Content uploaded by Marcus Eckert
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Marcus Eckert on Oct 24, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Overcome procrastination: Enhancing emotion regulation skills
reduce procrastination
Marcus Eckert
a,
⁎,DavidDEbert
b
, Dirk Lehr
a
, Bernhard Sieland
a
,MatthiasBerking
b
a
Leuphana University Lueneburg, Institute of Psychology, Lueneburg, Germany
b
University of Erlangen-Nuernberg, Germany
abstractarticle info
Article history:
Received 14 February 2016
Received in revised form 29 September 2016
Accepted 6 October 2016
Available online xxxx
Procrastination is a widespread phenomenon that affects performance in various life domains including academ-
ic performance. Recently, it has been argued that procrastination can be conceptualized as a dysfunctional re-
sponse to undesired affective states. Thus, we aimed to test the hypothesis that the availability of adaptive
emotion regulation (ER) skills prevents procrastination.
In a first study, cross-sectional analyses indicated that ER skills and procrastination were associated and that
these connections were mediated by the ability to tolerate aversive emotions. In a second study, cross lagged
panel analyses showed that (1) the ability to modify aversive emotions reduced subsequent procrastination
and that (2) procrastination affected the subsequent ability to tolerate aversive emotions. Finally, in a third
study, a two-arm randomized control trial (RCT) was conducted. Results indicated that systematic training of
the ER skills tolerate and modify aversive emotions reduced procrastination. Thus, in order to overcome procras-
tination, emotion-focused strategies should be considered.
© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Keywords:
Procrastination
Emotion regulation
Emotion-focused intervention
Training
1. Introduction
Procrastination is a widespread and well-known phenomenon that
refers to the voluntary delay of activities which are intended, despite
the delay may have negative consequences (e.g., Klingsieck, 2013). Indi-
viduals differ in the extent they postpone tasks (Steel, 2007). Chronical-
ly engaging in problematic procrastination has been reported by about
15% of adults (Ferrari, Díaz-Morales, O'Callaghan, Díaz, & Argumedo,
2007; Harriott & Ferrari, 1996; Steel, 2007)andtheprevalenceiseven
higher in specific populations: Up to 50% of college students procrasti-
nate consistently and problematically (Day, Mensink, & O'Sullivan,
2000). Numerous studies indicate that procrastination is associated
with significant impairment of work and academic performance (e.g.,
Steel, 2007). Students often engage in activities like sleeping, reading,
or watching TV instead of learning (Pychyl, Lee, Thibodeau, & Blunt,
2000). Moreover, procrastination reduces well-being (van Eerde,
2003), increases negative feelings such as shame or guilt (Fee &
Tangney, 2000), increases symptoms of serious mental health problems
such as depression (e.g., Strongman & Burt, 2000), and affects health be-
havior, such as delaying to seek proper care for health problems (e.g.,
Sirois, Melia-Gordon, & Pychyl, 2003; Stead, Shanahan, & Neufeld,
2010).
In an attempt to explain this widespread and potentially harmful
phenomenon, several authors have proposed that negative emotions
are an important antecedent of procrastination (Steel, 2007; Tice,
Bratslavsky, & Baumeister, 2001; Wohl, Pychyl, & Bennett, 2010). Evi-
dence for this assumption comes from studies showing that people pro-
crastinate more when they are sad or upset and that the subjective
pleasantness of the distractor moderates the link between feeling
upset and procrastination (Tice et al., 2001). Moreover, depressed affect,
neuroticism, and lack of control over distressing situations have been
found to be associated with procrastination (McCown, Johnson, &
Petzel, 1989). Finally, it was shown, that the positive effects of self-
forgiveness on procrastination were mediated by the reduction of
negative affect (Wohl et al., 2010).
Thus, emotion regulation plays a critical role for understanding the
self-regulatory failure of procrastination. Individuals postpone or
avoid aversive task in order to gain short-term positive affect at the
cost of long-term goals (Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). Regarding details of
this process, Sirois and Pychyl (2013) suggest considering counterfactu-
al thinking as an explanation of emotional misregulation that may pro-
mote procrastination. Counterfactual thinking means that individuals
compare “… unfavourable outcomes that did occur in the past to possi-
ble better (upward, “if only”statements) or worse (downward, “at
least”statements) outcomes that might have occurred”(Sirois &
Pychyl, 2013, 119). In short, upward counterfactuals can cue aversive
emotions (e.g. shame or guild) that may initiate correcting future be-
havior (Boninger, Gleicher, & Strathman, 1994). Considering that aver-
sive emotions like shame or guild cause self-regulation to break down,
Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
⁎Corresponding author at: Leuphana University Lueneburg, Rotenbleicher Weg 67, D-
21335 Lueneburg, Germany.
E-mail address: eckert@leuphana.de (M. Eckert).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.10.001
1041-6080/© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Learning and Individual Differences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif
upward counterfactuals may increase procrastination. On the contrary,
downward counterfactuals improve actual feelings but leads to poorer
future performance. Not only aversive emotional states cue procras-
tination, but also susceptibility to pleasurable temptations increase
procrastination if individuals try to maximize pleasant feelings on
coast of long-term goals (Dewitte & Schouwenburg, 2002, Tice &
Bratslavsky, 2000). But ironically, engaging in enjoyable activities
while procrastinating do not increase positive but negative affect be-
cause individuals feel guilty about their task avoidance (Pychyl et al.,
2000).
As aversive affective states have been shown to cue procrastination
by misregulation, it can be hypothesized that the ability to adaptively
cope with aversive affective states reduces the risk of procrastination.
According to Berking et al. (2008; 2014), ER skills include subcompo-
nents such as: the ability (a) to be aware of one's emotions, (b) to iden-
tify and label emotions, (c) to correctly interpret emotions related to
bodily sensations, (d) to understand the prompts of emotions, (e) to
support one's own self in emotionally distressing situations, (f) to ac-
tively modify negative emotions in order to feel better, (g) to accept
emotions, (h) to be resilient (in order to tolerate aversive emotions),
(i) to confront emotionally distressing situations in order to attain im-
portant goals, (j) to support oneself (self-support), and (k) to modify
aversive emotions (see Berking & Whitley, 2014 for details). Preliminary
support for the assumption validity of this model comes from several
studies in clinical and non-clinical populations (Berking & Znoj, 2008;
Berking, Meier, & Wupperman, 2010; Berking et al., 2011; Berking et
al., 2012; Berking, Ebert, Cuijpers, & Hofmann, 2013; Radkowski,
McArdle, Bockting, & Berking, 2014; Wirtz, Hofmann, Rieper &
Berking, 2013). Regarding all ER skills, in the heuristic framework of
Berking and Znoj (2008) the ability to tolerate (resilience) and the abil-
ity to modify aversive emotions (modification) play key roles. Findings
of Berking and colleagues support this; both abilities (resilience and
modification) moderate the effects of the remaining ER skills (Berking
et al., 2008).
There is ample evidence that shows how deficits in affect regulation
skills are associated with various mental health problems (e.g., Berking
& Lukas, 2015). Moreover, there is evidence that emotional self-regula-
tion reduces procrastination (e.g., Blunt & Pychyl, 1998). It was shown
that interventions which induct positive moods (Tice, Baumeister,
Shmueli, & Muraven, 2007) or interventions of self-affirmation
(Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009) enhance self-regulation capacity, which is
needed to overcome procrastination. At last, recent research found
that the association between health-related intention and actual engag-
ing in health-related behavior was moderated by ER skills (Eckert, Ebert,
Lehr, Sieland, Jazaieri & Berking, 2015). Although there is a body of evi-
dence that emotional self-regulation is associated with procrastination,
little is known about the association between the different abilities to
adequately process and respond to one's feelings and procrastination.
Thus, the aim of the present study is to clarify the role of emotion
regulation skills in order to reduce the tendency of procrastination.
