More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

305M. Stolarski et al. (eds.), Time Perspective Theory, Review, Research and Application: Essays in Honor of Philip G. Zimbardo, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-07368-2_20,© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

People in Western cultures adopt “usually” long-term educational, financial, and health goals, engaging in planned activities and, in general, that are future oriented (Schmuck and Sheldon 2001). These activities are related to many positive conse-quences, such as higher socio-economic status, superior academic achievement, less sensation seeking, and fewer health risk behaviour (Zimbardo and Boyd 1999). On the contrary, the lack of engagement in planned or future oriented behaviours is associated with negative consequences. Most likely, one negative consequence related to poor future planned behaviour is chronic procrastination, the purposive and frequent delay in beginning or completing a task to the point of experiencing subjective discomfort (Ferrari et al. 1995). People who procrastinate do not work on-task and as a result, “feel bad” (anxiety, regret) from their delaying tactics. Procrastination may include substantial impairment in personal, academic, and occupational functioning (Ferrari 2010). People who are procrastinators are often viewed (even by other procrastinators) as bad, harmful or foolish in nature (Ferrari and Patel 2004; Ferrari and Pychyl 2012; Van Eerde 2003). Research has shown that procrastination can result in poor academic performance, experiencing negative emotions such as shame and guilt about oneself, depression, and negative health behaviors, such as delaying seeking care for health problems (Steel 2007; Sirois et al. 2003).

Procrastination is also typically viewed as being volitional; that is, it involves the voluntary choice of one behavior or task over other competing options, and, second, although the concept of procrastination remains closely related to meeting

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

Juan Francisco Díaz-Morales and Joseph R. Ferrari

J.F. Díaz-Morales (*) Individual Differences and Work Department, Faculty of Psychology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spaine-mail: [email protected]

J.R. Ferrari DePaul University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USAe-mail: [email protected]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

306

deadlines within a specific timeframe, studies have also demonstrated that chronic procrastination is related to a number of affective, behavioral, and cognitive charac-teristics reflecting more than inefficient time management (Ferrari and Pychyl 2000).

Although procrastination, or putting off until tomorrow what one should do today, is a phenomenon well-known for thousands of years, it is only recently that systematic research was conducted with respect to its manifestations, causes, con-sequences, and cures (Schouwenburg et al. 2004). The first scientific studies date only from the mid 1980s (Lay 1986), and the first scholarly book summarizing research results in the area dates to 1995 (Ferrari et al. 1995). Next, three relevant contributions were realized: one special issue in the Journal of Social Behavior and Personality (Ferrari and Pychyl 2000), a book about academic procrastination (Schouwenburg et al. 2004), and the recent Ferrari’s book (Ferrari 2010), which reviewed for popular use more than 25 years of research about the causes, conse-quences and cures on this topic.

Procrastination typically is defined as a voluntary delay of an individual’s intended action toward some task despite foreseeable negative consequences and a potentially overall worse outcome (Ferrari 2010). But, what do we know about this complex tendency? What is the relationship between procrastination and time per-spective? In this chapter we present the principal characteristics notes of procrasti-nation (concept and definition, measure and some correlates) and the results of recent research related to procrastination and Time Perspective (TP).

The Nature of Procrastination

The term procrastination come from the Latin procrastinates, which literally means “forward tomorrow” and it has been defined as purposively delaying an intended course of action to the point of experiencing subjective discomfort (Ferrari et al. 1995). Definitions of procrastination have included similar items: time delay and discomfort or wrong with this behavior. For instance, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) suggested that because definitions of procrastination stress both behavioral delay and psychological distress, the degree of procrastination and the degree to which it presents a problem should be considered together. From this point of view, procrastination has been defined as an irrational tendency to delay tasks that should be completed (Lay 1986), as the unnecessary delaying of activities that one ulti-mately intends to complete, especially when done to the point of creating emotional discomfort (Lay and Schouwenburg 1993). Schouwenburg et al. (2004) suggested that procrastination referred to as postponing of tasks is inferred from the behavioral manifestations including lack of promptness either in intention or behavior, whereas Steel (2007) consider procrastination as “voluntarily delay an intended course of action despite expecting to be worse off for the delay”.

One cognitive process related to the voluntary delay of start/completing tasks or the poor realization of action–intention program has been indecision, or decisional

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

307

procrastination. Indecision may drive chronic behavioral procrastinators to create excuses to justify why they do not focus on a target behavior. If you are a procrasti-nator, the delay seems logical and justifiable; however from an external point of view is irrational and can damage other people’s perception of you (Ferrari 2010). According to the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991) attitudes are not strong predictors of what people doing, but they predict intention. Subsequently, behav-ioral intention is the best predictor of behavior, a much better predictor of an action that simply one’s attitude is. Lay (1986) claimed that procrastination is a function of the behavioral intention-behavior gap: procrastinators fail to move forward with their intentions. When people fail to “mind the gap” and not realize their goals, they could made different logical raisons such as excuses or regrets and also self- sabotage actions or rebellions against others (Ferrari 1991a, 2010; Ferrari and Pychyl 2000).

Obviously, individuals who see themselves as procrastinators often wish to reduce it by setting realistic goals and deadlines in order to complete tasks in a rea-sonable time frame, which always is underestimated (Ariely and Wertenbroch 2002). Non-procrastinators, in contrast, are individuals who perform most tasks in a timely manner. Studies indicated that chronic procrastination is related to a variety of personality variables, including low states of self-confidence and self-esteem (Ferrari and Díaz-Morales 2007b) and high states of depression, neurosis, self- awareness, social anxiety, forgetfulness, disorganization, non-competitiveness, dys-functional impulsivity, behavioral rigidity, and lack of energy (Burka and Yuen 1983; Ferrari et al. 1995; Ferrari and Pychyl 2000). Procrastination has been linked to two main personality traits, high neuroticism and low conscientiousness, specifi-cally low self-discipline (Schouwenburg and Lay 1995). Also, procrastination has been characterized by a personality style profile of inaction and accommodation to circumstances created by others (motivational aims), avoidance tangible and con-crete information and preference by symbolic and unknown ideas (cognitive style), and unconventional/dissenting and seeking social stimulation (behavioral disposi-tion) (Díaz-Morales et al. 2008a).

