Procrastination: Associations with achievement goal orientation and learning strategies

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.017Get rights and content

Abstract

Conceptualizations of procrastination as self-regulation failure have received considerable empirical support. However, procrastination has only occasionally been examined in relation to variables emphasized in models of self-regulated learning. We examined relations between procrastination, achievement goal orientations, and learning strategies. One hundred and seventy undergraduates completed measures of procrastination, goal orientation, and learning strategies usage. Bivariate correlations revealed that procrastination related negatively to a mastery-approach goal orientation and positively to a mastery-avoidance goal orientation. Procrastination was also related to greater disorganization and less use of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies. Multiple regression analyses revealed that disorganization and cognitive strategies usage were most predictive of procrastination. Results are interpreted within a self-regulation perspective.

Introduction

Procrastination is the tendency to delay initiation or completion of important tasks to the point of discomfort (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). Procrastination is increasingly viewed as involving a failure in self-regulation, defined as the ability to exert control over thoughts, emotions, impulses, and task performances in regard to preferred standards (Vohs & Baumeister, 2004). Self-regulation failure is implicated, for example, when procrastinators reveal a tendency toward temporal discounting, wherein the value of distant, large rewards is downplayed relative to more immediately available, smaller rewards (Dewitte and Schouwenburg, 2002, Howell et al., 2006, Schouwenburg, 2004, Schouwenburg and Groenewoud, 2001, Steel, in press). According to Temporal Motivation Theory (Steel, in press), procrastination reflects features of situations which promote temporal discounting, such as delayed rewards and task aversiveness, as well as personal characteristics which promote temporal discounting, such as low trait Conscientiousness and associated attributes including low self-control, disorganization, an intention-action gap, and low achievement motivation.

Characteristics of self-regulation failure in procrastination, such as low achievement motivation and disorganization, invoke concepts central to models of self-regulated learning. As defined by Pintrich (2000b), self-regulated learning refers to the “active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behaviour, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment” (p. 453). The nomological net of procrastination has only occasionally been extended to variables emphasized in models of self-regulated learning (e.g., Schouwenburg, 2004). In the current research, we examined procrastination in relation to two such variables: achievement goal orientation and learning strategies usage.

The achievement goal framework posits that students differ from each other in the purpose of their achievement behaviour and that these differences are associated with distinctive emotional, motivational, cognitive, and behavioural outcomes (e.g., Covington, 2000, Elliot, 2005, Pintrich, 2000b). Most recently, Elliot and McGregor (2001) conceptualized a “2 × 2 achievement goal framework”, in which four types of goal orientation are derived by combining a mastery versus performance dimension and an approach versus avoidance dimension. The mastery-approach goal orientation describes those seeking to learn all there is to learn; the mastery-avoidance orientation (newly added to the achievement goal taxonomy) describes those motivated to avoid not learning what there is to learn; the performance-approach orientation describes those motivated to perform better than their peers; and the performance-avoidance orientation describes those looking to avoid performing poorly relative to others.

Procrastination should be inversely correlated with approach goal orientations, given that approach orientations, especially mastery-approach, are associated with relatively adaptive self-regulatory processes including perceived competence and need for achievement (Moller & Elliot, in press). These processes may reduce the tendency to engage in temporal discounting (e.g., by reducing task aversiveness or by providing short-term rewards for diligent work). In past research, procrastination has been shown to correlate negatively with a general mastery orientation (i.e., making no distinction between approach and avoidance forms; Scher and Osterman, 2002, Wolters, 2003, Wolters, 2004; but see McGregor & Elliot, 2002, Study 2 for a null finding). A performance-approach orientation has emerged as uncorrelated with procrastination (McGregor and Elliot, 2002, Wolters, 2004) or as positively correlated with procrastination (Wolters, 2003). Finally, self-handicapping, a significant correlate of procrastination (van Eerde, 2003), negatively correlates with a general mastery orientation and a performance-approach orientation (e.g., Pintrich, 2000a).

Procrastination should correlate positively with avoidance forms of goal orientation, given that such orientations are associated with relatively maladaptive self-regulatory processes rooted in concerns about failure and incompetence (Moller & Elliot, in press), processes which may facilitate temporal discounting (e.g., by enhancing task aversiveness). Empirically, no research has examined procrastination in relation to the mastery-avoidance orientation. However, Elliot and McGregor (2001) showed that a mastery-avoidance orientation correlated with fear of failure and related traits, suggesting that such goals may be associated with greater procrastination (Ferrari, 2004, Steel, in press). Procrastination correlates positively with a performance-avoidance orientation (McGregor and Elliot, 2002, Wolters, 2003, Wolters, 2004). Finally, self-handicapping positively correlates with a performance-avoidance orientation (e.g., Urdan, 2004).