With regard to the ER subcomponents, the framework of Berking
and colleagues (e.g., Berking & Znoj, 2008)aswellasfindings of pre-
vious ER studies indicate that (1) the ability to tolerate and (2) the
ability to modify aversive emotions mediate the relations between
all other sub-skills and mental health (Berking et al., 2008). But
with regard to procrastination, little is known about the role of
these two sub-skills. Thus, we aim to clarify the roles of the ER skills
resilience and modification in the interplay of ER skills. For this pur-
pose we first tested the hypothesis that the availability of adaptive
emotion regulation skills would be cross-sectionally associated
with procrastination. In a second study, we clarified whether the
prospective effects of ER skills would negatively predict subsequent
procrastination. In a third study, we tested the hypothesis that a sys-
tematic training of adaptive ER skills would reduce procrastination
in a randomized controlled trial of 83 employees of different
professions.
2. Study 1
2.1. Materials and methods
2.1.1. Participants and procedures
Participants were recruited among students from the Leuphana Uni-
versity in Lueneburg (Germany) during February 2011. They were
asked to complete questionnaires about their study behavior in lectures.
Consenting participants completed a paper-and-pen-based survey that
included the questionnaires described in this section below. All proce-
dures of the study were approved by the Institutional Review Board
and complied with APA ethical standards.
The final sample consisted of 172 students (108 were women and64
were men). Average age was 22.1 years (SD = 3.0). Regarding the
sample's career choice, 86 participants (50%) studied economy, 84
(48.8%) studied to become teachers, one studied psychology (0.6%),
and another studied education sciences (0.6%).
2.1.2. Measures
2.1.2.1. Procrastination. Procrastination was measured by the Academic
Procrastination State Inventory (APSI), which is a self-report instru-
ment with 23 items that utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = not
to 5 = always) to assess procrastination in academic domains
(Schouwenburg, 1995;Germanversion:Helmke & Schrader, 2000).
Participants were asked to rate how often they engaged in the behavior
stated by the items during the previous week. An example of an item is:
“Gave up studying because you did not feel well”.Theinventoryin-
cludes three subscales (academic procrastination,fear of failure,and
lack of motivation). Relevant for the present study is the APSI
total
score
that is computed as the average of all items. Internal consistency of
the total score (α
total
=0.91)wasgood.
2.1.2.2. Emotion regulation. ER skills were assessed using the Emotion
Regulation Skills Questionnaire (ERSQ; German version: Berking & Znoj,
2008). The ERSQ is a self-report instrument that includes 27 items and
utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = notatallto5=almost always)
to assess adaptive emotion regulation skills (Berking & Znoj, 2008). The
ERSQ assesses nine specific ER skills (awareness, sensations, clarity, un-
derstanding, acceptance of aversive emotions, resilience, self-support in
distressing situations, readiness to confront distressing situations, and
modification) with subscales composed of three items each.
The items are preceded by the stem, “Last week …”. Items include: “I
paid attention to my feelings”(awareness); “my physical sensations
were a good indication of how I was feeling”(sensations); “I was clear
about what emotions I was experiencing”(clarity); “I was aware of
why I felt the way I felt”(understanding); “I accepted my emotions”
(acceptance of aversive emotions); “I felt I could cope with even intense
negativefeelings”(resilience); “Idid what I had planned, even if it made
me feel uncomfortable or anxious”(readiness to confront distressing
situations); and “I was able to influence my negative feelings”(modifi-
cation). Emotion regulation was successfully assessed by averaging all
of the items and computing a total score (Berking & Znoj, 2008).
2.1.3. Data analyses
In a first step, we conducted four regression analyses, first on
APSI
total
,secondonAPSI
procrastination
,thirdonAPSI
fear for failure
,andfourth
on APSI
lack of motivation
. We calculated the explained variance of all sub-
scales and the standardized regression weights of each subscale.
In order to clarify the roles of the ER skills resilience and modifica-
tion in the interplay of ER skills, we conducted mediating analyses.
We investigated whether the association of each ER skill and procrasti-
nation is mediated by the Subscale ERSQ
resilience
or by ERSQ
modify
. For
these analyses we used the SPSS MACRO PROCESS (Hayes, 2013).
11M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
For all statistical analyses, significance level was set at pb0.05 (two-
sided). SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 22.0 (IBM Corp., 2013) were used for all
analyses.
2.2. Results
Table 1 shows descriptive statistics and intercorrelations of the
variables.
Consistent with our hypothesis, the APSI
total
score and all APSI
subscales were significantly predicted by the ERSQ subscales (APSI
total:
F
9, 152
= 7.63, pb0.001, R
2
= 0.31; APSI
procrastination :
F
9152
=4.28,
pb0.001, R
2
= 0.20; APSI
fear for failure:
F
9, 152
= 5.70, pb0.001, R
2
=
0.25 and APSI
lack of motivation:
F
9, 152
= 5.37, pb0.001, R
2
= 0.23). Al-
though all ERSQ subscales (except awareness) were correlated with
the APSI sum score and the subscales (see Table 1), only ERSQ
resilience
was a significant predictor in the four regression analyses (see Table 2).
In line with our assumption, the mediation analyses outline that
ERSQ
resilience
mediated the association of all other ERSQ subscales on
the procrastination scales (see Table 3). Although Berking and col-
leagues conceptualized ERSQ
resilience
and ERSQ
modify
as key variables
(Berking & Znoj, 2008; Berking et al., 2008), in the present study
ERSQ
modify
moderates only a link between procrastination and ER skills.
For details see Table 3.
2.3. Discussion
Findings indicate that ER skills were associated with procrastination
(all subscales and sum score). But surprisingly regression analyses in-
cluding all ERSQ subscales revealed that only ERSQ
resilience
is a signifi-
cant predictor for procrastination (all subscales and sum score). These
findings indicated that most of the common variation of the ERSQ sub-
scales on procrastination was explained by ERSQ
resilience
. In the light of
the mediation-hypotheses, these findings are not that surprising. In
line with the framework of Berking and colleagues (Berking et al.,
2008), results of the mediation analyses outlined, that ERSQ
resilience
me-
diated the connection between the other ERSQ subscales and procrasti-
nation. Contrary to this framework, ERSQ
modifiy
, results were very
inconsistent.
Considering the results shown in Table 3, it may be suggested that
the ability to modify aversive emotions may be important for emotional
processing (like awareness or sensation), whereas the ability to tolerate
aversive emotions seems to be necessary for all adaptive emotional re-
sponses and processes, in order to deal with aversive or boring tasks.
This is highly plausible, because individuals, who are not able to tolerate
aversive emotions, will postpone or avoid aversive or boring tasks. Then
they will have no reason to become aware of these emotional states, to
understand, nor to modify them.
Despite thehigh plausibility, Study 1 is very limited by the cross-sec-
tional design. No causal interpretation of the results is possible. In order
to overcome this limitation, the prospective impact of ER skills on pro-
crastination and vice versa was investigated in Study 2.
3. Study 2
To further clarify whether cross-sectional associations between ER
skills and procrastination result from a causal effect of ER skills on pro-
crastination, we conducted a second study to test prospective associa-
tions between ER skills and procrastination.
Increasing workload leads to more perceived stress and aversive
emotions (Ross, Niebling, & Heckert, 1999). If, in addition to the increas-
ing workload, no fixed timetable exists, procrastinators are likely to reg-
ulate the aversive emotions and the perceived stress by postponing or
avoiding aversive tasks. DeArmond, Matthews, and Bunk (2014)
found an indirect impact from increasing workload on procrastination.
On the other hand, ER skills increase the probability to regulate aversive
emotions adaptively. Thus, we assume that ER skills prevent individuals
from procrastinating when workload increases. With regard to the key
role of the ability to tolerate (resilience) and the ability to modify aver-
sive emotions, we particularly expect that deficits in these sub-skills are
coupled with a rise of subsequent procrastination.