Usually, people procrastinate as a way to avoid certain outcomes and situations (Haghbin et al. 2009). Also, procrastinators say that they procrastinate because it gives them a “thrill,” thinking that waiting until the last minute might seem adaptive and functional, although research has showed that they are wrong in their belief that they work best under pressure (Ferrari 2001). Recent research, however, proposed that the positive thrill experience reported by some procrastinators for waiting actu-ally may be state anxiety mislabeled to avoid confronting the delay (Simpson and Pychyl 2009). Placing procrastination among related concepts, Schouwenburg et al. (2004) considered procrastination as a concept clustering of related traits: trait pro-crastination, weak impulse control, lack of persistence, lack of work discipline, lack of time management skill, and the inability to work methodically (see also Díaz- Morales et al. 2006a).

Procrastination, therefore, appears as a complex phenomenon integrates cogni-tive, emotional and behavioral aspects, plus the temporal component that indicated the deadline to do the task (Ferrari 2010; Ferrari et al. 1995). Steel (2007) argued that procrastination is reflected in the equation E × V/ГD, where E = expectancy or

[AU1]

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

308

likelihood of an outcome occurring, V = value or desirability of an outcome, Г = sensitivity to time delays, and D = the time until a rewarding stimulus becomes available. According to this function, a pattern of temporal discounting characterizes procrastination, wherein the value of distant, large rewards is downplayed relative to more immediately available, smaller rewards. Using this conceptualization is suggested that procrastinators are less future oriented and more oriented to present. We return to this issue and discuss this idea later in this chapter.

Prevalence of Procrastination

Research over the past 25 years has shown that procrastination is a common prob-lem in the general population and reflective of a maladaptive style to life. Everyone procrastinates, but not everyone is a procrastinator. This sentence, included as headline inside the Ferrari’s book, reflects the difference between delaying an action, something that all people realize in some occasion, and postponing the task which must be done (see Ferrari 2010). If one delays to gather more information or postpones a decision because he or she needs to do something important before the target act, then theses strategies are not procrastination.

Procrastination affects virtually everyone to some degree. It involves knowing that a task must be performed, yet intentionally failing to motivate oneself to carry out the task within the desired time frame (Ackerman and Gross 2005). When pro-crastination is a chronic behavior, becomes a maladaptive lifestyle. As many as 20–25 % of normal, healthy adult men and women, were classified as chronic pro-crastinators, individuals who engage in a needless delay of relevant and timely tasks across situations and settings. One series of trans-cultural studies showed that in Australia, Peru, Spain, United Kingdom (UK), United States (US) and Venezuela, the prevalence of chronic procrastinators is around 15–20 % of people (Ferrari et al. 2004, 2007; Harriott and Ferrari 1996). Although the tendency toward delaying the start of completing of tasks is common among adults living in six countries, consis-tent with previous literature reviews (Van Eerde 2003), large and significant country effects emerged between countries when raw procrastination scores was examined: UK reported significantly higher chronic procrastination compared to adults from Peru, US, Spain, and Australia with the lowest reported tendencies among adults from Venezuela.

In general, studies showed that prevalence of procrastination is similar to men and women. Most studies found no significant difference by sex, although Van Eerde’s (2003) meta-analysis stated that tendency to procrastinate was more common among the male than female participants. However, sex/gender variables hasn’t been consi-dered until recently and it would be interesting to research how everyday or quotidian tasks associate to one of the two genders are related to procrastination (Özer et al. 2009). Regarding occupation, white-collar workers and professional employees tend to demonstrate higher levels of procrastination than blue-collar workers and unskilled employees (Díaz-Morales et al. 2006b; Hammer and Ferrari 2002).

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

309

Finally, regarding age, some studies showed a significant negative correlation between procrastination and age among adults (Ferrari et al. 2005; Hammer and Ferrari 2002), indicating that procrastination moderately decreases with age (i.e. r = −0.27, Díaz-Morales et al. 2008a; r = −0.19, Gupta et al. 2012). No diffe-rence has been found related to level of studies. It is important consider the age of samples includes in procrastination studies, because usually procrastination has been frequently studied among undergraduates and scarcely studied among adults (Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a).

Also, people may procrastinate in one life area, but not in other areas. An exam-ple of situational procrastination is academic procrastination. It is different from chronic or everyday procrastination. Academic procrastination among students is defined as the delay in studying or completing academic assignments (Solomon and Rothblum 1984). It has been estimated that procrastination is prevalent in about 70 % of college students on academic tasks such as studying, registering form classes, completing reading assignments, or keeping appointments with professors. In-depth analysis of academic procrastination may be found in other sources (see Ferrari 2010; Schowenburg et al. 2004).

Measure of Procrastination

During the 1990s of past siècle, several experimental or quasi-experimental studies were realized in real situations (see Ferrari et al. 1995). For example, in the work-place, employees were confronted with tasks in which they are either likely to fail (Lay 1990; Van Eerde 2003) or tasks that have open-ended deadlines (Ferrari 1992). Among students a common behavioral index of procrastination was the time of submitted course assignments relative to assignment due dates. Students who scored higher on procrastination were more likely to postpone submission of assignments than were students who scored lower on procrastination scale (Digdon and Howell 2008).

