Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ObjectiveTaking Beswick, Rothblum, and Mann's seminal paper on academic procrastination as a starting point, we provide an updated review of academic procrastination and consolidate this knowledge with a procrastination typology. The goal of our study was to show that while the degree of procrastination is largely contingent on the trait of conscientiousness, the other four major personality traits determine how procrastination manifests. According to implications of need theory, we operationalised these four traits by the reasons students gave and the activities students pursued while procrastinating.MethodParticipants were 167 students of an undergraduate introductory psychology course. It was designed as a self‐directed computerised course enabled considerable amounts of procrastination. Students filled out a Big Five Inventory and wrote a short essay detailing: (a) what reason they saw as causing them to procrastinate, and (b) what activities they pursued while procrastinating. The reasons and activities were coded according to their fit to the personality traits.ResultsConscientiousness and its facets were the strongest correlates with procrastination. Moreover, in regression analyses, the other personality traits did not incrementally predict procrastination. However, the reasons ascribed to procrastination and the off‐task activities pursued reflected the other personality traits.ConclusionWhile conscientiousness is the core for all procrastination types, the other personality traits determine its phenomenology. Thus, the prominent understanding of a neurotic procrastinator might be misleading for research and practice. In fact, counsellors need to first address the conscientiousness core of procrastination and then match the subsequent interventions to the specific procrastination type.
Steel et al. (Wed,) studied this question.