3.1. Materials and methods
3.1.1. Participants and procedure
As in the previous study, participants were recruited among stu-
dents from the Leuphana University (Germany; no overlap between
the samples from Study 1 and Study 2). They also were asked to com-
plete questionnaires about study behavior. Assessments were conduct-
ed in the last week of lec ture period (T 1) and one week later, during the
first week ofthe non-lecture period (T 2). Typically, the deadline for as-
signments and examinations comes to its closing point during the first
week of the non-lecture period (the second measurement), which usu-
ally implies an increase in student workload. In order to evaluate pro-
spective effects of ER on procrastination under stress, we assessed
increased workload in the first week of the non-lecture period compared
to the last week of the lecture period and excluded participants if they
did not report an increase. To encourage students to participate in the
present study in spite of their already heavy workload, we raffled four
Amazon-vouchers at the value of 20 Euro as incentives. At both assess-
ment points, consenting participants completed the Emotion Regulation
Skills Questionnaire and General Procrastination Scale as described in
the previous study. All procedures were approved by the university's In-
stitutional Board and complied with APA ethical standards.
The final sample consisted of 79 students, of which 76 were female
(92.4%).The average age was 23.1 years (SD= 2.3). The first assessment
was completed by 190 participants. Forty-two (22.1%) of them were ex-
cluded because theyreported a decreased work load for thenon-lecture
period (excluding criterion). The second assessment was completed by
79 students (53.5%). Of the final sample population 63 participants
(79.7%) were studying to become teachers, 7 (8.9%) studied education
science, 3 (3.8%) studied environmental and sustainability studies, 2
(2.5%) studied human resources management, and one participant
(1.3%) studied in each one of the following careers: cultural sciences,
politics, English studies, and economics.
3.1.2. Measures
3.1.2.1. Emotion regulation skills. As in Study 1, we assessed ER skills with
the Emotion Regulation Skills Questionnaire (ERSQ;Germanversion:
Table 1
Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations between procrastination (APSI) and the sub-
scales of the ERSQ of Study 1.
MSD1234
1 APSI
total
58.0 14.52⁎0.86⁎⁎⁎ 0.80⁎⁎⁎ 0.69⁎⁎⁎
2 APSI
academic
procrastination.
33.9 8.33⁎⁎ 0.48⁎⁎⁎ 0.35⁎⁎⁎
3 APSI
fear for failure
13.6 4.94 0.63⁎⁎⁎
4 APSI
lack of motivation
3.7 1.97
5 ERSQ
awareness
3.5 0.81 −0.15⁎⁎⁎ −0.11⁎⁎⁎ −0.10⁎⁎⁎ −0.19⁎⁎⁎
6 ERSQ
sensation
3.8 0.70 −0.27⁎⁎⁎ −0.20⁎⁎⁎ −0.17⁎⁎⁎ −0.28⁎⁎⁎
7 ERSQ
clarity
3,9 0.76 −0.34⁎⁎⁎ −0.27⁎⁎⁎ −0.21⁎⁎⁎ −0.34⁎⁎⁎
8 ERSQ
understanding
3.9 0.79 −0.32⁎⁎⁎ −0.21⁎⁎⁎ −0.23⁎⁎⁎ −0.35⁎⁎⁎
9 ERSQ
acceptance
3.7 0.69 −0.40⁎⁎⁎ −0.32⁎⁎⁎ −0.33⁎⁎⁎ −0.28⁎⁎⁎
10 ERSQ
resilience
3.7 0.77 −0.53⁎⁎⁎ −0.42⁎⁎⁎ −0.49⁎⁎⁎ −0.40⁎⁎⁎
11 ERSQ
self-support
3.8 0.75 −0.43⁎⁎⁎ −0.33⁎⁎⁎ −0.42⁎⁎⁎ −0.31⁎⁎⁎
12 ERSQ
r.t.confront
3.6 0.82 −0.26⁎⁎⁎ −0.17⁎⁎⁎ −0.25⁎⁎⁎ −0.30⁎⁎⁎
13 ERSQ
modify
3.4 0.76 −0.29⁎⁎⁎ −0.22⁎⁎⁎ −0.26⁎⁎⁎ −0.21⁎⁎⁎
Note. N = 162; APSI = Academic Procrastination State Inventory (Schouwenburg, 1995;
German version: Helmke & Schrader, 2000);ERSQ = Emotion Regulation SkillsQuestion-
naire (Berking & Znoj, 2008); r.t.confront = readiness to confront aversive emotions.
⁎pb0.05.
⁎⁎ pb0.01.
⁎⁎⁎ pb0.001.
12 M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
Berking & Znoj, 2008). The internal consistency of the ERSQ
total
was
good (α
t1
= 0.93; α
t2
= 0.94).
3.1.2.2. Procrastination. Procrastination was measured with the German
short version of the General Procrastination Scale (GPS;Lay, 1986; Ger-
man version: Klingsieck & Fries, 2012). The GPS is a self-report instru-
ment with 9 items that utilizes a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 =
extremely uncharacteristic to 4 = extremely characteristic). Four items
are inversed. A total score was obtained by summing all items and
then dividing them bynine (number of items). The authors report an in-
ternal consistency of α=0.86(Klingsieck & Fries, 2012). The internal
consistency of the GPS in the present study was good (α
t1
=0.93;
α
t2
= 0.94).
3.1.3. Data analyses
To clarify the direction that prospective effects of ER skills might
have on procrastination, we conducted cross-lagged regressionanalyses
based on path analysis modeling. This method allows to investigate
time-lagged reciprocal effects of two variables, while, at the same
time, controlling for autoregression effects (Cole & Maxwell, 2003).
We conducted nine cross-lagged panels(CLP) to investigate the recipro-
cal effects of each ERSQ subscale and procrastination. For all statistical
analyses, significance level was set at pb0.05 (two-sided). SPSS 22.0
and AMOS 22.0 (IBM Corp., 2013) were used for all analyses.
3.2. Results
Correlations between ER sub-skills and procrastination are present-
ed in Table 4. To investigate the prospective effect of ER skills on pro-
crastination, nine CLP were conducted (see Tables 5 and 6). The model
fit for the path analyses of three emotional processing models
(ERSQ
awareness
,ERSQ
sensation
, ERSQ
understanding
;seeTable 4), for the sum
score, and for three regulation-orientated subscales (ERSQ
acceptance
,
ERSQ
self-support
,ERSQ
modify
;seeTable 5) were very good. Good to accept-
able were the model fits for ERSQ
clarity
(Table 4)andERSQ
resilience
(Table
5). Regarding the fit indices, the model including ERSQ
readiness to confront
did not fit(Table 5).
In line with our assumption, individuals scoring high on ERSQ
modify
at pre-assessment decreased subsequent procrastination (β=−0.09,
pb0.05), whereas procrastination measured at pre-assessment seemed
to have no impacton subsequent ERSQ
modify
(β= 0.07, n.s.).Contrary to
our expectations, no other ERSQ subscale predicted a reduction of sub-
sequentprocrastination. Surprisingly, findings indicated thata high pro-
crastination level decreased subsequent ability to tolerate aversive
emotions (ERSQ
resilience
;β=−0.19, pb0.05).
Table 2
Regression of the ERSQ-subscales on thesum score and the subscales of theAcademic Procrastination StateInventory (APSI
total
,APSI
procrastination
,APSI
fear for failure
, and APSI
lack of motivation
).
