatment
studies be performed to compare and contrast different procrastinationtreatment techniques. Through good empirical edata we believe that effective, efficient techniques will be developed to treat both lifelong and shortterm procrastination tendencies.

CHAPTER

11

EPILOGUE AS PROLOGUE

CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Throughout this volume, emphasis has been placed on reporting empirical
findings and on the extension of these findings to clinical and counseling
intervention. In addition, trait procrastination has been discussed from a
wide variety of perspectives, and promising directions for research have
been presented. Thus, as one of the few books on procrastination, the work
in this volume represents a systematic effort to present and integrate often
disparate psychological areas.
One of the limitations of this book is that the authors have been
frequently forced to draw tentative conclusions by using studies with
substantial methodological limitations. This problem is common to any
new field of psychological or behavioral science research, where exploratory studies often predominate over theory-driven efforts that are part of a
systematic program of research. Although this is a source of concern, we
remain optimistic that this difficulty will soon be rectified. As the outstanding work of the contributors within this volume indicates, methodological sophistication is rapidly increasing among procrastination researchers and is now beginning to rival that of many other areas of clinical,
social, and counseling psychology.
A similar, but more serious, concern lies in our suggestion of the use
of specific and detailed therapeutic interventions made in the absence of
comprehensive longitudinal and efficacy-outcome research. Consequently,
many of the counseling and clinical strategies advocated as appropriate for
the treatment of procrastination have occasionally been based on modest
empirical grounding. As we have noted, some interventions have simply
been grounded in a rational-theoretical approach combined with clinical
235

236

CHAPTER 11

experience. Counselors and therapists should take note of these limitations. Many of the problems that plague attempts to generalize applied
research to different settings may be relevant to the work presented here.
Therefore, results from the relatively small amount of outcome data regarding interventions may not generalize across different populations or
settings.

SPECIFIC AREAS OF FUTURE INTEREST

It is often customary to end multiauthored works such as this with a

concluding, unifying chapter that spells out future areas where resources
can be meaningfully directed. Such chapters often seem presumptuous,
since they frequently include suggestions from researchers in one field
telling researchers in other areas how, where, and why their research
should be undertaken. Occasionally, the purpose of such chapters is also
less than forthright. Too often authors may use these epilogues as a
springboard for advancing their specific research agendas, and hence their
status in the scientific community. In some cases, a more systematic
formulation of existing data is deliberately designed to support the authors' biases. In such cases, authors may even use the epilogue chapter as a
forum for suggesting research that they are already planning or have tried
unsuccessfully to fund.
In procrastination research, we needn't worry about these problems
and, instead, can devote ourselves to attempting to instill enthusiasm
about the topic in various subfields of psychology and the behavioral
sciences. Our purpose is to increase interest, research, and theory in a
variety of areas. It is impertinent to tell other researchers with more
specialized expertise about the needs of their field. Therefore, we limit the
following to a discussion of areas where present research suggests a
natural interface that may be fruitfully explored.
NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOPSYCHOWGY

Earlier in this work we presented data suggesting that a lack of

conscientiousness, along with the related construct of sensation-seeking,
may categorize one subtype of procrastinators Sensation-seeking appears
to possess moderately high hereditability find to be related to specific
neurophysiological processes which are just beginning to be understood
(Zuckerman, 1991). This suggests that at least some of the variance in
procrastination may be related to genetically-mediated physiological vari-

EPILOGUE AS PROLOGUE

237

ables, such as activity involving the serotonergic system. Similar genetic

mediation may occur for anxious task avoidance, possibly through noradrenergic projections linked to the nucleus coeruleus.
At this point, we can only theorize regarding the distinct role played
by neurotransmitters and receptor complexes in procrastination and discrete task avoidance. However, more recent advances in neuroscience have
strongly suggested that they key to behavior will not be found in the "one
neurotransmitter-one symptom" method that was popular during the
first decades of this new, hybrid discipline. For example, Gray's (1987)
biopsychological analyses of behavioral inhibition and activation systems
provide a much more comprehensive framework for understanding behavior than for attempting to link specific behavioral syndromes to single
types of neurotransmitters, including neurohormones. Gray's model may
serve as an appropriate basis for describing typologies of persons who
habitually postpone tasks because they are too fearful or of those who do
not discriminate appropriately relevant task cues.
A greater understanding of physiological variables may also affect
pharmacological treatment. As indicated in Chapter 9, most treatment for
procrastination has, in the past, barely reached a level of clinical significance. The judicious use of medications may help to boost the effectiveness of clinical interventions. The newer selective serotonergic reuptake
inhibitors appear to have a promising efficacy profile, insofar as they may
reduce depression, decrease impulsive behaviors, and inhibit the display
of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. (Their effects on anxiety, however, are
less clear.) In theory, these agents may act to strengthen purposeful
behavior, helping patients to remain goal-oriented. These questions can
only be answered with appropriate clinical research and double blind trials.
DEVELOPMENTAL AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Although some information is known about the relationship between

parenting styles and procrastination (Ferrari & Olivette, 1993, 1994), almost
nothing is known about the severity of procrastination in children and
adolescents. While teachers, parents, and school psychologists have reported anecdotal accounts of procrastination in children as young as early
elementary age (M. Shure, personal communications, August, 1994), no
set of studies has demonstrated the existence or significance of this
behavioral syndrome in people this young. More systematized efforts may
direct attention to a class of dysfunctional behavior in this age range that
previously has not been recognized. This early recognition may greatly
assist the student or adult later in life.

238

CHAPTER 11

One goal of developmental research is to provide different levels of

prevention that are appropriate to the severity of the problem (L'Abate,
1994). Ideally, the developmental researcher wishes to learn about methods
to prevent as many adult behavioral problems as possible, through either
primary (i.e., general and broad-focused), or secondary (i.e., for persons at
high risk) strategies. Presently, applied developmental research has produced outstanding methodologies to help parents treat children's behavioral problems (Schaefer & Breismeister, 1989). Howeve~ most of these
interventions fall under the category of tertiary prevention, or of treating
persons who already demonstrate behavioral problems. Increasing effort
is now being directed toward primary and secondary prevention of a
variety of childhood disorders (Shure, 1992).
Of special interest are strategies designed to prevent anxiety and
impulsiveness in children, because these are probably closely related to
procrastination (Touchet, Shure, & McCown, 1993). Most of these strategies are classroom-based and are economically implemented. It is hoped
that soon classroom-based interventions designed for primary prevention
of procrastination will begin in elementary school. Clinical experience
suggests that children as young as 9 or 10 can benefit from time management training. Data clearly indicates that adolescents can benefit from a
variety of decision-making skills (Baron & Brown, 1991). The teaching of
similar skills relevant to goal setting and task completion could be invaluable in the primary prevention of procrastination.
Another goal is broader secondary prevention prior to the college
years, when procrastination definitely becomes more likely to be problematic and may even increase. Successful secondary intervention would
involve early identification of high-risk children and adolescents, either
through specific behaviors, or through other methods, such as self-reports.
However, the hope of secondary prevention presumes several applications
of psycholOgical knowledge that are not presently available. It will be
necessary to develop methods to identify children at high risk before their
procrastinating behavior beconies more problematic. Next, it will be necessary to construct and test appropriate intervention strategies. Third, it will
be imperative to identify appropriate persons who could benefit from
these early interventions. Perhaps of greatest importance will be the
precise identification of negative and positive reinforcers in the maintenance of procrastination. Implementation of steps to meet the goal of
secondary prevention for procrastination lags far behind available strategies for other behavioral disorders. It is, we believe, a promising field for
applied developmental, community, and (perhaps most of all) school
psychologists.

EPILOGUE AS PROWGUE

239

INDUSTRIAuORGANlZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

An omission in this book has been an in-depth discussion of the

possible importance of procrastination in the workplace. Individuals who
have difficulty completing work-related tasks are not typically viewed as
outstanding employees (Ferrari, 1992a). In fact, persons demonstrating
elevated degrees of trait procrastination probably do not find employment
appropriate for their education and ability (although this remains an
empirical question). Employers seem to recognize this. Consequently, it is
not uncommon for potential employees to be screened for suitability in
part by the use of one of several nebulous measures of "job time usage,"
none of which appear to have been developed with respect to predictive
criterion validity.
It may be of interest for organizational psychologists to develop
accurate measures of work-related procrastination, with the belief that
these may be successfully used in employee selection and promotion
decisions. However, prior to the use of such instruments, carefullongitudinal validation must occu~ with close examination of the effects of workrelated trait procrastination on a variety of employee outcome measures
with behavioral referents. It is important to note that none of the existing
measures for trait procrastination discussed in this book are directly
applicable to work-related behavior. It would be both unethical and probably

legally indefensible to attempt to use any of the present measures for employee
selection or promotion.

Despite screening mechanisms such as interview processes, questionnaires, and the evaluation of previous work history, many workers apparently do exhibit job-related task avoidance and procrastination. Programs
designed to reduce work-related task avoidance conceivably would contribute to increased productivity. Since the implications of procrastination
include decreased revenues and opportunities for advancement, we believe this area may be of substantial interest to industrial and organizational psychologists.
Unfortunately, there is insufficient data examining corporate milieu or
managerial styles that either foster or decrease work-related procrastination. This is a curious omission, insofar as researchers, such as Lowman
(1993), note that procrastination is a potentially significant work-related
dysfunction. Some empirical support for the notion that work climates
may effect procrastination has been found in a dissertation by Coote (1987).
More specifically, Galue (1990) found that job exception and contingency
information were related to procrastination and that perceived job ambiguity was related to an employee's self-report of procrastination.