The achievement goal framework posits that one consequence of goal orientation adoption is differential usage of various strategies for learning (e.g., Pintrich, 2000b). Therefore, learning strategies are a second domain relevant to self-regulated learning and, potentially, to procrastination. Learning strategies are “mental processes that learners can deliberately recruit to help themselves learn and understand something new” (Resnick, cited in Brandt, 1988–1999, p. 12) and are frequently operationalized with measures of disorganization (i.e., whether a methodical approach to learning is adopted), deep versus surface processing (i.e., whether new knowledge is carefully evaluated and integrated vs. merely rehearsed and memorized; Entwistle & Ramsden, 1983), or usage of various cognitive (e.g., rehearsal and elaboration) and meta-cognitive (e.g., planning and regulating) strategies (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1993). Given the effortful and time-consuming nature of learning strategies, students who are relatively unmotivated toward distant tasks may resort to the use of such strategies less often. Indeed, Schouwenburg (2004) showed that procrastination is inversely correlated with adoption of a systematic and disciplined approach to one’s work and with planning and managing of one’s time, suggestive of poor organization. Organization, as a component of trait Conscientiousness, is also inversely correlated with procrastination (Steel, in press, van Eerde, 2004). Finally, Wolters, 2003, Wolters, 2004 showed that procrastination correlates with low use of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies. Thus, some evidence of associations between learning strategies usage and procrastination has emerged, although additional associations (e.g., with deep vs. surface processing) have yet to be tested.

Only Wolters (2003) has examined both achievement goal orientation and learning strategies usage in relation to undergraduates’ procrastination tendencies. However, no study has examined procrastination in relation to all four achievement goal orientations comprising the 2 × 2 achievement goal taxonomy. Also, few studies have examined procrastination in relation to a variety of learning strategies. Finally, research on procrastination and self-regulated learning has thus far measured procrastination with small numbers of face-valid items emphasizing task postponement but not the adverse impact of such postponement on functioning (Wolters, 2003; see Scher & Osterman, 2002, for an exception). We therefore employed validated self-report measures of procrastination in order to determine relationships with the achievement goal orientations composing the 2 × 2 taxonomy and a diverse set of learning strategies. We predicted that procrastination would inversely correlate with the mastery-approach and performance-approach goal orientations and would positively correlate with the mastery-avoidance and performance-avoidance goal orientations. We also predicted that procrastination would correlate with less use of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies, less deep and more superficial information processing, and greater disorganization.

Section snippets

Participants

Participants were 170 introductory psychology students at a 4-year undergraduate college in Canada, of which 119 were female and 49 were male; 2 participants did not specify their sex. Ages ranged from 17 to 47 years (M = 20.13, SD = 3.92). Students were enrolled in one of four course sections, in which grades were based on absolute cut-offs.

Measures

On the 12-item Procrastination Assessment Scale – Students (PASS; Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), students rated the extent to which they procrastinate in six

Descriptive statistics for measures

Results were analyzed using SPSS for Windows, Release 11.5.1. Descriptive statistics for all measures are reported in Table 1. Reliability coefficients were above .80, with the exception of the deep and surface processing scales and the performance-avoidance goal orientation scale. Age was not a correlate of any of the variables listed in Table 1. Women scored higher than men on performance-avoidance goal orientation (M = 5.59, SD = 1.13 vs. M = 5.12, SD = 1.41; t(166) = 2.25, p < .05), meta-cognitive

Discussion

Procrastination was negatively associated with the mastery-approach orientation and positively associated with the mastery-avoidance orientation, as predicted. Students who adopted the goal of learning everything there is to learn tended not to procrastinate, whereas those who adopted the goal of avoiding failing to learn what there is to learn tended to procrastinate. These findings speak to the importance of separately assessing the approach and avoidance forms of mastery orientation when

References (33)

  • P.J. Corr

    Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality

    Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews

    (2004)
  • A.J. Howell et al.

    Academic procrastination: the pattern and correlates of behavioural postponement

    Personality and Individual Differences

    (2006)
  • H.C. Schouwenburg et al.

    Study motivation under social temptation: effects of trait procrastination

    Personality and Individual Differences

    (2001)
  • W. van Eerde

    A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination

    Personality and Individual Differences

    (2003)
  • D. Ariely et al.

    Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: self-control by precommitment

    Psychological Science

    (2002)
  • R. Brandt

    On learning research: a conversation with Lauren Resnick

    Educational Leadership

    (1988–1999)
  • A.H.C. Chu et al.

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

    Journal of Social Psychology

    (2005)
  • M.V. Covington

    Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: an integrative review

    Annual Review of Psychology

    (2000)
  • F. Cury et al.

    The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2006)
  • S. Dewitte et al.

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

    European Journal of Personality

    (2002)
  • A.J. Elliot

    A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct

  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: a mediational analysis

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1996)
  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2001)
  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance

    Journal of Educational Psychology

    (1999)
  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: approach and avoidance temperaments and goals

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2002)
  • N.J. Entwistle et al.

    Understanding student learning

    (1983)
  • Cited by (273)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text