At present, several reliable and valid measures of chronic procrastination have been identified (see Ferrari et al. 1995, for actual items and psychometric properties of most chronic and academic self-report procrastination measures). Among adults the most frequently used scales has been the General Procrastination scale (GP; Lay 1986), the Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AIP; McCown et al. 1989), or the Decisional Procrastination scale (DP; Mann 1982). Among students, frequently used has been the Procrastination Assessment Scale -Student (PASS; Solomon and Rothblum 1984), the Aitken Procrastination Inventory (API; Aitken 1982), and the Tuckman Procrastination Scale (TPS; Tuckman 1991).

Procrastination scales by adults have been validated in different cultural contexts (Ferrari et al. 1995, 2009; Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a; Mariani and Ferrari 2012). Lay’s General Procrastination scale (GP, Lay 1986) measure dilatory behavior across different situations related to personality variables such as low self-control, rebelliousness, and extraversion. It is composed by 20 items such as “I am continually

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

310

saying I’ll do it tomorrow” and “When preparing to go out, I am seldom caught doing something at the last minute”. The GP scores on this scale have been related to external attributes or excuses for delays (Ferrari 1993) and poor performance when environmental stressors existed that heightened arousal at task deadlines (Ferrari 2001). Researchers typically found the scale to have a single factor struc-ture (Ferrari et al. 2005; Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a), although in Italian sample two factors has been identified (Mariani and Ferrari 2012). The Adult Inventory of Procrastination (AIP; McCown et al. 1989) measures chronic tendency to postpone tasks in various situations. It examines procrastination motivated by fears (e.g., suc-cess or failure), avoidance of disclosure of skill inabilities, and insecurities of per-formance (Ferrari 1991b). The AIP is composed of 15 items such as “I am not very good at meeting deadlines” and “I don’t get things done on time”. It is a global measure of frequent procrastination examining a variety of tasks in order to deflect potential disclosure of perceived inabilities and incompetence (Ferrari 1993) and self-relevant information about one’s skills and competence (Ferrari 1991b). Two factors were extracted from a Spanish sample of adults, labeled lack of punctuality and lack of planning (Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a), and among Turkish adult sample named positive aspects of avoidance and negative aspects of avoidance (Ferrari et al. 2009), whereas among Italian adult samples the AIP was considered as one- dimensional (Mariani and Ferrari 2012).

Whereas GP and AIP scales were developed to assess the frequency with which people postpone performing everyday behavioural tasks or activities, a more cogni-tive measure of procrastination (indecision) is evaluate by Decisional Procrastination Scale (DP, Mann 1982), described as the purposive delay in making decisions within some specific time frame (Effert and Ferrari 1989). It is a reliable and valid measure composes by five items such as “I delay making decisions until it is too late” or “I put off making decisions”.

Procrastination has been viewed both as a single trait dimension and as a com-plex trait composed of several component antecedents (Ferrari et al. 1995; Ferrari and Pychyl 2000). In this way, procrastination started to be analyzed from a multi-dimensional point of view. The logic was to analyze what is the dimensionality of more frequently procrastination scales. When factorial structure of the three com-bined scales was realized among Spanish adults by first time, four reliable compo-nents were identified (Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a). They may reflect four essential elements of trait procrastination that are conceptuality-relevant: dilatory behaviors, a summary of the predisposition to manifest intention behavior gaps; indecision, putting off making a decision within some specific time frame; lack of punctuality, such as an inability to work diligently on a task to meet its deadline; and lack of planning, a lack of self-discipline to stay focused on a target task. The principal component, dilatory behaviors, configures the most “pure” component of procrasti-nation because give count of the shared variance of the three scales of procrastina-tion (Díaz-Morales et al. 2006a).

Subsequently, Steel (2010) replicated a similar psychometric study with these three scales among English speakers and found three similar factors: general pro-crastination, rushing and appointment keeping, and promptness and doing tasks

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

311

immediately. Finally, Mariani and Ferrari (2012) tested different structure models using the same scales of procrastination. Not surprisingly, many different measures have been proposed to measures this needless and irrational delay, but from the beginning of research on procrastination, only recently the dimensionality of these scales has become to be analyzed.

Procrastination and Psychological Time

Time perspective (TP), an individuals’ understanding of one’s psychological past, present, and future, may be fundamental to understand human behaviour. The cog-nitive abilities to “travel through time” using one’s memory to move into the past or the imagination for the future may be considered to be a uniquely human capability (Sunddendorf and Corballis 1997). Past research has related either past, present or future orientations to psychological constructs such as well-being, optimism, con-trollability, self-direction or achievement motivation, and their effects to selected outcome behaviours (Zaleski 1994). The conceptualisation of how the perspective of future influences the self-regulation of behaviour has been stated from different theoretical approaches such as future possible selves (Markus and Nurius 1986), consideration of future consequences (Strathman et al. 1994), and anxiety of future (Zaleski 1996).

Time is constant: it does not fly! There are 24 h in a day, every day for 365 days a year. Time moves constantly. We can’t simply say, “time fly”, we must fly with it to take in all of the gusto and joy that life has to offer (Ferrari 2010). This implies, for example, that employees who organize their time in an effective manner will be perceived to be of greater value by employers, by virtue of the fact that they make a greater contribution to organizational efficiency. Procrastinators, in contrast, lead to increased employer costs by taking more time than necessary to complete requisite tasks. Deadlines play an important role in determining schedules for completing tasks and in guiding and focusing plans for action.

Although shown to be associated to affective, behavioral, and cognitive charac-teristics reflecting more than inefficient time management (Ferrari et al. 1995; Ferrari and Pychyl 2000), the concept of procrastination remains closely related to meeting deadlines within a specific timeframe. The existence of the approaching deadline may be, in itself, an important factor. However, procrastination is a cognitive- behavioral problem that is complex and has many intertwined roots. It is not merely a problem of time management.