240

OiAPTERll

It may be further hypothesized that individuals with a dispositional

tendency to postpone tasks in several areas of their lives may be more
vulnerable to displaying this behavior within their employment settings,
depending upon particular management patterns. We would predict this
may relate to the subtypes of procrastinators we have attempted to empirically define. For example, anxious procrastinators may perform better if
their supervisors assumed a less punitive stance. Procrastinators lacking in
conscientiousness may require additional structure and a lack of options
for "excuse making." Finally, it may be hypothesized that appropriate
targeted counseling in Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) may contribute to increased worker productivity and also decrease the subjective
stress associated with procrastination within employment settings and in
other spheres of life.
PERSONAliTY PSYCHOLOGY

Throughout this volume we have used the term "personality" with

some trepidation, preferring terms less associated with the many connotations of dispositions or personologic variables (see Pervin, 1990). Regardless, our position is that procrastination may warrant the status of a trait
and is probably an important individual difference variable. Thait procrastination is explainable within a variety of contemporary models of personality. These include the factor analytic theories of Eysenck (1967) and the
"Big Five" of Tupes and Christal (1961), the latter approach enjoying
increasing popularity (c.f. Costa & Widiger, 1994). A trait theory of procrastination is .also congruent with explanations of personality furnished by
cognitive and social learning theorists and even those from psychoanalytic
and psychodynamiC models.
One concern is that a construct fitting into any disparate theoretical
schema may avoid the necessary scientific scrutiny and criticism. Perhaps
the most appropriate test of the usefulness of the construct of trait
procrastination is whether it can generate a priori novel predictions, which
could then be validated in subsequent investigations. If it can, then its
further use is assured. If not, then Occam's razor and the scientific rule of
parsimony suggest that it is best forgotten. Nonetheless, integration of
procrastination with mainstream personality theory would require further
work on construct validity with particular emphasis on establishing a
nomological network regarding the construct, other factors of personality,
and behavior.
Finally, it is important to realize that available data suggests that
procrastination is not a unitary construct. That is, trait procrastination may
have significant overlap within various orthogonal personality factors that

241

EPILOGUE AS PROLOGUE

may also exhibit different situational correlates. Using Cattell's (1965)

distinction, procrastination is a "surface trait," a common behavioral
syndrome due to two or more "source traits," or more fundamental
constructs. Mathematically, this is expressed by the existence of two or
more principal components, which may be related to successful classifications of typologies. Existing data strongly suggests that at least two
"source traits" contribute to procrastination: a lack of conscientiousness,
and some form of anxiety or neuroticism. This means that people may
have elevated levels of trait procrastination for entirely different reasons-a
fact that should not be overlooked by clinicians.
Furthermore, aspects of trait procrastination within personality theory remain to be explored. For example, a legitimate empirical question
involves the relationship between procrastination and Eysenck's Psychoticism factor insofar as procrastinators may simply deliberately disregard
social mores and constraints pertaining to task completion and achievement. Hence, procrastinatory behavior becomes a manifestation of this
disregard, as opposed to a manifestation of anxiety or lack of conscientiousness. At this point in time, much more research is needed to precisely
determine what place, if any, procrastination reserves within contemporary factor-analytical-based personality theory.
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Social psychology constitutes on of the most vigorous areas of psychology in recent years and this trend shows no evidence of abating. There
are many ways in which recent theoretical developments in social psychology can be applied to explain and predict the behavior of procrastinators.
However, research in this area should now begin investigating the mutual
causal processes that social psychological factors and procrastinating individuals likely exert on each other. Extreme social behavior is modified by
its environmental milieu and also exerts reciprocal influences that change
the milieu. Unidirectional hypotheses, although convenient for the researcher, are probably inappropriate models for the complex manner in
which reality operates. Consequently, appropriate methodology will most
certainly involve greater use of multivariate models designed to measure
change, especially models such as confirmatory factor analyses with
repeated observations (Collins & Hom, 1991).
Social psychology has also applied its methodologically rigorous
technology to the understanding of the relationship between cognitive
processes and social variables. Again, there are numerous areas of inquiry
or hypotheses that come to mind regarding procrastination. However, one
foreseeable problem is that procrastination remains somewhat of an ill-

242

CHAPTER 11

defined trait, especially in naturalistic settings. Measurement error is

likely to distort findings substantially, unless models are chosen that can
successfully address this problem. Fortunately, the popular confirmatory
factor analysis models of JOreskog and SOrbom (1988), and Benter (1989)
were designed for these situations. Latent trait models of change can be
modeled successfully despite measurement error. This minimizes our
need for dependence on univariate and unidirectional social psychological
research regarding procrastination, which has been the standard to date.
Future research will therefore require multiple measures of procrastination
(such as behavioral indices, peer ratings, and teacher or employer evaluations) to augment simple self-reports via questionnaire methodology.
Fortunately, extensive knowledge regarding the mathematics of latent
trait models is no longer necessary with the development of newer, "user
friendly" computer packages. All that is required is an understanding of
matrix algebra, which is not beyond the ability of most current graduate
students in the behavioral sciences. The other major obstacle to the use of
latent trait or confirmatory factor models is now practically irrelevant. Such
models used to consume hours of mainframe computer time and were
beyond the means of researchers without substantial budgets, as well as of
friendly and tolerant computer center staff. Now, however, the availability
of popular computer programs and powerful desktop computers makes it
possible to analyze very complex, interactive relationships with many
parameters that would have been prohibitively time-consuming to model
even a decade ago. What took several hours of dedicated CPU time on a
mainframe computer may now be done in several minutes on a single
desktop unit.
The suggestion that researchers should make greater use of multivariate causal methodology should not be taken as suggesting that traditional
laboratory studies should be abandoned. Far from it! The recent history of
cognitive social psychology has shown that there is substantial benefit
from developments which occur in tandem with well-controlled laboratory studies. Results from correlational studies, however, are inherently
limited, unless they are confined to well-defined and theoretically-derived
hypotheses. Progress regarding procrastination is evident in the fact that
hypothetico-deductive experimentation and theory building, rather than
being a mere "cast net approach," is now necessary.
CUNICAUCOUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY

Data presented in this volume suggests a relationship between procrastination and several different types of psychopathology. However,
since studies regarding psychopathology have been primarily correla-

EPILOGUE AS PROLOGUE

243

tional and conducted at a single point in time, conclusions are limited.

Longitudinal research is needed to solidify a claim of any causal relation.
This is true for both Axis I and Axis II disorders. A promising line of
inquiry involves research that evaluates procrastination as a symptom and
a risk factor for future problems. Along similar lines, more research is
needed to ascertain the extent to which task avoidance contributes to
internal distress and interpersonal difficulties. Again, more sophisticated
research designs are necessary to address complex clinical difficulties
associated with procrastination.
Regardless of the role of procrastination in major psychopathology,
this behavior is a source of concern for many people, including college
students. Individuals will continue to seek treatment for it and counselors,
therapists, and clinicians will continue to struggle with finding appropriate methods of intervention. Chapters 9 and 10 make it clear that we are far
from developing satisfactorily effective treatment strategies. Because we
know so little about modifying this apparently distressing behavioral
pattern, it is incumbent upon practitioners to conduct outcome research
regarding interventions designed to modify procrastination. It is doubtful
that individual clinician/researchers will be able to establish definitive
patterns from their interventions, simply because they do not treat sufficient numbers of clients to draw valid conclusions. But there is no reason
why research teams across sites-such as within college counseling
centers or private group practice-could not pool data together in collaborative research efforts. In the absence of substantial grant funding,
collaborative research might be the only feasible financial mechanism by
which procrastination outcome research can expand.
ExPERIMENTAL PSYCHOWGY AND EXPERIMENTAL
PSYCHOPATHOWGY: THE NEED FOR A RETURN TO BASIC RESEARCH

A common complaint of practicing mental health clinicians is that

research-both of the "basic" and "applied clinical" varieties-is irrelevant
to their needs. This complaint is certainly reciprocated by experimental
psychologists and other "basic researchers," who believe that clinicians
frequently ignore the potential contributions that their efforts could make
to the goal of enhancing well-being (Boneau, 1992). In this age of widespread funding cuts for behavioral science research, the debate about the
relevance of basic versus applied research is likely to become more acrimonious.
We hope these controversies can be avoided by researchers in this
area. However, if forced to choose between conflicting funding priorities,
our position and financial resources would now side with the neglected

244

CHAPTER 11

experimentalist. Basic experimental and laboratory research regarding

procrastination should be developed at an accelerated pace. While educational, personality, social psychological, outcome, and other areas of
research are important, equally important and more neglected are fmdings generated from true or quasi-experimental designs.
One mistake that we hope laboratory-based procrastination researchers avoid is the belief that they are operating in a theoretical vacuum.
Many observers have expressed concerns that the behavioral sciences,
especially psychology, are now much too splintered to be considered a
single, integrated discipline (Bevan, 1991). An increasing tendency toward
specialization is thought by many to impede any sense of unity or ability
for either researchers or practitioners to learn from areas outside of their
own narrow fields. Basic research needs to include the integration of
theories from cognitive, social, personality, clinical, and physiological
psychology.
One example, taken from a broad array of possibilities, is the area of
attention, where there is a rich scientific tradition potentially applicable to
procrastination. M. W. Eysenck (1988) has argued that individuals who are
high in trait anxiety differ from those low on this trait in several aspects of
attentional functioning. Those high in trait anxiety show greater attentional selectivity, have smaller available attentional capacity, and greater
distractibility than people who are low in trait anxiety. Additionally,
Eysenck proposes that the degree to which this tendency is demonstrated
is a function of specific stimulus attributes.
Given what we know to be true about the behaviors of procrastinators,
a legitimate question is whether attentional aspects to stimulus cues can
help explain aspects of procrastinatory behavior. For example, it may well
be that procrastinators have a greater susceptibility to distraction than
nonprocrastinators. If this is demonstrated, further questions would regard the contributory role of various stimuli, arousal states, and situational
contexts. Questions such as these may seem endless-perhaps because
they have not been examined in a systematic fashion.
In some ways, the lack of laboratory-based research is surprising.
Apart from the outstanding efforts of Milgram and his colleagues in Israel
(e.g., Milgram, Dangour, & Raviv, 1992; Milgram, Gehrman, & Keinan,
1992), and some of the contributors of this volume, this domain of research
has been practically void of participants. Procrastination is an area where
subjects are not hard to find and where college students are appropriate
for drawing valid conclusions for many questions. (It is difficult to argue
that the use of undergraduates in laboratory-based procrastination research will lead to limited generalizability of findings.) Because of this,
and because of the comparative novelty of the topic, important contribu-

245

EPILOGUE AS PROLOGUE

tions can still be made by individual researchers who lack sophisticated

equipment and elaborate budgets. Major advances can also be made by
graduate students, working in conjunction with interested and mentoring
faculty. There are few fields in psychology that are so promising for the
young researcher. All that is needed is the intellectual curiosity, which we
hope this volume has helped to foster.

CONCLUSION
We would like to extend our utmost appreciation to the contributors to
this volume and to the many individuals who made it possible. Procrastination is an exciting area with many dimensions, and our hope is that the
reader obtains an understanding of the complexities involved in research
and intervention efforts. Finally, we are optimistic that work will continue
in the many implications associated with this construct. For those who are
interested or at least curious, the field remains wide open, and researchers
can make substantial contributions.

