Procrastination, the purposive delay in the beginning or completion of an intended act (Ferrari, 1998), is a highly prevalent phenomenon, especially in the academic context. In questionnaire studies two different types of procrastination have been identified (Ferrari, 1992; Schouwenburg, 1995): arousal and avoidance procrastination. However, we believe that research on procrastination could profit from a qualitative approach considering more antecedents and, particularly, consequences of procrastination. In an interview study with 29 university students we were able to identify 18 kinds of antecedents and 17 kinds of consequences of procrastination (e.g. social antecedents and consequences, antecedents associated with competence-related antecedents and positive consequences). The results of the study provide a starting point for the conceptualisation of a more comprehensive taxonomy of procrastination behaviour and for the development of interventions tailored to different types of procrastination.

Theoretical Background and Aims

Procrastination, the purposive delay in the beginning or completion of an intended act (Ferrari, 1998), is a highly prevalent phenomenon in a variety of contexts. In the university context academic procrastination is especially widespread with 70% of polled university students describing procrastination as a serious handicap for their studying (cf. Díaz-Morales, Ferrari, Argumedo, & Díaz, 2006; Ferrari, 2005; Harriot & Ferrari, 1996).

In questionnaire studies two different types of procrastination have been identified and can be measured reliably and validly (e.g. Ferrari, 1992). Arousal procrastinators delay tasks for thrill-seeking reasons, while avoidance procrastinators delay tasks due to imaged or actual fears associated with the performance of the task (Ferrari, 1998). Other researchers (e.g. Schouwenburg, 1995) have postulated a similar distinction. These distinctions have focused on two antecedents, namely arousal and fear. In our study we try to extend the existing conception of procrastination by identifying additional antecedents. Moreover, we believe that a comprehensive typology of procrastination should also encompass the consequences of procrastination behaviour. Therefore, we opted for a qualitative approach since it promises to reveal the potentially multi-faceted character of procrastination more adequately than quantitative studies.

Methods

Sample. Participants were 29 university students (mean age = 23.2; SD = 2.8), 18 of which were female. Participants were enrolled in 17 different fields of study and had been studying for 5 semesters on average (Min = 2; Max = 14). Participants were recruited on the university campus.

Procedure. Two trained interviewers kept to a semi-structured interview guide covering general beliefs concerning procrastination and procrastination experiences as well as assumed antecedents and consequences of personal procrastination behaviour. In this contribution we focus on the latter ones. The interviews took about 25 min on average and were recorded digitally.

Analyses. The interviews were content analysed in regard to assumed antecedents and consequences of the individual procrastination tendency. All interviews were transcribed and segmented into a total of 2483 idea units. In an iterative process of deduction and induction a system of ultimately 35 categories was developed. Intercoder agreement based on a sample of 588 segments was good (Cohen’s Kappa = .84).

Results

We were able to identify 18 kinds of antecedents and 17 kinds of consequences of procrastination. In regard to the different antecedents of procrastination the structure of the interview data suggests discriminating between situational antecedents and those mainly associated with personal attributes.

Personal antecedents. Personal antecedents could be organised into motivational antecedents (e.g. intrinsic or extrinsic incentives, interests, perceived task importance), volitional antecedents (e.g. self-discipline, ability to shield intention implementations against temptations), emotional antecedents (e.g. fear) and competence-related shortcomings (e.g. estimation of needed time, time management, procedural task competence). Additionally, trait-related aspects like laziness, decision-making difficulties, and preference for spontaneous a life style were also mentioned by the students.

Situational antecedents. With regard to situational antecedents of procrastination students’ statements could be categorised into social antecedents (e.g. individual task vs. group task, attitudes of peers to procrastination), antecedents of external structure (e.g. amount of other tasks, degree of external structure) and task inherent antecedents (e.g. task inherent incentives, task difficulty or pleasantness) that may lead to procrastination behaviour.

Consequences of procrastination. Consequences of procrastination were found in seven different domains: affective consequences (e.g. dissatisfaction, bad consciousness, negative mood, thrill seeking), cognitive consequences (e.g. rumination), consequences accounted for by the interaction of cognition and affect (e.g. stress, regret) physiological consequences (e.g. sleeplessness, sweating), behavioural consequences (e.g. restlessness, fidgeting), consequences related to performance level (e.g. less effective studying, more effective studying, duration of studying, grades) and social consequences (e.g. lack of agreeableness and lack of reliability as perceived by others). For all domains, participants named positive and negative consequences, the latter being predominant. In contrast to previous studies, all consequences were rather proximal than distal in nature. Interestingly, a rather large amount of statements indicated that students experience no consequences of their procrastination behaviour at all.

Discussion

In addition to well-known antecedents (e.g. fear, arousal; Ferrari, 1998) being discussed in literature concerning types of procrastination, the results of the study expand the spectrum of existing distinctions by establishing new antecedents of procrastination, like social antecedents and competence-related antecedents. Furthermore, many consequences of procrastination identified in this study, like social consequences, could be used to develop a more comprehensive taxonomy of types of procrastination. Future research should also take into account those patterns of procrastination that do not have any consequences at all or even positive ones – challenging the predominantly negative view on procrastination.

Finally, the differentiated view suggested by the results may serve as a promising starting point for tailored interventions. Students may profit from tailored interventions in that they receive the interventions that are suited best for their specific pattern of procrastination behaviour.

References

Díaz-Morales, J. F., Ferrari, J. R., Argumedo, D. & Díaz, K. (2006). Procrastination and demographic characteristics in Spanish adults: Further evidence. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(5), 629-633.

Ferrari, J. R. (1992). Psychometric validation of two procrastination inventories for adults: Arousal and avoidance measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 14(2), 97-110.

Ferrari, J. R. (1998). Procrastination. In H. Friedman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mental health (Vol. 3, S. 281-287). San Diego: Academic Press.

Ferrari, J. R. (2005). Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays among adults. North American Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 1-16.

Harriot, J. & Ferrari, J. R. (1996). Prevalence of procrastination among samples of adults. Psychological Reports, 78, 611-616.