Despite the obvious importance of time to procrastination, little research has examined this important relationship although the temporal component seems to be a key defining concept of procrastination. For instance, research indicated that chronic procrastinators compared to non-procrastinators spend less prepara-tion time on tasks that were likely to succeeded and more time on projects likely to fail (Lay 1990; Lay et al. 1989), tended to underestimate the overall time required to complete a task (McCown et al. 1987), spend less time searching for

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

312

information needed to complete tasks (Ferrari and Dovidio 2000), started aca-demics task (e.g. studying for exams) at the last minute (Lay and Burns 1991; Pychyl et al. 2000a), and are more “present-oriented” (Blatt and Quinlan 1967, in Ferrari et al. 1995).

Vodanovich and Seib (1997) indicated that individuals with a heightened ten-dency to procrastinate reported difficulties in structuring their time and viewed their use of time as less personally meaningful than non-procrastinators. Others empiri-cal studies on time management and procrastination found negative correlations (Lay 1992), and Lay and Schouwenburg (1993) hypothesized that time manage-ment was a mediator of the relation between procrastination and dilatory behavior. In a work-related context, Van Eerde (2003) showed that time management training increases the ability to manage time and decreases rates of preoccupation and procrastination.

Because procrastination is viewed as wasting time, time perspective has been studied in relation to procrastination. Chronic procrastinators prefer short-term activities (Ferrari and Emmons 1995; Lasane and Jones 2000; Pychyl et al. 2000a) avoiding or dismissing future goals in favor of reducing present tension (Baumeister 1997; Ferrari 2001) or seeking more immediate rewards (Pychyl et al. 2000b). In this way, chronic procrastinators look for immediate pleasurable rewards in the present time (Steel 2007). Time perspective represents an individual’s way of relat-ing to the psychological concepts of past, present, and future. Individuals use past, present, and future frames in encoding, storing, and recalling experienced events and in forming expectations, goals, and imaginative views (Boyd and Zimbardo 2005). Procrastination is conceptually representative of self-regulatory failure (Ferrari 2001) and consequently disables individuals from guiding their goal- directed activities across changing circumstances and over time (Karoly 1993).

Researchers demonstrated that dilatory behavior related stronger to a present orientation in comparison with a future orientation. An emphasis on future time orientation requires a long-time perspective. A person with this orientation may need longer time for important decisions, especially when there are long delays along the course of action. To determine the extent to which procrastination is asso-ciated with Time Perspective (i.e. past, present and future), Specter and Ferrari (2000) found that chronic procrastination in making decisions and postponing the beginning or finishing of tasks, was negatively associated with a future orientation, positively associated with a past orientation, and not associated with a present time orientation. After controlling negative affect, Jackson et al. (2003) showed that aca-demic procrastination among students had robust positive associations with a nega-tive evaluation of the past, a fatalistic view of the present and negatively related to future. Also, these researchers found that low levels of structured and purposed time were related with high procrastination. Whereas Specter and Ferrari (2000) found that decisional procrastination were related to low future and high past orientation, Jackson et al. (2003) found that academic procrastination was related to low future, high present fatalistic and past-negative. Clearly, in these two studies where two different scales of procrastination were used (decisional and academic procrastina-tion), procrastination was related to low future time perspective. Still, the common

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

313

statement that procrastinators prefer immediate pleasurable rewards in the present time wasn’t confirmed.

More recently, several studies found that procrastination correlates positively with fatalistic and/or hedonistic presents and negatively with future time orienta-tions, using Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) (Ferrari and Díaz- Morales 2007a; Díaz-Morales et al. 2008b; Digdon and Howell 2008).

Ferrari and Díaz-Morales (2007a) found significant zero-order correlations between two scales of procrastination (GP and AIP, respectively) and Time Perspective (TP) dimensions of Spanish version of ZTPI (Díaz-Morales 2006): neg-ative correlation with future, and positive correlations with present-fatalistic and present-hedonistic TP. The positive relation to past-negative TP was significant to AIP but not to GP (see Table 1 for details). Moreover, when shared variance between both procrastination scales and age were controlled in a hierarchical regression model, scores on AIP scale (controlling GP and age) was negatively predicted by present-fatalistic TP, whereas scores on GP scale (controlling AIP and age) was positively predicted by present-hedonist TP, and negatively associated with future TP.

The zero-order correlation profile indicated that as hedonistic as fatalistic view of the present were related to procrastination, similar to zero-order correlations showed by Jackson et al. (2003, p. 21). Results concerning the two procrastination scales in the hierarchical regression analysis were of interest. When the shared vari-ance of each scale was controlled (plus age), AIP was related to fatalistic present TP, whereas GP was related to hedonistic present TP. As indicated the authors, perhaps, both procrastination scales measures different form of procrastination: more related to avoidance, the AIP, and more related to arousal, the GP. Recent findings have discussed about this conceptualization and more research is necessary (Steel 2010).