REFERENCES

Abramson, Y. L., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in

humans: Critiques and reformulation. Journal of Ab7WmUl1 Psychology, 87, 49-74.
Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse
control. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 463-496.
Ainslie, G. (1992). Picoeconomics: The strategic interaction of successive motivational states within the
person. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A
psyclwlogical study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Aitken, M. (1982). A personality profile of the college student procrastinator. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Alexander, E (1933~ The relation of structural and instinctual conflicts. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 2, 181-207.
Allen, J. J., & Turner, G. S. (1975). The Lynfield Obsessional Compulsive Questionnaire.
Scottish Medical Journal, 20, 21-24.
Altshuler, J. L., & Ruble, D. N. (1989). DevEllopmental changes in children's awareness of
strategies for coping with uncontrollable stress. Child Development, 60, 1337-1349.
American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, cooperative, lind individualistic goal structures: A motivational analysis. In R. Ames (Ed.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 1, pp. 177-207).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structure, and student motivation. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Anderson, R. (1987). Envy and jealousy. Journal of College Student Psyclwtherapy, 1, 49-81.
Arlow, J. (1989). Psychoanalysis. In R. Corsini & D. Wedding (Eds.), Current Psyclwtherapies
(4th ed., pp. 19-64). Itasca, IL: EE. Peacock.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Balleweg, B. J. (1992, August). Relationship between perfectionism and the five-factor model of
personality. Paper presented at the Centennial Convention of the American Psychological
Association, Washington, DC.

247

248

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barlow, 0. H. (1992). Anxiety and its disorders. The nature and treatment of anxiety and panic. New
York: Guilford.
Baron, J. & Brown, R. (Eds.). (1991). Introduction in Teaching decision making to adolescents. (pp.
7-18). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barton, E., Ascione, E (1978). The proctoring component of personalized instruction: A help
or a hindrance. Journal of Personalized Instruction, 3, 15-22.
Baumeister, R. E, & Scher, S. J. (1988). Self-defeating behavior patterns among normal
individuals: Review and analysis of common self-destructive tendencies. Psychological

Bulletin, 104, 3-22.

Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects. Philadelphia:

University of Pennsylvania Press.
Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1989). An inventory for measuring clinical
anxiety: Psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 56, 893-897.
Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. E, & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy depression: A treatment
manual. New York: Guilford.
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Epstein, N. (1992). Self-concept dimensions of clinically depressed
and anxious outpatients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 423-432.
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., Epstein, N., & Brown, G. (1990). Beck Self-Concept Test. Psychological
Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2, 191-197.
Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for
measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561-571.
Benter, P. (1989). EQS structural equations program manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical
Software.
Berzonsky; M. 0. (1989). Identity style: Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 4, 267-28l.
Berzonsky; M. D., & Ferrari, J. R. (1994). Identity orientation and decisional strategies. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
Beswick, G., Rothblum, E. D., & Mann, L. (1988). Psychological antecedents of student
procrastination. Australian Psychologist, 23, 207-217.
Bevan, W. (1991). Contemporary psychology: A tour inside the onion. American Psychologist,
46, 475-483.
Biaggio, M. K, & Godwin, W. H. (1987). Relation of depression to anger and hostility
constructs. Psychological Reports, 61, 87-90.
Bijou, S., Morris, E., & Parsons, J. (1976). A PSI course in child development with a procedure
for reducing student procrastination. Journal of Personalized Instruction, 1, 36-40.
Blankstein, K R., & Flett, G. L. (1990). Cognitive components of test anxiety: A comparison
of assessment and scoring methods. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 5, 187-202.
Blankstein, K R., & Flett, G. L. (1992). Specificity in the assessment of daily hassles: Life
stress, locus of control, and adjustment in college students. Canadian Journal of Behavioral
Science, 24, 382-398.
Blankstein, K R., & Flett, G. L. (1993). Development of a general measure of daily life stressors in
students. Unpublished manuscript.
Blankstein, K R., Flett, G. L., & Batten, I. (1989). Problem-solving appraisals of test-anxious
students. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 4, 531-540.
Blankstein, K R., Flett, G. L., Boase, P., & Toner, B. (1990). Thought listing versus endorsement measures of self-referential thinking in test anxiety. Anxiety Research, 2, 103-111.
Blankstein, K R., Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Eng, A. (1993). Self-reported fears of

REFERENCES

249

perfectionists: An examination with the Fear Survey Schedule. Personality & Individual
Differences, 15, 323-328.
Blankstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., & Koledin, S. (1991). The Brief College Students' Hassles Scale:
Development, validation, and relation with pessimism. Journal of College Student Development, 32, 258-264.
Blankstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., & Watson, M. S. (1992). Coping and academic problem-solving
in test anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 37-46.
Blankstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., Watson, M. S., & Koledin, S. (1990). Test anxiety, self-evaluative
worry, and sleep disturbance in college students. Anxiety Research, 3, 193-204.
Blankstein, K. R., Toner, B., & Flett, G. L. (1989). Test anxiety and the contents of consciousness: Thought listing and endorsement measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 23,
269-286.
Blatt, S. J., & Quinlan, P. (1967). Punctual and procrastinating students: A study of temporal
parameters. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 169-174.
Bliss, E. (1983). Doing it now. A 12-step program for curing procrastination and achieving your goals.
New York: Scribner.
Block, J. H., Gjerde, P. E, & Block, J. H. (1991). Personality antecedents of depressive
tendencies in 18-year-olds: A prospective study. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,
60, 726-738.
Boneau, C. A. (1992). Observations of psychology's past and future. American Psychologist, 47,
1586-1596.
Borden, J. w., Peterson, 0. R., & Jackson, E. A. (1991). The Beck Anxiety Inventory in
nonclinical samples: Initial psychometric properties. Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 13, 345-356.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. Vol. 2: Separation, anxiety, and anger. New York: Basic
Books.
Brewin, C. R., & Furnham, A. (1986). Attributional versus preattributional variables in selfesteem and depression: A comparison and test of learned helplessness theory. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 50, 1013- 1020.
Brickman, P., & Bulman, R. J. (1977). Pleasure and pain in social comparison. In J. M. Suls, &
R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes (pp. 149-186). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Briordy, R. (1980). An exploratory study of procrastination. Dissertation Abstracts International,
41(2a), 590.
Brooke, R., & Ruthen, A. (1984). The effects of contingency contracting on student performance in a PSI class. Teaching of Psychology, 11, 87-89.
Brown, J. E (1936). Psychology and the social order. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Burl, J. R. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 110-119.
Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L. M. (1983). Procrastination: Why you do it and what to do about it. Reading,
PA: Addison-Wesley.
Bums, D. 0. (1980). Feeling good: The new mood therapy. New York: New American Library.
Bums, 0. D., & Beck, A. T. (1978). Cognitive behavior modification of mood disorders. In J. P.
Foreyt, & 0. P. Rathjen (Eds.), Cognitive behavior therapy: Research and application (pp. 109134). New York: Plenum.
Butler, L., & Meichenbaum, 0. (1981). The assessment of interpersonal problem-solving skills.
In P. C. Kendall, & S. 0. Hollon (Eds.), Assessment strategies for cognitive-behavioral
interventions (pp. 197-226). New York: Academic Press.
Biltz, M., Chamberlain, L., & McCown, W. (1995). Chaos theory and family therapy: The
application of the science of nonlinear dynamics to systemic change. New York: Wiley.
Cane, D. B., Olinger, J., Gotlib, I. H., & Kuiper, N. A. (1986). Factor structure of the

250

REFERENCES

Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale in a student population. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42,

307-309.
Cantor, N., & Kihistrom, J. E (1987). Personality and Social Intelligence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. E (1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A
control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 19-3S.
Cattell, R. B. (196S). The scientific analysis of personality. Chicago: Aldine.
Cattell, R. B. (1983). Structured learning theory. New York: Plenum.
Chamberlain, K., & Zika, S. (1990). The minor events approach to stress: Support for the use
of daily hassles. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 469-481.
Clark, L. A. (1989). The anxiety and depressive disorders: Descriptive psychopathology and
differential diagnosis. In P. C. Kendall, & D. Watson (Eds.), Anxiety and depression:
Distinctive and overlapping features (pp. 83-129). New York: Academic Press.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). lHpartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric
evidence and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 316-336.
Clark, T., Boyer, w., & Ferrari, J. R. (1993, April). Indecision: A function of processing failure?
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Arlington, VA.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (rev. ed.). New York:
Academic Press.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.
Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 24, 385-396.
Collins, L., & Hom, J. (Eds.). (1991). Best methods for the analysis of change: Recent advances,
unanswered questions, future directions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and. relationship
quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 58, 644-663.
Cooper, J. (1970). The Layton Obsessional Inventory. Psychological Medicine, 1, 48-64.
Coote, E. (1987). Procrastination in the workplace: A study of the predispositional and
situational determinants of delay behavior at work. (Doctoral dissertation, Tulane University, 1987). Dissertation Abstract Internationals, 49, 1196A.
Costa, P., & Widiger, T. A. (Eds.). (1994). Personality disorders and the five factor model of
personality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1989). The NEO-PIINEO-FFI manual supplement. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and
conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality & Individual
Differences, 12, 887-898.
Cottraux, J., Bouvard, M., Defayolle, M., & Massey, P. (1988). Validity and factorial structure
study of the Compulsive Activity Checklist. Behaviour Therapy, 19, 4S-S3.
Covington, M. V. (1993). A motivational analysis of academic life in college. In J. Smart (Ed.),
Higher education: A handbook of theory and research. New York: Agathon.
Covington, M. v., & Beery, R. G. (1976). Self-worth and school learning. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Covington, M. v., & Omelich, C. L. (1991). Need achievement revisited: Verification of
Atkinson's original 2 x 2 model. In C. D. Spielberger, I. G. Sarason, Z. Kulczar, & G. L.
Van Heck (Eds.), Stress and emotion: Anxiety, anger and curiosity (Vol. 14, pp. 85-10S).
Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Crocker, J., Alloy, L. B., & Kayne, N. T. (1988). Attributional style, depression, and perception
of consensus for events. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54, 840-846.