Regression on APSI
total
Regression on APSI
procrastination
Regression on APSI
fear for failure
Regression on APSI
lack of motivation
βTpβTpβTpβTp
ERSQ
awareness
0.08 0.85 0.396 0.07 0.67 0.502 0.10 1.04 0.301 0.07 0.71 0.477
ERSQ
sensation
−0.05 −0.44 0.657 −0.07 −0.56 0.577 −0.01 −0.06 0.953 −0.06 −0.48 0.633
ERSQ
clarity
−0.16 −0.80 0.424 −0.15 −1.00 0.320 0.10 0.66 0.512 −0.12 −0.83 0.411
ERSQ
understanding
−0.03 −0.20 0.843 0.10 0.65 0.518 −0.15 −1.10 0.272 −0.24 −1.74 0.083
ERSQ
acceptance
0.20 0.74 0.458 0.00 0.02 0.986 0.10 0.78 0.438 0.25 1.88 0.062
ERSQ
resilience
−0.50 −4.03 0.000 −0.35 −2.71 0.008 −0.46 −3.58 0.000 −0.41 −3.23 0.001
ERSQ
self-support
−0.15 −1.58 0.116 −0.15 −1.52 0.132 −0.16 −1.64 0.103 0.00 −0.01 0.990
ERSQ
r.t.confront
0.04 0.42 0.677 0.06 0.60 0.548 −0.01 −0.15 0.879 −0.14 −1.54 0.125
ERSQ
modify
0.07 0.74 0.460 0.07 0.67 0.503 0.04 0.37 0.709 0.16 1.69 0.093
Note. N= 162.
Table 3
Indirect effects on procrastination (APSI
total
,APSI
procrastination
,APSI
fear for failure
, and APSI
lack of motivation
;Schouwenburg, 1995).
Indirect effects on APSI
total
Indirect effects on APSI
procrastination
Indirect effects on APSI
fear for failure
Indirect effects on APSI
lack of
motivation
βSE
CI(95%)
βSE
CI(95%)
βSE
CI(95%)
βSE
CI(95%)
LLCI ULCI LLCI ULCI LLCI ULCI LLCI ULCI
Mediator:
ERSQ
resilience
ERSQ
awareness
−0.17 0.05 −0.2797 −0.0919 −0.13 0.04 −0.2247 −0.0654 −0.16 0.05 −0.2607 −0.0773 −0.12 0.04 −0.2144 −0.0475
ERSQ
sensation
−0.19 0.05 −0.2836 −0.1061 −0.15 0.04 −0.2342 −0.0776 −0.19 0.05 −0.3007 −0.1067 −0.13 0.04 −0.2337 −0.0638
ERSQ
clarity
−0.24 0.05 −0.3588 −0.1575 −0.18 0.04 −0.2742 −0.1023 −0.25 0.05 −0.3613 −0.1587 −0.14 0.05 −0.2409 −0.0574
ERSQ
understanding
−0.26 0.05 −0.3725 −0.1716 −0.21 0.04 −0.2968 −0.1262 −0.24 0.05 −0.3712 −0.1575 −0.14 0.05 −0.2422 −0.0436
ERSQ
acceptance
−,42 0.08 −0.5694 −0.2749 −,29 0.07 −0.4289 −0.1399 −,41 0.08 −0.5787 −0.2619 −,31 0.08 −0.4709 −0.1659
ERSQ
self-support
−0.28 0.05 −0.3973 −0.1862 −0.22 0.05 −0.3313 −0.1482 −0.24 0.05 −0.3495 −0.1570 −0.16 0.05 −0.2714 −0.0668
ERSQ
r.t.confront
−0.29 0.05 −0.4078 −0.1938 −0.20 0.06 −0.3110 −0.0939 −0.26 0.05 −0.3589 −0.1513 −0.22 0.06 −0.3578 −0.1078
ERSQ
modify
−0.34 0.05 −0.4623 −0.2580 −0.26 0.05 −0.3887 −0.1777 −0.30 0.05 −0.4116 −0.1993 −0.25 0.05 −0.3675 −0.1519
Mediator: ERSQ
modify
ERSQ
awareness
−0.13 0.05 −0.2340 −0.0545 −0.10 0.04 −0.1868 −0.0250 −0.12 0.05 −0.2494 −0.0404 −0.07 0.05 −0.1539 0.0213
ERSQ
sensation
−0.11 0.04 −0.2071 −0.0280 −0.07 0.04 −0.1409 0.0197 −0.10 0.04 −0.2022 −0.0332 −0.04 0.04 −0.1226 0.0602
ERSQ
clarity
−0.09 0.05 −0.1920 0.0090 −0.05 05 −0.1424 0.0432 −0.10 0.05 −0.2036 −0.0139 −0.01 0.05 −0.0993 0.0929
ERSQ
understanding
−0.10 0.06 −0.2163 0.0111 −0.07 05 −0.1741 0.0323 −0.10 0.05 −0.2082 0.0045 0.01 0.06 −0.0968 0.1404
ERSQ
acceptance
−0.05 0.06 −0.1857 0.0568 −0.01 0.06 −0.1246 0.1009 −0.05 0.06 −0.1852 0.0566 −0.03 0.06 −0.1434 0.0849
ERSQ
resilience
0.03 0.05 −0.0747 0.1195 0.03 0.05 −0.0664 0.1381 0.03 0.05 −0.0817 0.1210 0.03 0.05 −0.0586 0.1342
ERSQ
self-support
−0.11 0.04 −0.2186 −0.0337 −0.08 0.04 −0.1634 0.0019 −0.04 0.04 −0.1357 0.0176 −0.03 0.04 −0.1192 0.0458
ERSQ
r.t.confront
−0.06 0.04 −0.1578 0.0067 −0.03 0.04 −0.1039 0.0361 −0.08 0.04 −0.1838 −0.0006 −0.04 0.03 −0.1150 0.0308
Note. Independentvariables were subscales of the EmotionRegulation Skills Questionnaire (Berking & Znoj,2008); dependentvariable was procrastination(General ProcrastinationScale;
Lay, 1986) and the mediator was the ability to tolerate aversive emotions (ERSQ
resilience)
. The bolded effects were included in a 95%-confidence interval.
13M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
3.3. Discussion
Study 2 was conducted in order to investigate the prospective recip-
rocal effects of ER skills and procrastination. We assumed that ER skills
were negatively associated with subsequent procrastination. Indeed,
the ability to modify aversive emotions was negatively associated with
subsequent procrastination. But all other subscale of the ERSQ did not
cue a decrease of procrastination. Moreover, procrastination seemed
to reduce the subsequent ability to tolerate aversive emotions
(ERSQ
resilience
) but not vice versa.
Although we supposed that the ability to tolerate aversive emotions
reduces subsequent procrastination, the present findings seem to be
plausible. If someone procrastinates in order to avoid aversive emotions
or boredom, it is a kindof negative reinforcement. If the individual post-
pones or avoids the task, the expected undesired affective state disap-
pears. Instead of standing the aversive affect the individual learns not
to tolerate the aversive emotional state. Thus, the decrease of
ERSQ
resilience
may be a result of such a learning process.
Several limitations of Study 2 need to be addressed. First, it has been
argued that the validity of self-reports of emotional competence is lim-
ited (e.g., Stankov, 1999). However, subjective appraisals of emotion
regulation may often be at least as valid as alternative measures of emo-
tion regulation (e.g., Brackett & Mayer, 2003). Nevertheless, it is impor-
tant that future studies replicate the analyses using alternative
instruments such as observer ratings or physiological measurements.
Second, self-reported procrastination estimates may be also a problem.
Meta-analytic findings suggest that “…those in poorer moods are more
likely to indicate that they procrastinate, regardless of their actual be-
havior.”(Steel, 2007, p. 79). Future research should overcome this lim-
itation by external assessment. Third, the increase of workload was
assessed by a self-report item. The response may also depend on the
mood of the participants. However, the dates of the two assessments
(last week of the lecture period and the first week of non-lecture peri-
od) were chosen because workload typically increases in the beginning
of the non-lecture period for German students.
4. Study 3
The results of Study 2 suggest that the ability to modify aversive
emotions has a unidirectional negative effect on subsequent procrasti-
nation. In Study 3, we aim to replicate this finding in an experimental
design. We assume that individuals, who train their ability to modify
aversive emotions cued by tasks, reduce procrastination. Additionally,
we suppose that the decrease in procrastination is mediated by an in-
crease in the ability to modify aversive emotions.