However, the relationship between AIP and past-negative, and the results of regression analysis where shared variance of both AIP and GP procrastinations scales and age were controlled, was one good raison to follow researching and to analyze if relationship between time perspective dimensions and procrastination were different when different procrastination scales were used. Moreover, as we indicated before, previous studies had found that high decisional procrastination

Table 1 Zero-Order Correlations found in studies about relations between Procrastination Scales and Time Perspective (ZTPI)

StudiesPast- negative

Past- positive

Present- hedonistic

Present- fatalistic Future

Specter and Ferrari (2000) AIP −0.45Jackson et al. (2003) 0.39 0.31 0.57 −0.53Ferrari and Díaz- Morales (2007a) GP 0.14 0.28 −0.53

AIP 0.13 0.20 0.31 −0.59Díaz-Morales et al. (2008a, b) AIP 0.13 0.20 0.31 −0.61

DP 0.38 0.16 0.30 −0.47

Note: GP General Procrastination scale, AIP Adult Inventory of Procrastination, DP Decisional Procrastination scale

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

t1.1

t1.2

t1.3

t1.4

t1.5

t1.6

t1.7

t1.8

t1.9

t1.10

t1.11

t1.12

314

was associate to low future, high past, and not associated to present time orienta-tions (Specter and Ferrari 2000), whereas academic procrastination among students was associated to past-negative, present-fatalistic or negative view of the present, and negatively to future time perspective (Jackson et al. 2003). What could explain theses apparent differences of time perspective profile of procrastinators? It could be possible that differences were because procrastination was measured by indeci-sion scale (Specter and Ferrari 2000), a more cognitive form of procrastination, and by academic procrastination scale, a more situational form of procrastination (Jackson et al. 2003).

Following this line of reasoning, Díaz-Morales et al. (2008b) study analyzed the time perspective profile of procrastinators when behavioral and cognitive measures of procrastination were used. As behavioral measure of procrastination it was chose the Adult Inventory Procrastination (AIP, McCown et al. 1989) plus another mea-sure related to time, more biological-behavioral, the morningness-eveningness ori-entation, evaluated by the Composite Scale of Morningness (CS, Smith et al. 1989). As typical cognitive measure of procrastination it was chose the Decisional Procrastination Scale (DP, Mann 1982). Despite the fact that both Morningness- Eveningness (M/E) and Time Perspective (TP) relate to the area of human temporal functioning their mutual relationships had poorly been investigated until recently (Díaz-Morales et al. 2008b). Moreover, given that people’s ability to organize their day is at the core of the timing of many daily behaviors, it was assessed how procras-tinators and indecisive individuals differed in their time perspective (i.e., their way of relating to the past, present, or future) and also in morningness–eveningness (i.e., their preference for specific times during the day to do task or feel best moment).

Behavioral procrastination (evaluated by AIP) was negatively related to future and positively related to present-fatalistic, present-hedonistic, and past-negative TP (see Table 1). The profile was identical to found previously in a similar Spanish adult sample (Ferrari and Díaz-Morales 2007a). Decisional procrastination (indeci-sion) was negatively related to future, and positively related to present-fatalist, past- negative, and past-positive TP, but was not related to present-hedonist TP (see Table 1).

These results are similar to Specter and Ferrari’s (2000, p. 200) study, who evalu-ated indecision (zero-orders correlations coefficients of r = −0.45 with future, and r = 0.32 with past time orientations of Temporal Orientation Scale by Jones et al. 1996) and similar to Jackson et al. (2003) who evaluated academic procrastination and found negative relation with future, and positive relations with present- fatalistic, present-hedonistic, and past-negative TP. The correlation with past- positive TP was not significant).

Recently, Gupta et al. (2012) using a shortened version of the ZTPI (15 items) found that procrastination was inversely predicted by future and past-negative TP, and positively by present-fatalistic and past-positive TP. Although in the paper zero- order correlations was not indicated (only regression coefficients), and despite the differences between average age of samples and measures used, the results are simi-lar to zero-order correlations found previously among the two referenced studies with Spanish adults (see Table 1): procrastination (AIP scale used in both studies)

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

356

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

315

was negatively related with future, and positively related with present-fatalistic, present-hedonistic and past-negative TP (Ferrari and Díaz-Morales 2007a, and Díaz-Morales et al. 2008a, respectively). Past-Positive TP was not related to pro-crastination in any of two studies (0.01 and 0.01, respectively).

On other hand, procrastination (evaluated by AIP scale) was negatively related to morningness, whereas the negative correlation between indecision and morningness was not significant. Perhaps individual who procrastinates delayed their daily activi-ties because they believed they performed best in the afternoon or evening. It seemed that among adult men and women, procrastination, but not indecision, related to being a night person. Procrastinators likely performed activities during the evening, specifically much later than most people (Ferrari et al. 1997; Hess et al. 2000).

It is well-know that procrastination negatively relates to conscientiousness, as people postpone necessary duties to protect their self-esteem (Schouwenburg and Lay 1995; Van Eerde 2003; Watson 2001). Therefore, it may be that the reason why evening individuals are not held in the same regard as morning people is their tendency to avoid certain obligations during the day, making them low in con-scientiousness and likely to not conform to certain tasks that need immediate attention. Also, people high in morningness represent the best values and standards because they are more conscientious (Jackson and Gerard 1996) and have a dutiful or conformist personality style (Díaz-Morales 2007). The findings suggest that procrastination may mediate the relation between morningness-eveningness and a variety of maladaptive processes related to a low future and high present time orientations. Future oriented individuals exhibit various conscientious behaviors in regard to structuring time. They stress punctuality, wear watches and use agendas more often, and prefer regularity in their lives. Procrastinator people act with an opposite profile.

Other subsequent studies about procrastination have analyzed their relation to morningness-eveningness preference. Academic procrastination has been nega-tively related to M/E, point out that poor self-regulation is a salient characteristic of evening students (Digdon and Howell 2008). It is possible that self-regulation difficulties causes delayed sleep schedule causing the realization of task to the end of day, or that evening preference causes difficulties of self-regulation and the person would be out of sync with earlier schedules required by daytime commitments. Similar results has been found among Poland students sample remarking that probably morning people is predominately thinking in tomorrow, whereas evening people live in the present moment (Stolarski et al. 2013). Interestedly, self-control has also been proposed mediating the chronotype-time perspective relationships (Milfont and Schwarzenthal 2014).