251

REFERENCES

Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of
psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354.
Davey, G. C. L., Hampton, J., Farrell, J., & Davidson, S. (1992). Some characteristics of
worrying: Evidence for worrying and anxiety as separate constructs. Personality &
Individual Differences, 13, 133-147.
Defferbacker, J. L., McNamara, K., Stark, R. 5., & Sabadell, P. M. (1990). A comparison of
cognitive-behavioral and process-oriented group counseling for general anger reduction.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 69, 167-172.
DeLongis, A., Coyne, J.
Dakof, G., Folkman,S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationship of
daily hassles, uplifts, and major life events to health status. Health Psychology, 1, 119-136.
DeLongis, A., Folkman,S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). The impact of daily stress on health and
mood: Psychological and social resources as mediators. Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology, 54, 486-495.
Derogatis, L. R. (1983). Manual fur the SCl.r90-R. Towson, MD: Oinical Psychometric Research.
DeSiqtone, P. (1993). Linguistic assumptions in scientific language. Contemporary Psychodynamics: Theory, Research & Application, 1, 8-17.
Digman, J. M. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal
of Personality, 57, 195-214.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual
Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.
Drake, R. E., Asler, D. A., & Vaillant, G. E. (1988). Antecedents of personality disorders in a
community sample of men. Journal of Personality Disorders, 2, 60-68.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41,
1040-1048.
Effert, B. R., & Ferrari, J. R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining personality
correlates. Journal of Social Beluwior & Personality, 4, 151-156.
Ellis, A., & Knaus, W. J. (1977). Overcoming procrastination. New York: Institute for Rational
Living.
Ely, D., & Hampton, J. (1973). Predictions of procrastination in self-pacing instructional systems.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 075501).
Emmons, R. A., & King, L. A. (1989). Personal striving differentiation and affective reactivity.
Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 56, 478-484.
Endler, N. 5., & Magnusson, D. (1976). Toward an interactional psychology of personality.
Psychological Bulletin, 83, 956-974.
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1990a). Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS): Manual.
Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
Endler, N. 5., & Parker, J. 0. A. (1990b). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A critical
evaluation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 58, 844-854.
Eysenck, H. J. (1953). The structure of human personality. New York: Wiley.
Eysenck, H. J. (1%7). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.
Eysenck, H. J. (1970). The structure of human personality (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.
Eysenck, M. W. (1988). Anxiety and attention. Anxiety Research, 1, 9-15.
Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Cicero and the state-trait theory of anxiety: Another case of delayed
recognition. American Psychologist, 48, 114-115.
Ferrari, J. R. (1989a). Reliability of academic and dispositional measures of procrastination.
Psychological Reports, 64, 1057-1058.
Ferrari, J. R. (1989b). Self-handicapping by procrastinators: Effects of performance privacy and task
importance. Doctoral dissertation, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY.
Ferrari, J. R. (1991a). Compulsive procrastination: Some self-reported personality characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 455-458.

c.,

252

REFERENCES

Ferrari, J. R. (1991b). Self-handicapping by procrastinators: Protecting self-esteem, socialesteem, or both? Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 245-261.
Ferrari, J. R. (199lc). Procrastination and project creation: Choosing easy, nondiagnostic items
to avoid self-relevant information. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 6, 619-628.
Ferrari, J. R. (l991d). A preference for a favorable public impression by procrastinators:
Selecting among cognitive and social tasks. Personality & Individual Differences, 12, 12331237.
Ferrari, J. R. (1992a). Procrastination in the workplace. Attributions for failure among
individuals with similar behavioral tendencies. Personality & Individual Differences, 13,
315-319.
Ferrari, J. R. (1992b). Procrastinators and perfect behavior: An exploratory factor analYSis of
self-presentation, self-awareness, and self-handicapping components. Journal of Research
in Personality, 26, 75-84.
Ferrari, J. R. (1992c). Psychometric validation of two adult measures of procrastination:
Arousal and avoidance measures. Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 14,
97-100.
Ferrari, J. R. (1993a). Christmas and procrastination: Explaining lack of diligence at a "realworld" task deadline. Personality & Individual Differences, 14, 25-33.
Ferrari, J. R. (1993b). Procrastination and impulsivity: Two sides of a coin? In W. McCown, M.
B. Shure, & J. Johnson (Eds.), The impulsive client: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 265271). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ferrari, J. R. (1994). Dysfunctional procrastination and its relationship with self-esteem,
interpersonal dependency, and self-defeating behaviors. Personality & Individual Differences, 17, 673-679.
Ferrari, J. R. (in press). Perfectionism cognitions with nonclinical and clinical samples. Journal

of Social Behavior and Personality.

Ferrari, J. R., & Emmons, R. A. (in press). Methods of procrastination and their relation to
self-control and self-reinforcement: An exploratory study. Journal of Social Behavior and

Personality.

Ferrari, J. R., & Emmons, R. A. (1994). Procrastination as revenge: Do people report using
delays as a strategy for vengeance? Personality & Individual Differences, 15, 539-544.
Ferrari, J. R., & McCown, W. (1994). Procrastination tendencies among obsessive-compulsives
and their relatives. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 50, 162-167.
Ferrari, J. R., & Olivette, M. J. (1993). Perceptions of parental control and the development of
indecision among late adolescent females. Adolescence, 28, 963-970.
Ferrari, J. R., & Olivette, M. J. (1994). Parental authority influences on the development of
female dysfunctional procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality, 28, 87-100.
Ferrari, J. R., Parker, J. T., & Ware, C. B. (1992). Academic procrastination: Personality
correlates with Myers-Briggs Types, self-efficacy, and academic locus of control. Journal of
Social Behavior & Personality, 7, 495-502.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
Fibel, B., & Hale, W. D. (1978). The Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale: A new
measure. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 46, 924-931.
Flett, G. L., & Biankstein, K. R. (in press). Procrastination, dysfunctional attitudes, and negative

automatic thoughts about the self.

Flett, G. L., & Blankstein, K. R. (1993). Unpublished data, Yale University.

Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Hewitt, P. L. (in press). Perfectionism, affect, and test
performance in college students. Journal of College Student Development.
Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., Hewitt, P. L., & Koledin, S. (1992). Components of perfectionism and procrastination in college students. Social Behavior & Personality, 20, 85-94.

REFERENCES

253

Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (1990, November). The Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale:
Development and association with measures of adjustment. Paper presented at the 24th annual
meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy, San Francisco.
Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (1992, June). Perfectionism in anxiety and depression: An investigation
with the Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory. Paper presented at the World Congress of
Cognitive Therapy, Toronto, Ontario.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Bellissimo, E, & Gold, B. (1992). Perfectionism and depression in
children and adolescents. Canadian Psychology, 33, 511 (Abstract).
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Blankstein, K R. (1991, August). The Perfectionism Cognition
Inventory: Development, validation, and association with depression. Paper presented at the
99th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K R., & Dynin, c. (1994). Dimensions of perfectionism
and Type A behavior. Personality & Individual Differences, 16, 477-485.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K R., & Koledin, S. (1991). Dimensions of perfectionism
and irrational thinking. Journal of Rntional-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 9,
185-201.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K R., & Mosher, S. W. (1991). Perfectionism, selfactualization, and personal adjustment. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 6(5),
147-160.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K R., & O'Brien, S. (1991). Perfectionism and learned
resourcefulness in depression and self-esteem. Personality & Individual Differences, 12, 61-68.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Pickering, D. (in press). Perfectionism and
attributions for success and failure. Australian Journal of Psychology.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Blankstein, K R., Solnik, M., & Van Brunschot, M. (1992).
Perfectionism and social problem-solving ability. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Boucher, D. J., Davidson, L. A., & Munro, Y. (1992). The Child-

Adolescent Perfectionism Scale: Development, validation, and association with adjustment.

Department of Psychology Research Report No. 203, York University, North York,
Ontario, Canada.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Mikail, S. (1993, August). Dimensions of perfectionism in marital
distress. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Endler, N. 5., & Tassone, C. (in press). Perfectionism and
components of state anxiety and trait anxiety. Current Psychology.
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Singer, A. (in press). Perfectionism and parental authority styles.

Individual Psychology.

Flett, G. L., Vredenburg, K, Pliner, P., & Krames, L. (1987). Depression and social comparison information-seeking. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 2, 473-484.
Freud, S. (1953a). The ego and the id. In Standard Edition, 19:3 66 Games Strachey, rrans.).
London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis. (Original work published
1923)
Freud, S. (1953b). Inhibitions, symptoms, and anxiety. In Collected Works (Vol. 8, James
Strachey, rrans.) London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1926)
Freud, S. (1953c). The neuro-psychoses of defence. In Standard Edition, 3:45-61 Games
Strachey, rrans.) London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis. (Original
work published 1894).
Freund, B., Steketee, G. S., & Foa, E. B. (1987). Psychometric analysis with obsessivecompulsive disorders. Behavioral Assessment, 9, 67-79.
Frost, R. 0., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. 5., Mattia, J. I., & Neubauer, A. L. (1993). A comparison of two measures of perfection. Personality & Individual Differences, 14, 119-126.

254

REFERENCES

Frost, R. 0., Lahart, C. M., &: Rosenblate, R. (1991~ The development of perfectionism: A
study of daughters and their parents. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 15, 469-490.
Frost, R. 0., &: Marten, P. (1990). Perfectionism and evaluative threat. Cognitive Therapy &
Research, 14, 559-572.
Frost, R. 0., Marten, P. A, Lahart, c., &: Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 14, 449-468.
Frost, R. 0., &: Sher, K. J. (1989). Checking behavior in a threatening situation. Beluwior
Research & Therapy, 27, 385-389.
Frost, R. 0., Sher, K. J., &: Geen, T. (1986). Psychopathology and personality characteristics of
nonclinical compulsive checkers. Behavior Research & Therapy, 24, 133-143.
Gagliardi, N. (1984). As time goes by ... Working Woman, 9, 79-80.
Galue, A, J. (1990). Perceived job ambiguity, predisposition to procrastinate, work-related information
and experience: An investigation of procrastination behavior at work. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Tulane University.
Giovacchni, P. (1975). Productive procrastination: Technical factors in the treatment of the
adolescent. Adolescent Psychiatry, 4, 352-370.
Girodo, M., &: Roehl, J. (1978~ Cognitive preparation and coping self-talk: Anxiety management during the stress of flying. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psyc1wlogy, 46, 978-989.
Girodo, M., &: Stein, S. J. (1978). Self-talk and the work of worrying in confronting a stressor.
Cognitive Therapy & Research, 2, 305-307.
Gordon, R. A (1989). Intention and expectation measures as predictors of academic performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 405-415.
Gorman, B., &: Wessman, A (1977). Images, values, and concepts of time in psychological
research. In B. Gorman &: A Wessman (Eds.), The personal experience of time. New York:
Plenum.
Gotlib, 1. H. (1984). Depression and general psychopathology in university students. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 93, 19-30.
Graham, J. R. (1987). The MMPI: A practical guide (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Gray, J. (1987). The neuropsychology of emotion and personality. In S. M. Stahl, S. D. Iverson,
&: E. C. Goodman (Eds.), Cognitive neurochemistry (pp. 171-190~ Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Greco, P. (1985). Self-statements of chronic procrastinators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
California School of Professional Psychology, San Diego, CA
Green, P., &: Wmd, Y. (1975). New ways to measure consumers' judgments. Harvard Business
Review, 53, 107- 117.
Greene, G. (1981). Dissertation procrastination. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 1548A (University Microfilms No.
AAD81-21201).
Griest, J. H., Jefferson, J. w., &: Marks, 1. M. (1986). Anxiety and its treatment: Help is available.
Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
Haas, L. J., &: Cummings, N. A (1991). Managed outpatient mental health plans: Clinical,
ethical, and practical guidelines for participation. Professional Psychology, 22, 45-51.
Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology,
15,27-33.
Harre, R. (1984). Personal being. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Harter, S., &: Marold, D. B. (1994). The directionality of the link between self-esteem and
affect: Beyond causal modeling. In D. Cicchetti, &: S. L. Toth (Eds.), The self and its
disorders: Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology (pp. 333-369). Rochester,
NY: University of Rochester Press.