Table 4
Correlations between ER sub-skills and procrastination.
Correlations on
Procrastination T1
Correlations on
Procrastination T2
rprp
ERSQ
awareness
0.17 0.142 0.10 0.396
ERSQ
sensation
−0.11 0.339 −0.16 0.157
ERSQ
clarity
−0.23 0.045 −0.25 0.025
ERSQ
understanding
−0.07 0.953 −0.03 0.788
ERSQ
acceptance
−,03 0.785 −0.05 0.677
ERSQ
resilience
−0.24 0.031 −0.26 0.023
ERSQ
self-support
−0.17 0.143 −0.22 0.056
ERSQ
r.t.confront
−0.35 0.002 0.43 0.000
ERSQ
modify
−0.14 0.216 0.22 0.056
ERSQ
total
−0.18 0.110 −0.25 0.029
GPS_t1 1.00 0.000 0.93 0.000
ERSQ
awareness
0.06 0.608 −0.03 0.765
ERSQ
sensation
0.07 0.553 −0.03 0.798
ERSQ
clarity
−0.06 0.590 −0.16 0.163
ERSQ
understanding
0.06 0.593 −0.01 0.911
ERSQ
acceptance
−0.07 0.544 −0.15 0.180
ERSQ
resilience
−0.35 0.002 −0.43 0.000
ERSQ
self-support
−0.13 0.243 −0.25 0.028
ERSQ
r.t.confront
−0.40 0.000 −0.48 0.000
ERSQ
modify
−0.03 0.818 −0.13 0.253
ERSQ
total
−0.13 0.257 −0.25 0.026
Table 5
Cross lagged panels: Emotional Processing Subscale of the Emotion Regulation Skills Questionnaire (Berking & Znoj, 2008)onGPS.
T1 T2 βp
Model fit
χ
2
pCFI TLI RMSEA 90% CI
RMSEA
LLCI ULCI
CLP 1: ERSQ
total
- GPS 2.60 0.11 0.99 0.96 0.143 0.000 0.369
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
total_t1
ERSQ
total_t2
0.73 0.000
ERSQ
total_t1
GPS
t2
−0.08 0.052
GPS
t1
ERSQ
total_t2
0.00 0.971
CLP 2: ERSQ
awareness
- GPS 2.20 0.14 0.99 0.97 0.12 0.000 0.354
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
awareness_t1
ERSQ
awareness_t2
0.70 0.000
ERSQ
awareness_t1
GPS
t2
−0.06 0.467
GPS
t1
ERSQ
awareness_t2
−0.06 0.152
CLP 3: ERSQ
sensation
- GPS 0.93 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.000 0.295
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
sensation_t1
ERSQ
sensation_t2
0.66 0.000
ERSQ
sensation_t1
GPS
t2
−0.06 0.146
GPS
t1
ERSQ
sensation_t2
−0.14 0.099
CLP 4: ERSQ
clarity
- GPS 4.10 0.04 0.98 0.97 0.20 0.029 0.415
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
clarity_t1
ERSQ
clarity_t2
0.57 0.000
ERSQ
clarity_t1
GPS
t2
−0.05 0.471
GPS
t1
ERSQ
clarity_t2
−0.07 0.290
CLP 5: ERSQ
understanding
- GPS 0.004 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.000 0.000
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
understanding_t1
ERSQ
understanding_t2
0.53 0.000
ERSQ
understanding_t1
GPS
t2
−0.02 0.561
GPS
t1
ERSQ
understanding_t2
−0.07 0.500
Note. Significant effects (except auto-regression effects) were bolded.
14 M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
Therefore, Study 3 focused on the implementation of a randomized
control trial (RCT) to test the impact of an online-training focusing on
ER strategies in order to overcome procrastination of aversive tasks.
We assume that the trainingof emotion-focused strategies reduces pro-
crastination. Furthermore, we hypothesize that the training of emotion-
focused strategies increases ER skills. The emotion-focused strategies
included tolerating as well as modifying aversive emotions. Moreover,
we suppose that the effects on procrastination are mediated by an in-
crease of these ER skills.
4.1. Materials and methods
4.1.1. Participants and procedures
The participants of this third study were recruited through newspa-
per articles about the current study and through the website www.
training-geton.de, which was a platform for internet-based trainings
and training research of the Leuphana University Lueneburg (Germa-
ny). Interested individuals applied to participate by writing an email
to the primary study investigator (first author).
Individuals were asked to (i) provide an informed consent and (ii)
complete an online baseline questionnaire (www.soscisurvey.de).
Then, participants were randomized to an intervention group (IG) or a
waiting list control (WLC) using the online tool RANDOM.ORG. A list
of participants was entered in the tool which then changed the listing
order randomly. Participants with an even listing number were allocat-
ed to the IG and got access to the online intervention. Participants with
an uneven number were allocated to the WLC. They were asked to wait
about two weeks for the post-assessment and subsequent access to the
online training by email. Two weeks later, all participants were invited
to complete the same questionnaire as a post-assessment. All proce-
dures were approved by the university's Institutional Review Board
and complied with APA ethical standards.
From 215 individuals who were interested in the online training, 83
provided the informed consent and completed the pre- and post-ques-
tionnaires. Fifty-seven participants (68.7%) were women and the aver-
age age was 40.8 years (SD = 11.9). Four individuals (4.8%) reported
to be unemployed, six were students (7.2%), and oneperson was retired
(1.2%). All other participants (86.7%) were employed. Forty-four partic-
ipants (53.0%) of the final sample were allocated to the IG and 39 partic-
ipants (47.0%) were randomized to the WLC.
4.1.2. Intervention
The two-week web-based intervention promoted emotion-focused
strategies to overcome procrastination. Thestrategies tolerate and mod-
ify aversive emotions, are appropriate to cope adaptively with emotions
(Berking et al., 2008). Thus, the intervention focused on these two strat-
egies. In the intervention, participants were asked to (1) choose one of
their daily tasks which they were most likely to procrastinate and (2)
identify whether the task characteristics are associated with aversive
emotions or with a lack of positive affect.
Depending on this, (3) participants were encouraged to tolerate the
lack of positive affect (e.g., boredom) or the aversive emotions (e.g., fear
for failure). Following Berking and Whitley (2014), the strategy to toler-
ate aversive emotions included intentionally permitting aversive emo-
tions to be present, then reminding oneself of one's toughness and
resilience, and finally reminding oneself of (or increasing) the affective
commitment with task.
On this basis, (4) participants could try to modify their emotions. In
order to do that, they either tried to increase positive affect or to reduce
aversive emotions. The strategy to modify aversive emotions consisted
of first practicing a short relaxation-exercise, then reappraising the
harm and the probability of the potential threat, and lastly deciding
whether to execute the task.
After completing the chosen task, participants (5) evaluated how
successfully they coped with aversive emotions or witha lack of positive
affect. This procedure took about 10 minand was repeateddaily for two
weeks.
4.1.3. Measures
We assessed procrastination as our primary outcome with the Ger-
man short version of the General Procrastination Scale (Lay, 1986;Ger-
man short version: Klingsieck & Fries, 2012) as described in Study 2.
In this study, Crombach's alpha of the GPS was acceptable (α
t1
=0.80,
α
t2
= 0.85).
Table 6
Cross laggedpanels: Subscales concerning regulation of the Emotion Regulation Skills Questionnaire (Berking & Znoj, 2008)onGPS.