Future-oriented people tend to carefully plan and organize their work activities, which is the opposite of procrastinators who show low persistence, work discipline, time management skills, and the ability to work methodically (Milgram and Tenne 2000). A present-focus orientation may relate to completing tasks as close to a deadline as possible. Such a strategy may energize the individual to work quickly especially if the task is unattractive or not challenging (Van Eerde 2003). An higher score on present-hedonistic TP is a characteristic of individuals what seek pleasure

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

444

445

316

and enjoyment, have high levels of energy, and they lack emotional stability (Zimbardo and Boyd 1999), whereas an higher score on procrastination is typical of people who tend to be sensation seekers, focusing on pleasure in the moment as opposed to the completion of tasks that fail to provide high levels of sensation or pleasure (Steel 2007). Also, present-fatalistic individuals exhibit low levels of con-scientiousness, depression, and high levels of emotional instability, which is related to task evasiveness and emotional instability of procrastinators (Dewitte and Schouwenburg 2002). The relations showed in some studies between procrastina-tion and both present-hedonistic and present-fatalistic time orientations could be explained by the way to evaluate procrastination, the characteristic of the sample (students vs. adults), or even the cultural context.

However, both dimensions of present, hedonistic and fatalistic, have logical rela-tions with procrastination. Procrastinators could engage in pleasurable activities or make excuses to gain additional time for completing tasks, feeling bad and discom-fort with the situation (Ferrari et al. 1995). Emphasis on past time orientation might enable a person to take a long-term perspective, avoid risks, and emphasize stability, whereas an emphasis on present time orientation might facilitate a person to live in the here and now focusing on short-term perspectives (Brislin and Kim 2003). Studies have shown that a motivational mechanism of procrastination may include neglecting previous experience, particularly failures (Buehler et al. 1997), which result in postponement of action motivated by an avoidance response. The relation-ship between indecision and both past-negative and positive TP could be explained because indecisive individuals may be too preoccupied with reminiscing about both positive and negative past events, and this form of rumination may result in indeci-sion (Janis and Mann 1977).

Some final limitations must be indicated, because when the comparison of differ-ent results obtained from different studies is realized trying to elucidate the relations between procrastination and time perspective, several aspect must been considered. First, demographics characteristics of the samples are not directly identical: age (students or adults) and nationality. Second, when time perspective dimensions are considered, usually a regression analysis is realized considering time dimensions as predictors and procrastination as criteria. However some studies included covariates (i.e. age, other procrastination or time scales) and the results of regression coeffi-cients are not directly comparable. For this reason, zero-order correlations coeffi-cients have been revised in this chapter. An third, the size effect of correlations coefficients was high to future, moderated to present time orientations and past- negative, and small to present hedonistic and past positive.

Conclusions: Is It About Time?

Procrastination refers to an irrational tendency to delay beginning and/or complet-ing tasks that should be completed, feeling subjective discomfort. Procrastinators know they should perform and activity and may even want to do so but they fail to

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

446

447

448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

471

472

473

474

475

476

477

478

479

480

481

482

483

484

485

486

317

motivate themselves to initiate and finish activities within desired or expected time frames (Ferrari 2010). More than half of college students consider procrastination is a severe problem in their lives and about 15–20 % of the general populations of very different countries (Ferrari et al. 2007). Results of several studies indicated that people with cognitive (indecision) procrastination tendencies reported that they were focus less in the future, more in present fatalistic and, at the same time, in past- positive and past-negative time perspective.

A plausible explanation for the relation to both, negative and positive, past orien-tations is that indecisive individuals may be too preoccupied with reminiscing about both positive and negative past events, and this form of rumination may result in indecision. On the other hand, people reported high behavioral procrastination claimed low future and high present-fatalistic, present-hedonistic and past-negative time perspectives. The lack of future TP was related to both tendencies to a fatalistic and hedonic view of the present. The resigned present and negative past are anteced-ents of a reduced motivation to plan ahead, congruent to a negative vision of the future. On other hand, focus on immediate pleasures and not in complicated plans to future, is also supported in some studies, suggesting that chronic procrastinators focus on present pleasures more than non-procrastinators. Past researches have noted that when procrastinators engage in pleasurable activities or make excuses to gain additional time for completing tasks, the also report increased guilt (Ferrari and Beck 1998). Finally, although research about counseling the procrastination has been compiled (Schouwenburg et al. 2004), from the recent findings about unbal-anced or biased time perspective, procrastination could be treated (Boniwell and Zimbardo 2004). Also, the potential utility of Time Perspective Therapy proposed recently (Zimbardo et al. 2012) could be added in the research agenda for future. In consequence, it is possible that procrastinators experience the present with both hedonistic and fatalism terms and the correlational studies realized among under-graduates or adults, using different measures and in different age range, not provide sufficient discrimination power. As would say a typical procrastinator: more time is necessary to elucidate these complex but interesting relationship.

References

Ackerman, D., & Gross, B. L. (2005). My instructor made me do it: Task characteristics of procras-tination. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 5–13.

Aitken, M. E. (1982). A personality profile of the college student procrastinator. Doctoral disserta-tion, University of Pittsburgh, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 722.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines and performance: Self control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13, 219–224.

Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown and emotional distress as fac-tors in self-defeating behavior. Reviews of General Psychology, 1, 145–174.

Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Balancing one’s time perspective in pursuit of optimal func-tioning. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice. Hoboken: Wiley.

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

487

488

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

499

500

501

502

503

504

505

506

507

508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

523

524

525

526

527

528

529

318

Boyd, J. N., & Zimbardo, P. (2005). Time perspective, health, and risk taking. In A. Strathman & J. Joireman (Eds.), Understanding behavior in the context of time (pp. 85–10). Mahwah: LEA.