REFERENCES

255

Hays, W. L. (1973). Statistics fur the social sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wmston.
Hazan, c., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.
Hazan, c., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective.
Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 270-280.
Heath, A. c., Neale, M. c., Kessler, R. c., Eaves, L. J., & Kendler, K. S. (1992). Evidence for
genetic influences on personality from self-reports and informant ratings. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 63, 85-96.
Hermans, D. (1977). Analyse en validering van een studieproblemen vragenlijst [Analysis and
validation of a study problems questionnaire}. Unpublished manuscript, University of
Nijmegen, Department IOWO, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hermans, H. J. M. (1976). PMT. Prestatie motivatie test, hand/eiding [PMT, Achievement motivation
test, manual}. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Hersen, M., & Bellack, M. (1988). Dictionary of behavioral assessment techniques. New York:
Pergamon.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1989). The Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale: Development
and validation. Canadian Psychology, 30, 339.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1990). Perfectionism and depression: A multidimensional
analysis. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 5, 423-438.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991a). Dimensions of perfectionism in unipolar depression.

Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 98-101.

Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991b). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality & Social

Psychology, 60, 456-470.

Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1993a). Dimensions of perfectionism, daily stress, and depression: A test of the specific vulnerability hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102,
58-65.
Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1993b). Perfectionism and goal orientation in impulsive and
suicidal behavior. In W. McCown, M. Shure, & J. Johnson (Eds.), The impulsive client:
Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 247-263). Arlington, VA: American Psychological
Association Press.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Blankstein, K. R. (1991). Perfectionism and neuroticism in
psychiatric patients and college students. Personality & Individual Differences, 12,273-279.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Endler, N. S. (in press). Dimensions of perfectionism, coping,
and depression. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Mosher, S. W. (1992). The Perceived Stress Scale: Factor structure
and relation to depression symptoms in a psychiatric sample. Journal of Psychopathology &
Behavioral Assessment, 14, 246-257.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & Thrnbull-Donovan, W. (1992). Perfectionism and suicidal intent.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31, 181-190.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., & 'fumbull-Donovan, W. (1992). Perfectionism and MMPI indices of
personality disorder. Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 14, 323-335.
Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Turnbull-Donovan, w., & Mikail, S. (1991). The Multidimensional
Perfectionism Scale: Reliability, validity, and psychometric properties in psychiatric
samples. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 3, 464--468.
Hewitt, P. L., & Genest, M. (1990). The ideal self: Schematic processing of perfectionistic
content in dysphoric university students. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59,
802-808.
Hewitt, P. L., Mittelstaedt, w., & Wollert, R. (1989). Validation of a measure of perfectionism.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 133-144.

256

REFERENCES

Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,
94, 319-340.
Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1986). Self-discrepancies and emotional
vulnerability: How magnitude, accessibility, and type of discrepancy influence affect.
Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 5-15.
Higgins, E. T., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1985). Self-concept discrepancy theory: A psychological model for distinguishing among different aspects of depression and anxiety.
Social Cognition, 3, 51-76.
Higgins, E. T., Tykocinski, 0., & Vookles, J. (1990). Patterns of self-beliefs: The psychological
significance of relations among the actual, ideal, ought, can, and future selves. In J. M.
Olson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Self-inference processes: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 6, pp. 153190). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Higgins, E. T., Vookles, J., & Tykocinski, O. (1992). Self and health: How "patterns" of selfbeliefs predict types of emotional and physical problems. Social Cognition, 10, 125-150.
Hill, M., Hill, D., Chabot, A., & Barrall, J. (1978). A survey of college faculty and student
procrastination. College Student Personnel Journal, 12, 256-262.
Hindmarch, I., Beaumont, G., Brandon, S., & Leonard, B. E. (Eds.). (1990). Benzodiazepines:
Current concepts. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Hofstee, W. K. B., De Raad, B., and Goldberg, L. R. (1992). Integration of the Big Five and
circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63,
146-163.
Hollender, M. H. (1965). Perfectionism. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 6, 94-103.
Hollon, S. D., & Kendall, P. C. (1980). Cognitive self-statements in depression: Development
of an Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 4, 383-395.
Honig, W. K. (1966). Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts.
Homey, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth. New York: Norton.
Hylex; S., & Reidex; R. (1993). Personality diagnostic questionnaire, revised. New York: New York
Psychiatric Institute.
Jackson, 0. N. (1976). Jackson Personality Inventory. Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press.
Jacobson, N., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining
meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology,
59,12-19.
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and
commitment. New York: Free Press.
Jette, c. c., & Remien, R. (1988). HispaniC geriatric residents in a long-term care setting.
Journal of Applied Gerontology, 7, 350-366.
John, 0. P. (1990). The "Big Five" factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural
language and in questionnaires. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and
research. New York: Guilford.
Johnson, D. P., & Slaney, R. B. (1992, August). Investigation of the construct validity of a
perfectionism questionnaire. Paper presented at the centennial convention of the American
Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Johnson, J. (1992). The 55-77. A measure of psychological symptom severity. Princeton, NJ:
NorthShore Press.
Johnson, J., & Bloom, M. (1993, July). Procrastination and the five-factor theory of personality.
Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for the Study of Individual Differences,
Baltimore, MD.
Johnson, J., & Bloom, M. (1995, in press). The role of conscientiousness and neuroticism in
academic procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences.

REFERENCES

257

Johnson, J., &: McCown, W. (1993). Addictive behaviors and substance abuse: An overview. In
P. Sutker &: H. Adams (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of psychopathology (2nd ed., pp. 437450). New York: Plenum.
Johnson, J., &: McCown, W. (1994). Family treatment of neurobehavioral disorders. Binghamton,
NY: Haworth.
Johnson, R. M. (1987). Adaptive conjoint analysis. Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software
Conference on Perceptual Mapping, Conjoint Analysis and Computer Interviewing. Sun Valley,
10: Sawtooth Software.
Jones, A. (1975). Grandiosity blocks writing projects. Thmsactional Analysis Journal, 5, 415.
J01'eskog, K. G., and Sarbom, D. (1988). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications.
Chicago: SPSS.
Kahnemann, D., Slovic, P., &: Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics
and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kanfa; H, &: Hagerman, S. (1981). The role of self-regulation. In L. Rehm (Ed.), Behavior
therapy for depression: Present state and future directions (pp. 143-179). New York: Academic
Press.
Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. c., Schaefer, c., &: Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of
stress measurement: Daily hassles imd uplifts versus major life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 1-39.
Kantor, J. R. (1969). The scientific evolution of psychology, Vol. II. Chicago: Principia Press.
Kantor, J. R. (1953). The logic of modern science. Bloomington, IN: Principia Press.
Kendall, P. c., &: Watson, D. (1989). Anxiety and depression: Distinctive and overlapping features.
New York: Academic Press.
Knaus, W. (1973). Overcoming procrastination. Rational Living, 8, 2-7.
Kohn, P. M., Lafreniere, K., &: Gurevich, M. (1990). The Inventory of College Students' Recent
Life Experiences: A decontaminated hassles scale for a special population. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 13, 619-630.
Kulik, J., Fulik, C. L., &: Carmichael, K. (1974). The Keller plan in science teaching. Science,
183,379.
L'Abate, L. (1994). A theary of personality development. New York: WIley.
~bate, L., &: Bagarazzoni, D. (1993). Sourcebook of marriage and family evaluation. New York:
BrunnerlMazel.
Lakein, A. (1973). How to get control of your time and life. New York: New American Library.
Larson, D. G., &: Chastain, R. L. (1990). Self-concealment: Conceptualization, measurement,
and health implications. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 439-455.
Lay, C. H. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of Research in

Personality, 20, 474-495.

Lay, C. H. (1987). A modal profile analysis of procrastinators: A search for types. Personality &
Individual Differences, 8, 705-714.
Lay, C. H. (1988). The relation of procrastination and optimism to judgments of time to
complete an essay and anticipation of setbacks. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 3,
201-214.

Lay, C. H. (1990). Working to schedule on personal projects: An assessment of person-project

characteristics and trait procrastination. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 5, 91-103.
Lay, C. H. (1992). 'frait procrastination and the perception of person-task characteristics.
Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 7, 483-494.
Lay, C. H., &: Burns, P. (1991). Intentions and behavior in studying for an examination: The
role of trait procrastination and its interaction with optimism. Journal of Social Behavior &
Personality, 6, 605-617.
Lay, c., Edwards, J. M., Parker, J. D. A., &: Endler, N. S. (1989). An assessment of appraisal,

258

REFERENCES
anxiety, coping, and procrastination during an examination period. European Journal of

Personality, 3, 195-208.

Lazarus, R. S. (1990). Theory-based stress measurement. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 3-13.