T1 T2 βp
Model fit
χ
2
pCFI TLI RMSEA 90% CI
RMSEA
LLCI ULCI
CLP 6: ERSQ
acceptance
- GPS 0.08 0.78 1.00 1.00 0.000 0.000 0.197
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
acceptance_t1
ERSQ
acceptance_t2
0.66 0.000
ERSQ
acceptance_t1
GPS
t2
−0.02 0.658
GPS
t1
ERSQ
acceptance_t2
−0.05 0.565
CLP 7: ERSQ
resilience
- GPS 4.74 0.03 0.98 0.90 0.219 0.056 0.433
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
resilience_t1
ERSQ
resilience_t2
0.66 0.000
ERSQ
resilience_t1
GPS
t2
−0.03 0.444
GPS
t1
ERSQ
resilience_t2
−0.19 0.018
CLP 8: ERSQ
self-support
- GPS 2.19 0.14 0.99 0.96 0.123 0.000 0.354
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
self-support._t1
ERSQ
self-support_t2
0.54 0.000
ERSQ
self-support_t1
GPS
t2
−0.06 0.129
GPS
t1
ERSQ
self-support_t2
−0.04 0.636
CLP 9: ERSQ
R.t.confront.
- GPS 10.10 0.00 0.96 0.73 0.342 0.174 0.546
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.92 0.000
ERSQ
R.t.confr_t1
ERSQ
R.t.confr_t2
0.49 0.000
ERSQ
R.t.confr_t1
GPS
t2
−0.13 0.002
GPS
t1
ERSQ
R.t.confr_t2
−0.25 0.007
CLP 10: ERSQ
modify.
- GPS 1.56 0.21 1.00 0.98 0.085 0.000 0.328
GPS
t1
GPS
t2
0.93 0.000
ERSQ
modify_t1
ERSQ
modify_t2
0.69 0.000
ERSQ
modify_t1
GPS
t2
−0.09 0.026
GPS
t1
ERSQ
modify_t2
0.07 0.383
Note. Significant effects (except auto-regression effects) were bolded.
15M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
To evaluate to what extent the intervention actually enhances ER,
we also assessed the effects of the intervention on ER. As the interven-
tion primarily focused on acceptance, resilience, and modification of
aversive emotions, we focused on these three aspects of ER and included
the ERSQ scales acceptance, resilience, and modification as secondary
outcomes. Reliability of these subscales in the present study were sub-
scales of α
t1
=0.77andα
t2
= 0.82 for acceptance, α
t1
=0.77and
α
t2
= 0.77 for resilience, and α
t1
=0.80andα
t2
=0.77for
modification.
4.1.4. Data analyses
Our hypothesis was that the training increases the abilities to toler-
ate and to modify aversive emotions. Therefore, in a first step, we
checked whether the training influenced those ER skills by conducting
ANCOVAs, by controlling the respective pre-measured ER skills.
In a second step, we tested if the training of emotion-focused strate-
gies to cope with aversive tasks reduces procrastination. Therefore, we
conducted another ANCOVA by controlling pre-measured procrastina-
tion. The effect size was calculated.
In a third step, we investigated if the effects on procrastination were
mediated by the increase of ER strategies. We conducted a mediation
analysis by applying the SPSS MACRO PROCESS (Hayes, 2013). First,
we tested the direct effects of the independent variable treatment on
procrastination (t2). Then, we tested the indirect effects of the change
in the ERSQ subscales ERSQ
resilience
and ERSQ
modify
.Therefore,wecon-
ducted separate analyses. To calculate the change of each ERSQ subscale
we subtracted the pre-measure from thepost-measure. In eachanalysis,
we controlled pre-measured procrastination statistically.
We aimed to investigate the de facto influence of applying ER strat-
egies on aversive emotional states that were triggered by tasks. Thus,
we conducted per-protocol analyses, using SPSS 22.0 for all analyses
(IBM Corp., 2013).
4.2. Results
An ANOVA indicated no significant differences between the treat-
ments regarding age (F= 0.025, pN0.05), procrastination (F=
0.289, pN0.05), and all nine ER skills (F= 0.038–3.436, pN0.05)
in pre-measurements. With regard to gender a chi-square-test was
conducted, no differences (χ
2
= 1.411, pN0.05) between treatments
were found.
In line with our assumption, an ANCOVA indicated that the training
of emotion-focused strategies reduced procrastination (F
1, 81
=8.979,
pb0.01, d
between
=0.34).Fig. 1 displays thedevelopment of procrastina-
tion from baseline (T1) to post-measurement (T2). Reported means of
procrastination in the WLC (M
t1
= 3.34, SD = 0.40, M
t2
= 3.29, SD =
0.48) did not differ significantly (t=1.099,pN0.10), whereas the re-
duction in means of the IG (M
t1
= 3.40, SD = 0.48, M
t2
= 3.10, SD =
0.54) was significant (t= 5.113, pb0.001, d
withing
= 0.59).
Participants of the IG group reported a significant increase in their
abilities to tolerate aversive emotions (F
1, 80
=4.424,pb0.05) and
modify aversive emotions (F
1, 80
= 14.109, pb0.001) compared to
the WLC group. Table 7 shows the means, SDs for baseline (t1) and
post-treatment (t2), and the test-statistics for all outcome measure-
ments separately.
To test whether the effect of the training on procrastination (t2) was
mediated by increasing the ER skills ERSQ
resilience
and ERSQ
modify
,an
analysis of indirect effects was conducted. Procrastination (t1) was con-
trolled. There were significant indirect effects of the ER treatment on
procrastination through the change in both ER subscales
(ΔERSQ
resilience:
β=−0.06, 95% CI [−0.152, −0.005], and ΔERSQ
modify
:
β=−0.08, 95% CI [−0.202, −0.001]). Additional, analyses indicated
that the ER subscales ΔERSQ
acceptance
and ΔERSQ
readiness to confront
were
also significant indirect pathways between treatment and reduction in
procrastination (see Table 8). Following Baron and Kenny (1986), a me-
diation effect needs a significant pathway from the independent vari-
able on the dependent variable before including the mediator, a
significant pathway from the independent variable on the mediator,
and a significant pathway from the mediator on the dependent variable.
Mediation analyses outlinethat only for ΔERSQ
resilience
and ΔERSQ
modify
all pathways were significant (see Table 9).
5. General discussion and conclusion
Results of Study 3 indicated that the online-based training reduced
procrastination and increased all ER skills, including the ability to mod-
ify and to tolerate aversive emotions. Regarding the mediation hypoth-
eses, Table 8 indicated that indirect pathways from treatment on
procrastination via ERSQ
acceptance
, ERSQ
resilience
, ERSQ
readiness to confront
,
and ERSQ
modify
were significant. However, the path from ERSQ
acceptance
(mediator) on procrastination was only marginal significant and the
path from treatment on ERSQ
readiness to confront
(mediator) was not
significant (see Table 9). Following Baron and Kenny (1986),thesig-
nificance of all pathways is a premise of mediation. Thus, the
Fig. 1. Comparison of intervention group (IG) and waiting list control (WLC) group on
development of procrastination from baseline (T1) to post-measurement (T2).
Table 7
Means, standard deviations, and test-statistics of IG and WLC for procrastination (GPS), depression (CES-D) and for the nine ERSQ-Subscales.
WLC IG Test-statistics
M
t1
(SD) M
t2
(SD) M
t1
(SD) M
t2
(SD) Fp
Procrastination 3.34 (0.40) 3.29 (0.48) 3.40 (0.48) 3.10 (0.54) 8.979 0.004
ERSQ
awareness
3.42 (0.84) 3.51 (0.83) 3.02 (0.84) 3.91 (4.92) 0.963 0.329
ERSQ
sensation
3.16(0.80) 3.04 (0.91) 3.47 (0.89) 3.59 (0.93) 4.465 0.038
ERSQ
clarity
3.36 (0.77) 3.22 (0.88) 3.61 (0.89) 3.79 (0.84) 6.606 0.012
ERSQ
understanding
3.24 (0.75) 3.22 (0.73) 3.41 (0.78) 3.65 (0.79) 5.527 0.021
ERSQ
acceptance
3.13 (0.76) 3.07 (0.80) 2.85 (0.82) 3.29 (0.82) 4.318 0.041
ERSQ
resilience
2.95 (0.99) 2.86 (0.89) 2.89 (0.98) 3.20 (0.88) 4.424 0.039
ERSQ
self-support
3.21 (0.73) 3.09 (0.77) 3.32 (0.84) 3.49 (0.80) 6.513 0.013
ERSQ
r.t.confront
2.77 (0.79) 2.88 (0.90) 2.68 (0.86) 3.19 (0.83) 3.100 0.083
ERSQ
modify
2.75 (0.74) 2.70 (0.74) 2.81 (0.76) 3.21 (0.82) 14.109 0.000
16 M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
reduction of the procrastination level seems to be mediated by the
increase in ERSQ
resilience
and ERSQ
modify
.