Brislin, R. W., & Kim, E. S. (2003). Cultural diversity in people’s understanding and uses of time. Applied Psychology, 52, 363–382.

Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & McDonald, H. (1997). The role of motivated reasoning in optimistic time predictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 238–247.

Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L. M. (1983). Procrastination: Why you do it and what to do about it. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Dewitte, S., & Schouwenburg, H. (2002). Procrastination, temptations, and incentives: The strug-gle between the present and the future in procrastinators and the punctual. European Journal of Personality, 16, 469–489.

Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo [Factorial structure and reliability of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory]. Psicothema, 18, 565–571.

Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2007). Morning and evening-types: Exploring their personality styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 769–778.

Díaz-Morales, J. F., Ferrari, J. R., Díaz, K., & Argumedo, D. (2006a). Factorial structure of three procrastination scales with Spanish adult population. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22, 132–137.

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

Díaz-Morales, J. F., Cohen, J., & Ferrari, J. R. (2008a). An integrated view of personality styles related to avoidant procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 554–558.

Díaz-Morales, J. F., Ferrari, J. R., & Cohen, J. R. (2008b). Indecision and avoidant procrastination: The role of morningness-eveningness and time perspective in chronic delay lifestyles. The Journal of General Psychology, 135, 228–240.

Digdon, N. L., & Howell, A. J. (2008). College students who have an eveningness preference report lower self-control and greater procrastination. Chronobiology International, 25, 1029–1046.

Effert, B. R., & Ferrari, J. R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining personality correlates. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 151–161.

Ferrari, J. R. (1991a). Self-handicapping by procrastinators: Protecting social-esteem, self-esteem, or both? Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 245–261.

Ferrari, J. R. (1991b). A preference for a favorable public impression by procrastination: Selecting among cognitive and social tasks. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1233–1237.

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

Ferrari, J. R. (1993). Christmas and procrastination: Explaining lack of diligence at a “real-world” task deadline. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 25–33.

Ferrari, J. R. (2001). Procrastination as self-regulation failure of performance: Effects of cognitive load, self-awareness, and time limits on “working best under pressure.”. European Journal of Personality, 15, 391–406.

Ferrari, J. R. (2010). Still procrastinating: The no regrets guide to getting it done. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Ferrari, J. R., & Beck, B. L. (1998). Affective responses before and after fraudulent excuses by academic procrastinators. Education, 118, 529–538.

Ferrari, J. R., & Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2007a). Procrastination: Different time orientations reflect different motives. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 707–714.

Ferrari, J. R., & Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2007b). Perceptions of self-concept and self-presentation by procrastinators: Further evidence. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 91–96.

Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Examining behavioral processes in indecision: Decisional procrastination and decision-making style. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 127–137.

Ferrari, J. R., & Emmons, R. (1995). Methods of procrastination and their relation to self-control and self-reinforcement: An exploratory study. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 135–142.

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

530

531

532

533

534

535

536

537

538

539

540

541

542

543

544

545

546

547

548

549

550

551

552

553

554

555

556

557

558

559

560

561

562

563

564

565

566

567

568

569

570

571

572

573

574

575

576

577

578

579

580

581

582

583

584

319

Ferrari, J. R., & Patel, T. (2004). Social comparisons by procrastinators: Rating peers with similar and dissimilar delay tendencies. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1493–1501.

Ferrari, J. R., & Pychyl, T. A. (2000). Procrastination: Current issues and new directions. Corte Madre: Select Press.

Ferrari, J. R., & Pychyl, T. A. (2012). “If I wait, my partner will do it:” The role of conscientious-ness as a potential mediator for academic procrastination and perceived social loafing. North American Journal of Psychology, 14, 13–24.

Ferrari, J. R., Johnson, J., & McCown, W. (1995). Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research, and treatment. New York: Plenum Press.

Ferrari, J. R., Harriott, J. S., Evans, L., Lecik-Michna, D. M., & Wenger, J. M. (1997). Exploring the time preferences of procrastinators: Night or day, which is the one? European Journal of Personality, 11, 187–196.

Ferrari, J. R., O’Callaghan, J., & Newbegin, I. (2004). Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays among adults. North American Journal of Psychology, 6, 1–6.

Ferrari, J. R., Doroszko, E., & Joseph, N. (2005). Procrastination in corporate settings: Sex, status, and geographic comparisons of arousal and avoidance types. Individual Differences Research, 3, 140–149.

Ferrari, J. R., Díaz-Morales, J. F., O’Callaghan, J., Díaz, K., & Argumedo, D. (2007). Frequent behavioral delay tendencies by adults: International prevalence rates of chronic procrastina-tion. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 458–464.

Ferrari, J., Özer, B., & Demir, A. (2009). Chronic procrastination among Turkish adults: Exploring decisional, avoidant, and arousal styles. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 302–308.

Gupta, R., Hershey, D. A., & Gaur, J. (2012). Time perspective and procrastination in the work-place: An empirical investigation. Current Psychology, 31, 195–211.

Hammer, C. A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2002). Differential incidence of procrastination between blue-and whitecollar workers. Current Psychology, 21, 333–338.

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

Hess, B., Sherman, M. F., & Goodmand, M. (2000). Eveningness predicts academic pro crastination: The mediating role of neuroticism. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 61–74.

Jackson, L. A., & Gerard, D. A. (1996). Diurnal types, the “big five” personality factors, and other personal characteristics. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 11, 273–284.

Jackson, T., Fritch, A., Nagasaka, T., & Pope, L. (2003). Procrastination and perceptions of past, present, and future. Individual Differences Research, 1, 17–28.

Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.