Leazak, M. D. (1983). Neuropsychological assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Leonard, B. E. (1992). Fundamentals of psychopharmacology. New York: Wiley.
Leonard, B. E., & Spencer, P. S. J. (1990). Antidepressants: Thirty years on. London: Clinical
Neuroscience.
Levy; L. H. (1963). Psychological interpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Little, B. R. (1983). Personal projects: A rationale and method for investigation. Errvironment &
Behavior, 15, 273-309.
Lloyd, M., & Zylla, T. (1981). Self-pacing: Helping students establish and fulfill individualized
plans for pacing unit tests. Teaching of Psychology, 8, 100-103.
Lowman, R. (1993). Counseling and psychotherapy of work dysfunction. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Lu, L. (1976). Programmed systems of instruction. Technical report No. 721. Department of
Education, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Luteijn, E, Starren, J., & Van Dijk, H. (1985). Hand/eiding bij de NPV [Manual for the NPV].
Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
MacIntyre, P. (1964). Dynamics and treatment of passive aggressive underachievers. American
Journal of Psychotherapy, 18, 95-108.
Maier, S. (1986). Stressor controllability and stress-induced analgesia. In 0. Kelley (Ed.),
Stress-induced analgesia. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 467, pp. 30-39).
New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Manaster, G., & Corsini, R. (1982). Individual psychology: Theory and practice. Itasca, IL: E E.
Peacock Publishers.
Mandel, H. P., & Marcus, S. I. (1988). The psychology of underachievement: Differential diagnosis
and differential treatment. Toronto: Wiley.
Mann, L. (1982). Decision-making questionnaire. Unpublished inventory. Flinders University of
South Australia, Australia.
Marks, I. M. (1969). Fears and phobias. London: Heinemann.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion,
and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Marsh, H. w., & Parker, J. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a
relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well? Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 47, 213-231.
Martin, T. R. (1990). Procrastination, perfectionism, and depression in college students. Unpublished honors thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Martin, T. R., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (1992). Unpublished data. Department of
Psychology; York University, North York, Ontario, Canada.
Martin, T. R., Flett, G. L., & Hewitt, P. L. (1993). Perfectionism, self-expectancies, and procrastination. Unpublished manuscript.
Matheny, K. B., Aycock, D. w., Pugh, J. L., Curlette, W. L., & Silva Cannella, K. D. (1986).
Stress coping: A qualitative and quantitative synthesis with implications for treatment.
The Counseling Psychologist, 14, 499-549.
Mazur, J. (1990). Learning and behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McCann, C. D., & Higgins, E. T. (1988). Motivation and affect in interpersonal relations: The
role of personal orientations and discrepancies. In L. Donohew, H. E. Sypher, & E. T.
Higgins (Eds.), Communication, social cognition, and affect (pp. 53-79). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.

REFERENCES

259

McCann, D. P., Moretti, M., & Gavin, D. R. (1986). Interpersonal orientation and depression.
Unpublished manuscript, York University, Toronto, Canada.
McCann, J. T. (1988). Passive-aggressive personality disorder: A review. Journal of Personality
Disorders, 2, 170-179.
McCown, W. (1986). Behavior of chronic college-student procrastinators: An experimental
study. Social Science & Be1uwioral Documents, 17, 133.
McCown, W. (1994). Procrastination and personality disorders: Empirical relationship and
causality. Contemporary Psyclwdynamics, 3, 141-148.
McCown, W. (1994). Procrastination, personality disorders, and adult incest survivors. Unpublished manuscript, Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, NY.
McCown, W. (1995). The relationship between venturesomeness, impulsivity, and procrastination in college students and adults. Integra/Apogee Technical Research Paper No. 95"()8.
Radnor, PA: Integra/Apogee, Inc.
McCown, w., Carise, D., & Jo)mson, J. (1991). 'frait procrastination in adult children of alcohol
abusers. Journal of Social Be1uwior & Personality,S, 121-134.
McCown, w., & DeSimone, P. (1993). Impulsivity: A historic overview. In W. McCown, J.
Johnson, & M. Shure (Eds.), The impulsive client: Theory, research, and treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McCown, W., & Ferrari, J. R. (1995a). A meta-analysis of treatments for procrastination in high
school and college students. Unpublished manuscript, Northeast Louisiana University.
McCown, W., & Ferrari, J. R. (1995b). Some experimental analogues ofprocrastination. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
McCown, w., GaIina, H., Johnson, J., DeSimone, P., & Posa, J. (1993~ Borderline personality
disorder and laboratory-induced cold pressor pain: Evidence of stress-induced analgesia. Psychopathology and Be1uwior Assessment, 15, 87-95.
McCown, w., & Johnson, J. (1989a, April). Validation of an adult inventory of procrastination.
Paper presented at the Society for Personality Assessment, New York.
McCown, w., & Johnson, J. (1989b). Differential arousal gradients in chronic procrastination. Paper
presented at the American PsycholOgical Society, Alexandria, VA.
McCown, w., & Johnson, J. (1989c). Nonstudent validation of an adult inventory of procrastination.
Paper presented at the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.
McCown, W., & Johnson, J. (1991~ Personality and chronic procrastination by students during
an academic examination period. Personality & Individual Differences, 12, 662-667.
McCown, W., Johnson, J., & Petzel, T. (1989a, April). Further validation of an adult inventory of
procrastination. Paper presented at the Southeastern Psychological Association, New
Orleans, LA.
McCown, w., Johnson, J., & Petzel, T. (1989b). Procrastination, a principal components
analysis. Personality & Individual Differences, 10, 197-202.
McCown, w., Johnson, J., & Shure, M. (Eds.). (1993). The impulsive client: Theory, research, and
treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McCown, w., Petzel, T., & Rupert, P. (1987). Personality correlates and behaviors of chronic
procrastinators. Personality & Individual Differences, 11, 71-79.
McCown, w., & Roberts, R. (1994). A studies of academic and work-related dysfunctioning
relevant to the college version of an indirect measure of impulsive behavior. Integra
Technical Paper 94-28, Radnor, PA: Integra, Inc.
McCown, w., Touchet, M., Posa, J., & Bishop, K. Personality disorders and chronic procrastination:
Data from normal and clinical samples. Manuscript submitted for publication.
McKean, J. J. (1990). An investigation of academic procrastination as a behavioral manifestation of
learned helplessness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Seton Hall University, South
Orange, NJ.

260

REFERENCES

McMahon, R. c., & Davidson, R. S. (1985). An examination of the relationship between

personality patterns and symptom/mood patterns. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,
552-556.
Meyer, T. J, Miller, M. L., Metzger, R. L., & Borkovec, T. 0. (1990). Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. Behaviour Research & Therapy, 28, 487-495.
Milgram, N. (1991). Procrastination. In R. Dulbecco (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human biology (Vol. 6,
pp.149-155). New York: Academic Press.
Milgram, N., Dangour,
& Raviv, A. (1992). Situational and personal determinants of
academic procrastination. Journal of General Psychology, 11, 123-133.
Milgram, N. A., Gehrman, T., & Keinan, G. (1992). Procrastination and emotional upset: A
typological model. Personality & Individual Differences, 13, 1307-1313.
Milgram, N. A., Sroloff, B., & Rosenbaum, M. (1988). The procrastination of everyday life.
Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 197-212.
Millon, T. (1981). Disorders of personality. DSM-III: Axis II. New York: Wiley.
Missildine, H. (1963). Your inner child of the past. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Monroe, S. M. (1983). Major and minor life events as predictors of psychological distress:
Further issues and findings. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 6, 189-205.
Mook, J., Van Der Ploeg, H. M., & Kleijn, W. C. (1990). Anxiety, anger, and depression.
Anxiety Research, 3, 17-31.
Moretti, M. M., & Higgins, E. T. (1990). Relating self-discrepancy to self-esteem: The
contribution of discrepancy beyond actual-self ratings. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 26, 108-123.
Morris, E., Surber, c., & Bijou, S. (1978). Self- versus instructor-pacing: Achievement,
evaluations, and retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 224-230.
Muszynski, S. Y., & Akamatsu, T. J. (1991). Delay in completion of doctoral dissertations in
clinical psychology. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 22, 119-123.
Nelson, T., & Scott, 0. (1972). Personalized instruction in educational psychology. Michigan
Academician, 4, 293-302.
Newman, E, Ball,S., Young, D., Smith, c., & Purtle, R. (1974). Initial attitude differences
among successful, procrastinating, and "withdrawn from course" students in a personalized system of statistics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5, 105-113.
Nicholls, J. G., Cheung, P. c., Lauer, J., & Patashnick, M. (1989). Individual differences in
academic motivation: Perceived ability, goals, beliefs, and values. Learning & Individual
Differences, I, 63-84.
Nicholls, J. G., Licht, B. G., & Pearl, R. A. (1982). Some dangers of using personality
questionnaires to study personality. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 572-580.;
Ost, L. G., & Sterner, U. S. (1987). Applied tension: A specific behavioral method of treatment
of blood phobia. Behavioral Research & Therapy, 20, 445-460.
Pacht, A. R. (1984). Reflections on perfection. American Psychologist, 39, 386-390.
Pervin, L. A. (1990). Handbook of personality: Theory and research. New York: Guilford.
Post, R. D. (1988). Self-sabotage among successful women. Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 6,
191-205.
Protter, B., & 'fravin, S. (1982). Profile of defendants seen for presentence psychiatric
examination. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law, 10, 123-134.
Rand, B. (Ed.). (1989). The classical psychologists: Selections illustrating psychology from Anaxagoros to Wundt. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Rado, S. (1933). Fear of castration in women. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 2, 425-475.
Rhodewalt, E (1990). Self-handicappers: Individual differences in the preference for anticipatory, self-protective acts. In R. L. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Berglas (Eds.), Selfhandicapping: The paradox that isn't (pp. 69-106). New York: Plenum.