Concerning the ability to modify aversive emotions, the results of
studies 1–3 were quite consistent. The ability to modify aversive
emotions seems helpful in order to overcome procrastination. Un-
derstanding procrastination as dysfunctional emotion regulation,
this finding is very plausible. However, results of Study 1 indicated
that the assoc iation between ERSQ
modify
and procrastination is medi-
ated by the ability to tolerate aversive emotions (ERSQ
resilience
).
Moreover, the association of all other subscales and procrastination
is also mediated by the subscale ERSQ
resilience
. It seems that the abil-
ity to tolerate aversive emotions plays a key role in the interplay of
ER sub-skills. Yet, the results concerning ERSQ
resilience
look like they
were inconsistent. Thus, we had to discuss the ostensive discrepancy
concerningthesubscaleERSQ
resilience
in Study 2 and Study 3 in order
to understand the relation between the ability to tolerate aversive
emotions and procrastination.
Results of Study 2 indicated that procrastination has a unidirectional
negative effect on the subsequent ability to tolerate aversive emotions.
We suggested negative reinforcement as an explanation. To overcome
disorders caused by negative reinforcement (i.e., anxiety disorders), a
classical intervention in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is confron-
tation with response prevention (Deacon & Abramowitz, 2004). If indi-
viduals train to tolerate aversive emotions cued by aversive or boring
tasks, they may increase their ability to tolerate aversive emotions as
this intervention is similar to response prevention. The training of ER-
focused strategies may operate like response prevention. The partici-
pants were encouraged to bear aversive emotions, before they tried to
modify them. If they were not able to modify aversive emotions cued
by the task, they had to remind themselves that they were able to toler-
ate these feelings.
Although the effects of ER skills on procrastination were compara-
tively small (in Study 2 ERSQ
modify
on procrastination β=−0.09; indi-
rect effects on procrastination in Study 3 resilience, (β=−0.06), and
modification (β=−0.08)), they were significant. As procrastination
(i) has multiple causes and (ii) is stable over time (Steel, 2007;see
also our results), we did not expect large effects, neither as direct pro-
spective effects (Study 2) nor as indirect effects (Study 3). The small ef-
fect size between intervention group and waiting list control (Study 3)
is in line with this assumption. According to previous findings showing
that procrastination is a kind of short-term mood repair (Tice et al.,
2001), the results of Study 3 suggested that individuals applying ER
skills resilience and modification were able to overcome the temptation
to regulate their mood by procrastination.
Several limitations need to be addressed. First, comparing a treat-
ment with a waiting list control results may be confounded by a placebo
effect. Therefore, future research should overcome this limitation by ap-
plying a placebo control. Second, it is important to investigate the treat-
ment adherence in order to analyze the effects of adherence on the
findings. Unfortunately, we did not assess the adherence to the treat-
ment or to specific ER strategies. Future research should investigate
(a) how often participants choose which ER strategies and (b) which
strategies were linked to the reduction of procrastination. Third, Study
3is lacking a follow-up assessment. Thus, no interpretation with regard
to long-term effects is possible. In order to obtain information about the
stability of these effects, future research should replicate this study with
follow-up assessments. The fourth limitation concerns the measure of
procrastination across the studies. In Study 1, procrastination was mea-
sured by the Academic State Procrastination Inventory (ASPI;
Schouwenburg, 1995; German version: Helmke & Schrader, 2000)
which assesses academic procrastination. In Study 2 and Study 3 general
procrastination - instead of academic procrastination - was measured
by the General Procrastination Scale (GPS; Lay, 1986;Germanversion:
Klingsieck & Fries, 2012). This change is grounded in better psychomet-
ric properties of the German version of the GPS, which did not exist
when Study 1 was conducted. Although there is a difference between
academic and general procrastination, the associations between emo-
tion regulation and both forms of procrastination seem to hold across
studies. However, future studies should clarify the association between
ER skills and different domains of procrastination.
A practical implication of our results is to integrate ER strategies in
already existing procrastination interventions, in order to find addition-
al ways to overcome procrastination. To the best of our knowledge, no
procrastination interventions incorporate increasing different ER skills,
until today. With regard to the potential economic damage for individ-
uals as well as companies that is subsequent to procrastination, a plau-
sible strategy to counterbalance this could be to provide employees a
service that would teach them to use the same ER skills that were ap-
plied in the above mentioned training and that showed to be beneficial
to avoid procrastination. Additionally, courses to cope with aversive
emotions (induced by tasks) seem to be highly relevant for students.
Table 9
Mediated effect of the treatment on procrastination at post-assessment (GPS
t2
) by mediators (a) increased ability to accept aversive emotions (ΔERSQ
acceptance
), (b) increased ability to
tolerate aversive emotions (ΔERSQ
resilience
), (c) increased readiness to confront with aversive emotions (ΔERSQ
r.t.confront
), and (d) increased ability to modify aversive emotions
(ΔERSQ
modify
). In each mediation analysis, procrastination at pre-assessment was controlled.
Mediator: ΔERSQ
acceptance
Mediator: ΔERSQ
resilience
Mediator: ΔERSQ
r.t.confront
Mediator: ΔERSQ
modify
BTpBT pBT pBTp
(I) Regression on mediator
Treatment 0.25 2.28 0.026 0.23 2.05 0.044 0.18 1.63 0.108 0.36 3.41 0.001
(II) Regression on GPS
t2
Treatment −0.22 −2.91 0.005 −0.22 −2.91 0.005 −0.22 −2.91 0.005 −0.22 −2.91 0.005
(III) Regression on GPS
t2
Mediator −0.15 −1.91 0.060 −0.20 −2.66 0.010 −0.21 −2.85 0.006 −0.16 −2.08 0.041
Treatment −0.18 −2.39 0.019 −0.18 −2.34 0.022 −0.18 −2.47 0.016 −0.16 −2.03 0.046
Note. Model I is the path from treatment on the mediator (ΔERSQ
acceptance
,ΔERSQ
resilience
,ΔERSQ
r.t.confront
,orΔERSQ
modify
). Model II is the direct path from treatment on procrastination
(GPS
t2
) and Model III shows path from the mediator on procrastination and the chance in the direct path after including the mediator.
Table 8
Indirect effects on procrastination. Independent variable was the treatment; dependent
variable was procrastination at post-assessment (General Procrastination Scale; GPS
t2
;
Lay, 1986) and the mediatorsare the differences of subscales of post- and pre-assessment
of the Emotion Regulation Skills Questionnaire (Berking & Znoj, 2008). In each mediation
analysis, procrastination at pre-assessment was controlled.
βSE
CI (95%)
LLCI ULCI
Mediators:
ΔERSQ
awareness
0.02 0.02 −0.0323 0.0441
ΔERSQ
sensation
−0.02 0.02 −0.0803 0.0166
ΔERSQ
clarity
−0.03 0.03 −0.1159 0.0092
ΔERSQ
understanding
−0.01 0.02 −0.0761 0.0302
ΔERSQ
acceptance
−0.05 0.04 −0.1406 −0.0003
ΔERSQ
resilience
−,06 0.04 −0.1522 −0.0047
ΔERSQ
self-support
0.00 0.02 −0.0439 0.0545
ΔERSQ
r.t.confront
−0.05 0.04 −0.1787 −0.0001
ΔERSQ
modify
−0.08 0.05 −0.2017 −0.0012
Note. Effects which were included in the 95%-confidence interval were bolded.
