Comparing active delay and procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.005Get rights and content

Abstract

Researchers have proposed that the act of postponing academic work may be divided into a traditional definition of procrastination, viewed as maladaptive, and adaptive forms of delay. Adaptive forms of delay may be more consistent with certain facets of self-regulated learning. The current study investigated this issue by examining whether the relations between aspects of self-regulated learning and active delay may be distinct from the relations these aspects of self-regulated learning have with procrastination. Among 206 undergraduates, procrastination was positively predicted by mastery-avoidance goals and negatively by metacognitive strategy usage, whereas active delay was negatively predicted by avoidance goals and positively by self-efficacy. Furthermore, students who reported higher levels of active delay also received better grades. These findings provide support that active delay is a distinct form of delay from procrastination that may be more positive due to its associations with some adaptive self-regulatory processes and academic achievement.

Highlights

► We examined active delay; a form of delay different from procrastination. ► Some adaptive self-regulated learning facets were related to active delay. ► Active delay and procrastination were inversely related. ► Achievement goals related differently to active delay vs. procrastination. ► Active delay was positively associated with grades; procrastination was not.

Section snippets

Distinguishing procrastination and active delay

Contrasting the irrational nature of procrastination, researchers have acknowledged that postponing a task can sometimes be an intentional and rational decision (Schouwenburg, 2004, Simpson and Pychyl, 2009). Examples of potentially adaptive types of delay include when individuals postpone a task because they have prioritized other more important tasks or when more information/resources are needed before the target task is executed (Ferrari, 2010). Other adaptive reasons for delaying work

Motivational beliefs and procrastination

Perhaps due to procrastination being characterized as a type of self-regulatory failure, a logical direction research has taken is to examine this phenomenon within a self-regulated learning framework. Common motivational beliefs examined within a self-regulated learning perspective are achievement goals and self-efficacy (e.g., Wolters, 2003).

Achievement goals reflect four different purposes for engaging in achievement behaviors: mastery-approach (learning content), mastery-avoidance (avoiding

The current study

No studies identified to date have examined active delay within a self-regulated learning framework. Therefore, we examined whether the relations between aspects of self-regulated learning (i.e., achievement goals) and active delay would be distinct from the relations these aspects of self-regulated learning have with procrastination. Since procrastination typically is associated with less desirable motivational beliefs and lower strategy usage, we hypothesized that active delay would relate to

Participants

Participants were 206 (74% female; mean age = 24.4; S.D. = 5.5) college students enrolled in a section of a human development course across three different semesters. The sample was ethnically diverse: Hispanic (26%), Caucasian (28%), African American (22%), Asian/Asian American (20%), and Other (4%). Each course section utilized the same syllabus and curriculum, and we controlled for semester in the analyses.

Procedure

Participants completed an online survey consisting of demographics and Likert-scaled items

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations

Alpha coefficients, descriptive statistics, and correlations among the main variables are reported in Table 1. Pearson correlations indicate that active delay was significantly related to four out of five motivational variables and cognitive and metacognitive strategies. As expected, students with greater self-efficacy (r = .16, p < .05) were more likely to report actively delaying, and students who adopted mastery-avoidance (r = −.54, p < .001) and performance-avoidance goals (r = −.19, p < .01) were less

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine whether active delay could be distinguished from procrastination and would be more consistent with certain facets of self-regulated learning. Our results add credence to the notion that active delay differs from procrastination and may be a more adaptive form of delay. This is supported by three main findings: a) active delay and procrastination were found to be inversely related, b) procrastination was negatively related to adaptive self-regulatory

References (35)

  • J.N. Choi et al.

    Why not procrastinate? Development and validation of a new active procrastination scale

    The Journal of Social Psychology

    (2009)
  • A.H. Chu et al.

    Rethinking procrastination: Positive effects of “active” procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance

    The Journal of Social Psychology

    (2005)
  • S. Dewitt et al.

    Procrastination, temptations, and incentives: The struggle between the present and the future in procrastinators and the punctual

    European Journal of Personality

    (2002)
  • J. Díaz-Morales et al.

    Factorial structure of three procrastination scales with a Spanish adult population

    European Journal of Psychological Assessment

    (2006)
  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2001)
  • A. Elliot et al.

    On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application

    Journal of Educational Psychology

    (2008)
  • S. Eun Hee

    The relationship of procrastination with a mastery goal versus an avoidance goal

    Social Behavior & Personality

    (2009)
  • Cited by (117)

    • Big Five personality traits predicting active procrastination at work: When self- and supervisor-ratings tell different stories

      2022, Journal of Research in Personality
      Citation Excerpt :

      Indeed, in a qualitative study by Schraw et al. (2007), several students reported that they intentionally delayed some tasks simply because they affectively preferred the peak experience while cramming (Brinthaupt & Shin, 2001; Sommer, 1990; Vacha & McBride, 1993) which often involves a sustained state of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Also owing to their general positivity and optimism, extroverts tend to feel confident about achieving satisfactory outcomes within deadlines (Chu & Choi, 2005; Corkin et al., 2011; Klassen et al., 2008; Lindt et al., 2014; Schraw et al., 2007), which is another key defining feature of AP. Emotional Stability is another positive predictor because this trait allows active procrastinators to remain calm to perform the delayed tasks at the last minute, whereas those with low emotional stability (or high neuroticism) may not engage in AP to avoid the risks of experiencing such negative emotions as anxiety/stress under time pressure (Choi & Moran, 2009; Corkin et al., 2011; Ferrari, 2001; Strunk et al., 2018).

    • The effect of self-regulated writing strategies on students’ L2 writing engagement and disengagement behaviors

      2022, System
      Citation Excerpt :

      Action is the defining characteristic of learner engagement because learning requires active involvement on the part of the learner (Hiver et al., 2021a). Some researchers, though not all, consider the use of SRL strategies as a key indicator of engagement: the active deployment of SRL strategies is related mostly to the subdomain of cognitive engagement (Fredricks et al., 2004). The strong connection between these two constructs suggests that research on SRL and student engagement can, and should, be integrated to a greater extent (Wolters & Taylor, 2012).

    • Procrastination vs. Active Delay: How Students Prepare to Code in Introductory Programming

      2024, SIGCSE 2024 - Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Tel.: + 1 713 743 9822; fax: +1 713 743 4996.

    View full text