w.,

261

REFERENCES

Rice, L., & Greenberg, L. (1984). Patterns of change. New York: Guilford.
Romine, P. G., & Crowell, O. C. (1981). Personality correlates of under- and overachievement
at the university level. PsycJwlogical Reports, 48, 787-792.
Rorer, L. G. (1983). "Deep" RET: A reformulation of some psychodynamic explanations of
procrastination. Cognitive Therapy lit Research, 7, 1-10.
Rosati, P. (1975). Procrastinators prefer PSI. ERM (A publication of the Educational Research
and Methods Division of the American Society for Engineering Education), 17-19, 22.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Rothblum, E. D. (1990). Fear of failure: The psychodynamic, need achievement, fear of
success, and procrastination models. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.), Handbook of social and
evaluation anxiety (pp. 497-537). New York: Plenum.
Rothblum, E. D., Solomon, L. J., & Murakami, J. (1986). Affective, cognitive, and behavioral
differences between high and low procrastinators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33,
387-394.
Ruble, D. N., & Flett, G. L. (1988). Conflicting goals in self-evaluative information-seeking:
Developmental and ability level analyses. Child Development, 59, 97-106.
Safran, J. D., Vallis, T. M., Segal, Z.
& Shaw, B. E (1986). Assessment of core cognitive
processes in cognitive therapy. Cognitive Therapy lit Research, 10, 509-526.
Salizman, L. (1979). Psychotherapy of the obsessional. American Journal of Psychiatry, 33, 32-40.
Sanavio, E., & Vidotto, G. (1985). The components of the Maudsley Obsessional-Compulsive
Questionnaire. Behaviour Research lit Therapy, 23, 659-662.
Sanchez-Bernardos, M. L., & Sanz, J. (1992). Effects of the discrepancy between self-concepts
on emotional adjustment. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 303-318.
Sarason, I. G. (1984). Stress, anxiety, and cognitive interference: Reactions to tests. Journal of
Personality lit Social Psychology, 51, 215-226.
Sarason, I. G., Johnson, J. H., & Siegel, J. M. (1978). Assessing the impact of life changes:
Development of the Life Experiences Survey. Journal of Consulting lit Clinical PsycJwlogy,
46, 932-946.
Saunders, S. M., Howard, K. I., & Newman, E L. (1988). Evaluating the clinical significance of
treatment effects: Norms and normality. Behavior Assessment, 10, 207-218.
Schaefer, c., & Breismeister, J. (Eds.). (1989). Handbook of parent training: Parents as cotherapists
for children's behavioral problems. New York: Wiley.
Scheier, M. E, & Carver, C. S. (1988). A model of behavioral self-regulation: 1ranslating
intention into action. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.
21, pp. 303-346). New York: Academic Press.
Schouwenburg, H. C. (l992a). Procrastinators and fear of failure: An exploration of reasons
for procrastination. European Journal of Personality. 6, 225-236.
Schouwenburg, H. C. (1992b, September). Differential diagnosis and treatment of procrastination and fear of failure in university students. Paper presented at the 22nd Congress
of the European Association for Behavior Therapy, Coimbra, Portugal.
Semb, G., & Glick, M. (1979). Student withdrawals and delayed work patterns in self-paced
psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 6, 23-25.
SIler, K. J., Frost, R. 0., & Otto, R. (1983). Cognitive deficits in compulsive checkers: An
exploratory study. Behavior Research lit Therapy, 21, 357-363.
Sherman, J. (1981). Stop procrastinating-Do it. Golden Valley, MN: Pathway Books.
Shipley, R. H., Butt, J. H., & Horwitz, E. A. (1979). Preparation to reexperience a stressful
medical examination: Effect of repetitious videotape exposure and coping style. Journal
of Consulting lit Clinical PsycJwlogy, 47, 485-492.

v.,

262

REFERENCES

Shipley, W. C. (1940). A self-administering scale for measuring intellectual impairment and

deterioration. Journal of Psychology, 9, 371-377.
Shure, M. (1992). I can problem solve (lCPS): An interpersonal cognitive problem solving program
(preschool). Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Silver, M. (1974). Procrastination. Centerpoint, 1, 49-54.
SilveI; M., & Sabini, J. (1981). Procrastinating. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 11, 207-221.
Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 971-980.
Skinner, B. E (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Free Press.
Skinner, B. E (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts.
Small, I. E, Small, J. G., Alig, V. B., & Moore, 0. S. (1970). Passive-aggressive personality
disorders: A search for a syndrome. American Journal of Psychiatry, 121, 973-981.
Smith, G. M. (1967). Usefulness of peer ratings of personality in educational research.
Educational & Psychological Measurement, 27, 967-984.
Smith, M. L., Glass, G. v., & Miller, T. (1980). The benefits of psychotherapy. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Snowden, J. (1980). A comparison of written and postbox forms of the Leyton Obsessional
Inventory. Psychological Medicine, 10, 165-170.
Snyder, C. R., & Higgins, R. L. (1988). Excuses: Their effective role in the negotiation of
reality. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 23-35.
Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitivebehavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503-509.
Spacapan, S., & Cohen, S. (1983). Effects and aftereffects of stressor expectations. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 45, U43-U54.
Spielberger, C. D. (1988). Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Scale (STAX). Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Spielberger, C. D., Johnson, E. H., Russell, S. E, Crane, R. J., Jacobs, G. A., & Worden, T. J.
(1985). The experience and expression of anger: Construction and validation of an anger
expression scale. In M. A. Chesney and R. H. Rosenman (Eds.), Anger and hostility in
cardiovascular and behavioral disorders (pp. 5-30). New York: Hemisphere.
Spielberger, C. D., Krasner, S. S., & Solomon, E. P. (1988). The experience, expression, and
control of anger. In M. P. Janisse (Ed.), Individual differences, stress, and health psychology
(pp. 89-108). New York: Academic Press.
Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., Skodol, A. E., Williams, J. B. w., & First, M. B. (1989). DSM-III-R

casebook: A learning companion to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

(3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Spock, B. (1971). Helping the procrastinating child. Redbook, 36, 20.
Spoth, R. (1989). Applying conjoint analysis of consumer preferences to the development of
utility-response health promotion programs. Health Education Research, 4, 439-449.
Spoth, R., & Molgaard, V. (1993). Consumer-focused data collection in prevention program
evaluation: Rationale and illustrations. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 16, 278-294.
Sroloff, B. (1983). An empirical research of procrastination as a state/trait phenomenon. Unpublished
master's thesis, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv, Israel.
Stecher, B. M., & Davis, W. A. (1987). How to focus an evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Steketee, G. (1990). Personality traits and disorders in obsessive- compulsives. Journal of
Anxiety Disorders, 4, 351-364.
Sternberger, L. G., & Bums, G. L. (1990). Compulsive Activity Checklist and the Maudsley
Obsessional-Compulsive Inventory: Psychometric properties of two measures of
obsessive-compulsive disorder. Behaviour Therapy, 21, 117-U7.

REFERENCES

263

Strauman, T. J. (1992). Self-guides, autobiographical memory, and. anxiety and. dysphoria:

Toward a cognitive model of vulnerability to emotional distress. Journal of Abnormal

Psychology, 1m., 87-95.

Strauman, T. J., &: Higgins, E. T. (1987). Automatic activation of self-discrepancies and.

emotional syndromes: When cognitive structures influence affects. Journal of Personality
& Social Psychology, 53, 1004-1014.
Strauman, T. J., &: Higgins, E. T. (1988). Self-discrepancies as predictors of vulnerability to
distinct syndromes of chronic emotional distress. Journal of Personality, 56, 685-707.
Strong, S. R., Wambach, C. A., Lopez, E G., &: Cooper, R. K. (1979). Motivational and.
equipping functions of interpretation in counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 26,
98-107.
Strub, R. (1989). Frontal lobe syndrome in a patient with bilateral globus pallidus lesions.
Archives of Neurology, 46, 1024-1027.
Strupp, H. H., &: Binder, J. L. (1984). Psychotherapy in a new key: A guide to time-limited dynamic
psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.
Summers, A. (1990, May). The neurotic defense mechanism and the deep analysis process. Paper
presented at the American Psychiatric Association, New York.
Swallow, S. R., &: Kuiper, N. A. (1988). Social comparison and. negative self-evaluations: An
application to depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 55-76.
Sweeny, P., Butler, R., &: Rosen, L. (1979). The modification and prediction of procrastination in a
personalized system of instruction course. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED
185 450).
Swets, J. (1991). Normative decisionmaking. In J. Baron, &: R. Brown (Eds.), Teaching decision
making to adolescents (pp. 273-296). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thbachnik, N., Crocker, J., &: Alloy, L. B. (1983). Depression, social comparison, and the falseconsensus effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 45, 688-699.
Tabachnick, B. G., &: Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). New York:
Harper &: Row.
Tallis, E, Eysenck, M., &: Mathews, A. (1992). A questionnaire for the assessment of
nonpathological worry. Personality & Individual Differences, 13, 161-168.
Thylor, R. (1979). Procrastination: The personality and. situational correlates of procrastination
behavior for achievement tasks. Dissertation Abstracts International, 40(4-b), 1967.
Thylor, D. (1988) Buspirone: A new approach to the treatment of anxiety. Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology Journal, 2, 2445-2452.
Tharp, R. G., &: Wetzel, R. J. (1969). Behavior modification in the natural environment. New York:
Academic Press.
Touchet, M., Shure, M. B., &: McCown, W. (1993). Interpersonal cognitive problem solving as
prevention and treatment of impulsive disorders. In W. McCown, J. Johnson, &: M. Shure
(Eds.), The impulsive client: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 387-404). Washington, DC:
American PsycholOgical Association.
lliandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological
Review, 96, 506-520.
1ii.andis, H. c., McCusker, c., &: Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and
collectivism. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020.
1ii.ce, A., &: Milton, c. (1987). Locus of control as a predictor of procrastination among adults
in correspondence courses. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 65, 1002.
'Ii'oyer, G. T., &: Salman, S. L. (Eds.). (1986). Handbook of healthcare risk management. Rockville,
MD: Aspen.
lUckman, B. W. (1991). The development and concurrent validation of the Procrastination
Scale. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 51, 473-480.

264

REFERENCES

Tupes, E. R., & Christal, R. (1961). Recurrent personality [actors based on trait ratings. USAFD
Technical Report No. 67-97. Lackland AFB, DC
Turkat,1. D. (1990). The personality disorders: A psychological approach to clinical management. New
York: Pergamon Press.
van der Kolk, B. (1987). Psychological trauma. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association Press.
Van der Ploeg, H. M. (1988). Handleiding bij de Examen/Toets Attitude Vragenlijst [Manual of the
Test Anxiety Irwentory). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Voicu, D. (1992). An examination ofparent-child relations, psychological separation, and psychological
adjustment in relation to academic and general dispositional procrastination. Unpublished
honor's thesis, York University, North York, Ontario, Canada.
Voicu, 0. (1993). Unpublished data, York University, North York, Ontario, Canada.
Vorst, H. C. M. (1989). Handleiding voor gebruikers van de uitslagen van Leren & Studeren [User
manual for the results of Learning & Studying]. Unpublished manuscript, University of
Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vredenburg, K., Flett, G. L., & Krames, L. (1993). Analogue versus clinical depression: A
critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 327-344.
Vredenburg, K., O'Brien, E., & Krames, L. (1988). Depression in college students: Personality
and experiential factors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 419-425.
Warshaw; P. R., & Davis, E D. (1985). Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral
expectation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 213-228.
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive
emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465-490. '
Watson, D., Clark, L. E., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures
of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
Watson, D., & Kendall, P. C. (Eds.). (1989). Common and differentiating features of anxiety
and depression: Current findings and future directions. In Anxiety and depression:
Distinctive and overlapping features (pp. 493-508). New York: Academic Press.
Weber, M. (1926). Basic writings. London: Kegan Paul.
Webster!; New Collegiate Dictionary (1992). New York: Wmston.
Weissman, A., & Beck, A. T. (1979). Development and validation of the Dysfunctional Attitudes
Scale: A preliminary investigation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Toronto.
Wessman, A. A. (1973). Personality and the subjective experience of time. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 37, 103-114.
Widseth, J. (1987). Hearing the theme of grandiosity in procrastination by college students.
Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 1, 91-98.
Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Wiggins, N., Blackburn, M., & Hackman, J. R. (1969). Prediction of first-year graduate
success in psychology: Peer ratings. Journal of Educational Research, 63, 81-85.
Zelinsky, G., Ferrari, J., & Dovidio, J. (1994, April). Information searching by decisional procrastinators. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association,
Providence, RI.
Ziesat, H. A., Jr., Rosenthal, T. L., & White, G. M. (1978). Behavioral self-control in treating
procrastination of studying. Psychological Reports, 42, 59-69.
Zuckerman, M. (1991). Psychobiology of personality. Cambridge, EnglandlNew York: Cambridge University Press.