17M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
References
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediatorvariable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,51(6), 1173–1182.
Berking,M., & Lukas, C. (2015). The affect regulation training (ART):A transdiagnostic ap-
proach to the prevention and treatment of mental disorders. Current Opinio n in
Psychology,3,64–69.
Berking, M., & Whitley, B. (2014). Affect regulation training (ART). New York: Springer.
Berking, M., & Znoj, H. -J. (2008). Entwicklung und validierung eines fragebogens zur
standardisierten selbsteinschätzung emotionaler kompetenzen (SEK-27). Zeitschrift
für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie,56,141–152.
Berking, M., Wupperman, P., Reichardt, A., Pejic, T., Dippel, A., & Znoj, H. (2008).Em otion-
regulation skills as a treatment target in psychotherapy. Behaviour Research and
Therapy,46(11), 1230–1237.
Berking, M., Meier, C., & Wupperman, P. (2010). Enhancing emotion-regulation skills in
police officers - results of a controlled study. Behavior Therapy,41,329–339.
Berking, M., Margraf,M., Ebert, D., Wuppermann, P., Hofmann, S., & Junghanns,K. (2011).
Emotion regulation skills as a predictor of relapse during and after treatment of alco-
hol dependence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,79,307–318.
Berking, M., Poppe, C., Luhmann, M., Wuppermann, P., Jaggi, V., & Seifritz, E.(2012). Emo-
tion-regulation skills and psychopathology: Is the ability to modify one's negative
emotions the ultimate pathway by which all other skills affect symptoms of mental
disorders? Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry,43,931–937.
Berking, M., Ebert, D., Cuijpers, P., & Hofmann, S. G. (2013). Emotion‐regulation skills
training enhances the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive
disorder. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics,82,234–245.
Berking, M., Wirtz, C., Svaldi, J., & Hofmann, S. (2014). Emotion‐regulation predicts de-
pression over five years. Behaviour Researc h and Therapy,57,13
–20.
Blunt, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (1998). Volitional action and inaction in the lives of undergradu-
ate students: State orientation, procrastination and proneness to boredom.
Personality and Individual Differences,24,837–846.
Boninger, D. S., Gleicher, F., & Strathman, A. (1994). Counterfactual thinking: From what
might have been to what may be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67(2),
297–307.
Brackett, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2003). Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity
of competing measures of emotional intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin,29, 1147–1158.
Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data:
Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology,112,558–577.
Day, V., Mensink, D., & O'Sullivan,M. (2000). Patternsof academic procrastination. Journal
of College Reading and Learning,30,120–134.
Deacon, B. J., & Abramowitz, J. S. (2004). Cognitive and behavioral treatments for anxiety
disorders: A review of meta-analytic findings. Journal of Clinical Psychology,60(4),
429–441.
DeArmond,S., Matthews, R. A.,& Bunk, J. (2014). Workload andprocrastination:The roles
of psychological detachment and fatigue. International Journal of Stress Management,
21(2), 137.
Dewitte, S., & Schouwenburg, H. C. (2002). Procrastination, temptations, and incentives:
The struggle between the present and the future in procrastinators and the punctual.
European Journal of Personality,16(6), 469–489.
Eckert, M., Ebert, D. D., Lehr, D., Sieland, B., Jazaieri, H., & Berking, M. (2015). Teachers'
emotion regulation skills facilitate implementation of health-related intentions.
American Journal of Health Behavior,39,874–881.
Fee, R. L., & Tangney, J. P. (2000). Procrastination: A means of avoiding shame or guilt?
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality,15,167–184.
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 pro-
crastination. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,38,458–464.
Harriott, J., & Ferrari, J. R. (1996). Prevalence of procrastination among samples of adults.
Psychological Reports,78,611–616.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, andconditional process analysis:
A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Helmke, A., & Schrader, F. -W. (2000). Procrastination im studium –Erscheinungsformen
und motivationale bedingungen. In U. Schiefele, & K. -P. Wild (Eds.), Interesse und
lernmotivation. Untersuchungen zu ent wicklung, förderung und wirkung
(pp. 207–225). Münster: Waxmann.
IBM Corp. Released (2013). IBM SPSS Statistics forWindows, Version22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM
Corp.
Klingsieck, K. B. (2013).Procrastination.When good things don't come to those who wait.
European Psychologist,18,24–34.
Klingsieck, K. B., & Fries, S. (2012). Procrastination: Development and validation of a Ger-
man short scale of the general procrastination scale (lay, 1986). Diagnostica,58,
182–193.
Lay, C. H. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of Research in
Personality,20,474–495.
McCown, W., Johnson, J., & Petzel, T. (1989). Procrastination, a principal components
analysis. Personality and Individual Differences,10,197–202.
Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., & Blunt, A. (2000). Five days of emotion: An expe-
rience sampling study of undergraduate student procrastination. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality,15,239–254.
Radkowski, A., McArdle, J. J., Bockting, C. L. H., & Berking, M. (2014). Successful emotion
regulation skillsapplication predicts subsequent reduction of symptoms duringtreat-
ment of major depressive disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,82,
248–262.
Ross, S. E., Niebling, B. C., & Heckert, T. M. (1999). Sources of stress among college stu-
dents. Social Psychology,61(5), 841–846.
Schmeichel, B. J., & Vohs, K. (2009). Self‐affirmation and self‐control: affirming core
values counteracts ego depletion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,96(4),
770–782.
Schouwenburg, H. C. (1995). Academic procrastination: Theoretical notions, measure-
ment, and research. In J. R. Ferrari, & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Procrastination and task
avoidance: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 71–96). New York: Plenum Press.
Sirois, F. M., Melia-Gordon, M. L., & Pychyl, T. A. (2003). “I′ll look after my health, later”:
An investigation of procrastination and health. Personality and Individual Differences,
35,1167–1184.
Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short‐term mood regula-
tion: Consequences for future self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass,7(2),
115–127.
Stankov, L. (1999). Mining on the “no man's land”between intelligence and personality.
In P. L. Ackerman, P. C. Kyllonen, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Learning and individual differ-
ences: Process, trait, and content determinants (pp. 315–337). Washington, DC: Amer-
ican Psychological Association.
Stead, R., Shanahan, M. J., & Neufeld, R. W. J. (2010). “I′ll go to therapy, eventually”:Pro-
crastination, stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences,49,
175–180.
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of
quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin,133,65–94.
Strongman, K. T., & Burt, C. D. B. (2000). Taking breaks from work: An exploratory inquiry.
Journal of Psychology,134,229–242.
Tice, D. M., & Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving in to feel good: The place of emotion regula-
tion in the context of general self-control. Psychological Inquiry,11(3), 149–159.
Tice, D. M., Baumeister, R. F., Shmueli, D., & Muraven, M. (2007). Restoring the self: Pos-
itive affect helps improve self-regu lation following ego depletion. Journal o f
Experimental Social Psychology,43(3), 379–384.
Tice, D. M., Bratslavsky, E., & Baumeister, R. F. (2001). Emotional distress regulation takes
precedence over impulse control: If you feel bad, do it! Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,80,53–67.
van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastina-
tion. Personality and Individual Differences,35,1401–1419.
Wirtz, C., Hofmann, S. G., Rieper, H., & Berking, M. (2013). Emotion regulation skills pre-
dict symptoms of anxiety disorders over a 5-year period in individuals at-risk for
major depressive disor der. Depression and Anxiety,31,87–95.
Wohl,M.J.A.,Pychyl,T.A.,&Bennett,S.H.(2010).Iforgivemyself,nowIcanstudy:How
self-forgiveness for procrastinating can reducefuture procrastination. Personality and
Individual Differences,48,803–808.
18 M. Eckert et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 52 (2016) 10–18