Jones, J. M., Banicky, L., Lasane, T., & Pomare, M. (1996). The temporal orientation scale. Unpublished measure available from T. Lasane, Department of Psychology, St. Mary’s College, St. Mary’s City, MD

Karoly, P. (1993). Mechanisms of self-regulation: A system view. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 23–52.

Lasane, T. P., & Jones, J. M. (2000). When socially-induced temporal myopia interferes with aca-demic goal-setting. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 75–86.

Lay, C. H. (1986). At last, my research on procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 479–495.

Lay, C. H. (1990). Working to schedule on personal projects: An assessment of person-project characteristics and trait procrastination. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 91–103.

Lay, C. (1992). Trait procrastination and the perception of person-task characteristics. Journal of Social Behavior and 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 and Personality, 5, 91–193.

Lay, C. H., & Schouwenburg, H. C. (1993). Trait procrastination, time management, and academic behavior. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 647–662.

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

585

586

587

588

589

590

591

592

593

594

595

596

597

598

599

600

601

602

603

604

605

606

607

608

609

610

611

612

613

614

615

616

617

618

619

620

621

622

623

624

625

626

627

628

629

630

631

632

633

634

635

636

637

638

639

320

Lay, C. H., Edwards, J. M., Parker, J. D. A., & Endler, N. S. (1989). An assessment of appraisal, anxiety, coping, and procrastination during an examination period. European Journal of Personality, 3, 195–208.

Mann, L. (1982). Decision making questionnaire: Parts I and II. In J. R. Ferrari, J. L. Johnson, & W. McCown (Eds.), Procrastination and task avoidance. New York: Plenum Press.

Mariani, M. G., & Ferrari, J. R. (2012). Adult Inventory of Procrastination scale (AIP): A compari-son of model with and Italian sample. Testing, Psychometric, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 19, 3–14.

Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969.McCown, W., Petzel, T., & Rupert, P. (1987). An experimental study of some hypothesized behav-

iors and personality variables of college student procrastinators. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 781–786.

McCown, W., Johnson, J., & Petzel, T. (1989). Procrastination, a principal components analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 197–202.

Milfont, T. L., & Schwarzenthal, M. (2014). Explaining why larks are future-oriented and owls are present-oriented: Self-control mediates the chronotype-time perspective relationships. Chronobiology International, 31(4), 581–588.

Milgram, N., & Tenne, R. (2000). Personality correlates of decisional and task avoidant procrasti-nation. European Journal of Personality, 14, 141–156.

Özer, B. U., Demir, A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2009). Exploring academic procrastination among Turkish students: Possible gender differences in prevalence and reasons. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 241–257.

Pychyl, T. A., Morin, R. W., & Salmon, B. R. (2000a). Procrastination and the planning fallacy: An examination of the study habits of university students. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 135–150.

Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., & Blunt, A. (2000b). Five days of emotion: An experience sampling study of undergraduate student procrastination. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 239–254.

Schmuck, P., y Sheldon, K. M. (2001). Life goals and well-being. Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber.Schouwenburg, H. C., & Lay, C. H. (1995). Trait procrastination and the Big-Five factors of per-

sonality. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 481–490.Schouwenburg, H. C., Lay, C. H., Pychyl, T. A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2004). Counseling the procrasti-

nator in academic settings. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Simpson, W. K., & Pychyl, T. A. (2009). In search of the arousal procrastinator: An investigation

of the relation between procrastination, arousal-based personality traits and beliefs about pro-crastination motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 906–911.

Sirois, F. M., Melia-Gordon, M. L., & Pychyl, T. (2003). “I’ll look after my health, later”: An investigation of procrastination and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1167–1184.

Smith, C. S., Reilly, T. C., & Midkiff, K. (1989). Evaluation of three circadian rhythm question-naires with suggestions for an improved measure of morningness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 728–738.

Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive- behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503–509.

Specter, M. H., & Ferrari, J. R. (2000). Time orientations of procrastinators: Focusing on the past, present, or future? Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 197–202.

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintes-sential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65–94.

Steel, P. (2010). Arousal, avoidant and decisional procrastinators: Do they exist? Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 926–934.

Stolarski, M., Ledzińska, M., & Matthews, G. (2013). Morning is tomorrow, evening is today: relationships between chronotype and time perspective. Biological Rhythms Research, 44, 181–196.

J.F. Díaz-Morales and J.R. Ferrari

640

641

642

643

644

645

646

647

648

649

650

651

652

653

654

655

656

657

658

659

660

661

662

663

664

665

666

667

668

669

670

671

672

673

674

675

676

677

678

679

680

681

682

683

684

685

686

687

688

689

690

691

692

321

Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., y Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742–752.

Sunddendorf, T., y Corballis, M. C. (1997). Mental time travel and the evolution of the human mind. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 123, 133–167.

Tuckman, B. (1991). The development and concurrent validity of the Procrastination Scale. Educational Psychological Measurement, 5, 473–480.

Van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1401–1418.

Vodanovich, S. J., & Seib, H. M. (1997). Relationship between time structure and procrastination. Psychological Reports, 80, 211–215.

Watson, D. C. (2001). Procrastination and the five-factor model: A facet level analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 149–158.

Zaleski, Z. (1994). Psychology of future orientation. Lublin: Lublin University Press.Zaleski, Z. (1996). Future anxiety: Concept measurement and preliminary research. Personality

and Individual Differences, 21, 165–174.Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable, individual-

differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 1271–1288.Zimbardo, P., Sword, R., & Sword, R. (2012). The time cure: Overcoming PTSD with the new

psychology of time perspective therapy. San Francisco: Wiley.

More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective

693

694

695

696

697

698

699

700

701

702

703

704

705

706

707

708

709

710

711

712

Author QueryChapter No.: 20 0002143152

Query Details Required Author’s Response

AU1 Please provide the reference list for Haghbin et al. (2009)