INDEX

Ability, 40-43
Absenbnindedness, 62
Academic Hassles Inventory (AHI), 154
Academic procrastination, 187-210
Academic Procrastination State Inventory
(APSI), 76, 85-87
Achievement motivation, 40
Achievement tests, 192
Adjusbnent, 148-156
Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AlP),
15-18, 49, 64-67, 174, 205
Adult procrastination, 216-219
Agitation, 97-112
Aitken's Procrastination Inventory (API),
26, 49, 52-54, 205
Alcoholism, 172, 196, 231
Anger Expression Scale, 173-175
Anger suppression, 171, 172
Anorexia, 17
Anxiety, 9, 22, 29-30, 51, 52, 59, 62, 63,
69, 91, 99, 123137-167, 170, 194, 199201
Anxiolytic drugs, 219, 220
Applied-decison theory, 6
Assessment, 194-196, 221-224
Attachment theory, 158-160
Attributions, 74
Atypical procrastination, 211-216, 226-232
Augustine, 21
Authoritarian parenting, 24, 25, 128, 231
Authoritarianism, 117
Avoidance, 59, 66, 162, 198, 199

Beck's Depression Inventory (BOI), 76, 140

Behaviorism, 25-34
Benzodiazepines, 199, 200, 220
"Big Five," 43, 44, 76-80, 120
Biopsychological variables, 45, 46, 236, 237
Brain damage, 45
BS,206
Buck-passing, 59, 61
Bulimia,17
Bums Perfectionism Scale (BPS), 116, 121,
123,175
Causal attributions, 37, 38
Characterological tendencies, 169-186
Childhood experiences, 23-25, 227
Christian scripture, 8
Cognitive and cognitive-behavioral
theories, 34-38
Cognitive complexity, 169
Compulsive Activity Checklist (CAC), 179
Conscientiousness, 43, 44, 79, 81, 89, 95,
190, 199, 201-204, 213, 227
Conditioning, 28-30
Conflict theory of decision making, 61
Coping, 164-166, 178
Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations
(CISS), 164-166
Cortical arousel, 213
Costlbenefits analysis, 6
Counseling, 112, 155, 218, 219, 242, 243
Covert negativeness, 68
Cross-cultural considerations, 107-109

265

266

INDEX

Death,23
Decisional Procrastination Scale (DPS), 178,

179
Definitions
with irrationality, 7
moral dimension in, 8
multidimensional,11-12
operational, 9-11
with temporal emphasis,S, 6
Dejection, 99-107
Dementia, 22
Depression, 9, 51, 53, 117, 133, 134, 137167, 194, 195
and anxiety, 38, 39
and low self-esteem, 38, 39
unipolar, 17-18
Developmental approach, 237, 238
Diligence, 64
DispOSitional tendencies, 36, 37
Doing It Now, 204-210
Dominance, 52
OSM-III-R, 17, 115, 171, 176, 183, 209
DSM-N, 19
Dysfunctional beliefs, 144
Dyslexia, 195
Dysphoric affect, 68
Educational research, 238
Ego-dystOniC cognition, 11
Ego involvement, 130-131, 170
Egyptians, 4
Emergency rooms, 6
Energy levels, 52, 59
English Achievement Test, 41
Everyday procrastination, 56-70
Expected values, 6
Experimental psychology, 243-245
Extinction, 25
Extraversion, 42-44
Family, 114-116, 232, 233
Fear, 170
Fear of failure, 35, 51, 54, 73-76, 82, 92,
93, 118, Ul, 123, 139
Flinders University's Decisional
Procrastination Scale, 49, 61-63
Fluid consumption, 131
Forgetfulness, 181
Frontal lobe, 45

Freud, Sigmund, 22
Frustration, 52
Gender differences, 140
General anxiety disorder, 17-18
General Hassles Inventory (GHI), 152
General Procrastination Scale (GPS), 46,
49, 56-61, 76, 121, 123, 140, 141, 151,
152
Greco-Roman civilization, 8
Group therapy, 190, 204-210, 215, 216
Hassles, 150, 151
Hassles and Uplifts Scale, 151
Hassles Scale, 150, 151
Humiliation, 170
HypothalamiC pituitary adrenal axis, 45
Impatience, 62
Impulsivity, 42-43, 199, 213
Incest, 25
Indecisiveness, 59, 62
Industrial/organizational psychology, 239,
240
Identity style, 63
Individual differences, 34
Individual therapy, 208, 209
Industrial ReVolution, 4
Intelligence, 40-43
Irrational beliefs, 35-36, 51
Irrational cognitions, 51, 72, 73
Learned Helplessness, 37, 38
Leaming theory, 26
Life Experiences Survey (LES), 151
Life satisfaction, 68, 69
Life stress, 148-156
Locus of control, 37, 38, 62, 118
Low-threat situations, 130-132
Lynfield Obsessional/Compulsive
Questionnaire, 174, 180-183
Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale,
175
Measurement, 84-90
Medical procrastination,31
Meta-analysis, 187-189
Memory loss, 181
Minnesota MultiphasiC Personality
Inventory (MMPI), 194, 199, 231

INDEX
Monoamine oxidase inhibitors, 221
Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale
(MPS),120
Need achievement, 80, 81
Need for achievement, 58
Neobehaviorism, 22
NEO-PI-R, 43-44, 120
Neurotic avoidance, 190
Neurotic disorganization, 58, 59
Neuroticism, 39, 44, 45, 79, 81, 89, 149, 150
New Testament, 8
Noncompetitiveness, 62
Obsessive compulsive disordet; 18, 173-185
Operant conditioning, 84
Optimism, 59, 163, 164
Organization, 58
Overarousel, 46

Oxford English Dictionary (OED), 4

Parental expectancies, 126-130

Passive aggression, 25, 132, 171-173
Path analysis, 93-95, 122
Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ),
141,142
Perceived incompetence, 68
Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), 151
Perectionism,38,59,6O,113-136,139,144,173
Perfonnance evaluation, 145
Permissive parenting, 24
Personal Projects Analysis, 103, 104
Personality disorders, 18-19, 117, 169-186, 195
Personality Disorders Questionnaire, 19
Personality Research Form (PRF), 43
Personological explanations, 40-45
Personality psychology, 240, 241
Personalized systems of instruction, 32-34,
41
Pessimism, 149, 163, 164
Phobias, 17, 18, 30, 31
Positive and Negative Affect Scales
(PANAS), 105, 106, 110
Post-traumatic stress disorder, 17
Prefrontal lobe, 45
Prinicpal components analysis, 150
Private self-consciousness, 36, 37
Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students
(PASS), 48-52, 76, 121, 122, 123, 138,
139,154

267
Procrastination Checklist Study Tasks
(PCS), 76, 84-85
Psychoanalytic perspective, 22
Psychodynamic theories, 23-25, 218
Psychodynamic treatment, 228-232
Psychological adjustment, 156-160
Psychopharmacology, 219-221
Psychoticism, 45
Punctuality, 51
Punishment, 27, 31
Rationalization, 59, 61
Reaction to Tests Scale, 141
Rebelliousness, 58
Reinforcement theory, 26-28
Risk management, 6
Rotter's Locus of Control Scale, 37
Schizophrenia, 9, 17, 223
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), 22, 41, 191,
192
Self-actualization, 117
Self-appraisal, 146
Self-concealment, 146
Self-concept, 52, 147
Self-consciousness, 59, 62, 63, 143, 162
Self-confidence, 50, 51, 139, 169
Self-control, 119
Self-discrepancy, 97-100
Self-efficacy, 36, 55, 125, 143, 198, 199, 206
Self-esteem, 51, 59, 62, 66, 74, 139, 143, 169
Self-evaluation, 143-148
Self-expectancies,125
Self-handicapping, SO, 51, 59, 62, 63, 143,
146, 148, 162
Self-help books, 24
Self-monitoring, 62
Self-presentation, 59, 60, 146
Self-regulation, 68, 109, 110, 125, 134
Self-report measures, 47-70
of academic procrastination, 48-52
of everyday procrastination, 56-70
Self-socialization, 161
Self-statements, 36, 37
Self-uncertainty, 158-160
Self-worth, 80, 81
Shipley Intelligence Test, 41
Shopping, 15, 60, 66
Social approval, 145
Social comparison, 59, 60, 147, 160, 161

268
Social desirability, 176

Social psychology, 241, 242

Specious rewards, 31, 32
Stress, 224
Strong's Procrastination Log, 76
Structured Clinical Interview of the
Diagnosis (SCIDS), 19
Student Worry Scale (SWS), 141, 142
Study Problems Questionnaire (SPQ), 76,
86-90
Substance abuse, 9, 17, 18, 225, 226
Symptom-Checklist-90-R (SClr90-R), 154

Task aversiveness, 51, 54, 68

Thsk plan, 202
Thxes,10
'leI-Aviv Procrastination Inventory, 49, 67-69
Telephone survey, 15

INDEX
Temperamental explanations, 40-45
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), 40
Thrill-seeking, 46, 60
Tune dependency, 90-93
Tune management, 79, 84, 188
Time perception, 44, 45
'frait procrastination, 97-112
1i'eatment length, 216-218
'Iiicyclic antidepressents, 220, 221
Tuckman's Procrastination Scale, 49, 54-56
Type A behavim; 53, 68, 118, 224
Underarousal, 46

Webster New Collegiate Dictionary, 8

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test (WAIS),
22,192,193
Worry Domains Questionnaire (WPQ), 142