Content uploaded by Shira Pollack
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Shira Pollack on Feb 03, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gasc20
Anxiety, Stress, & Coping
An International Journal
ISSN: 1061-5806 (Print) 1477-2205 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gasc20
Prior Day Negative Affect Influences Current Day
Procrastination: A Lagged Daily Diary Analysis
Shira Pollack & Joanna Herres
To cite this article: Shira Pollack & Joanna Herres (2020): Prior Day Negative Affect Influences
Current Day Procrastination: A Lagged Daily Diary Analysis, Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, DOI:
10.1080/10615806.2020.1722573
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2020.1722573
Published online: 03 Feb 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Prior Day Negative Affect Influences Current Day Procrastination:
A Lagged Daily Diary Analysis
Shira Pollack and Joanna Herres
Psychology Department, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey, USA
ABSTRACT
Background and objectives: Procrastination is a common problem
among college students. Negative affect associated with stress and
anxiety is linked to higher levels of procrastination. Although there is a
relationship between procrastination and affect, little is known about the
direction of this relationship. The current study explored whether
changes in daily negative affect (NA) or positive affect (PA) preceded
procrastination or whether procrastination preceded changes in affect.
Method and design: The current study is a secondary data analysis of a
larger study. After completing an initial survey assessing students’
emotional well-being, students were asked to participate in a follow-up
daily diary survey. Participants in the daily diary (N= 53) completed a
brief survey each weekday evening for two weeks that assessed daily
affect and events. Multilevel regression tested whether NA and PA
predicted next-day procrastination and vice versa. Results: Cross-lag
panel analysis demonstrated that students reported more
procrastination following days they experienced higher levels of NA.
However, procrastination did not predict changes in NA. PA was not
associated with prior day or next day procrastination experiences when
controlling for NA. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that
negative emotions motivate procrastination behavior. Implications for
helping students cope with and regulate NA are discussed.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 14 March 2019
Revised 24 January 2020
Accepted 24 January 2020
KEYWORDS
Procrastination; emotion
regulation; negative affect;
college students; avoidance
“I’ll do it tomorrow”is a common phrase expressed by college students. Between 80 and 95% of
college students procrastinate in their daily work (Steel, 2007). Procrastination, or voluntary delaying
of tasks and responsibilities despite being worse offbecause of the delay (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013), inter-
feres with students’ability to accomplish tasks in a timely manner and achieve long-term goals. The
degree to which people generally procrastinate (i.e., trait procrastination) is associated with worse
academic performance including lower assignment grades, course grades, and grade point averages
(Kljajic & Gaudreau, 2018; Steel, 2007). A study that analyzed factors affecting retention in community
college courses found that procrastination and poor time management are the primary reasons for
college student failure or drop out (Doherty, 2006).
College students often procrastinate even when they are aware of the pressure to complete cour-
sework on time and balance responsibilities. Chronic procrastinators tend to attribute their procras-
tination to individual characteristics, such as laziness, a lack of motivation, and poor time
management skills (Senecal, Koestner, & Vallerand, 2010). However, procrastination is more than
just a self-sabotaging personality trait. Rather, it is a state-like behavior related to fluctuating
emotional experiences (Steel, 2007). While the link between emotions and procrastination is clear,
there are varying interpretations regarding whether emotions precede procrastination or
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Joanna Herres herresj@tcnj.edu
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING
https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2020.1722573
procrastination precedes emotions. This lack of clarity regarding the direction of effects makes it
difficult to identify which behavior to target when working with students to increase their pro-
ductivity and improve their emotional well-being. In the current study, we examined the direction
of effects between daily procrastination and affect in liberal arts college students. This was a second-
ary analysis of daily diary data from a larger survey study investigating aspects of campus emotional
well-being.
NA precedes procrastination
Results of several studies indicate that negative affect (NA) precedes procrastination. Schoolwork is
often perceived as unpleasant, frustrating, boring, and anxiety-provoking (e.g., Kaftan & Freund,
2019). The theory of virtuous and vicious circles illustrates how when students perceive a task as aver-
sive or experience low self-efficacy towards completing a task, they tend to procrastinate (Wäschle,
Allgaier, Lachner, Fink, & Nückles, 2014). Their negative perception of tackling the task creates a ten-
dency for them to delay completing it altogether. Furthermore, students who experience negative
emotions in response to schoolwork may develop poor impulse control, the inability to resist
urges and immediate desires (Tice, Bratslavsky, & Baumeister, 2001). For example, distress caused
by approaching assignment deadlines and exams can interfere with a student’s ability to exercise
self-control and resist procrastination. When distressed or anxious, many students give in to short-
term mood repair in order to feel better in the moment, rather than choosing behavior that will
help them to achieve long-term goals (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013). In other words, negative emotions
associated with schoolwork may prompt students to engage in other, more pleasant activities in
order to improve their mood. Avoiding unpleasant tasks through procrastination improves mood
temporarily; however, “giving in to feel good”and prioritizing immediate impulses can interfere
with meeting long-term goals, such as achieving a high GPA, landing a preferred career, or living
a healthy lifestyle (Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). Similar to the urge to procrastinate, individuals
consume alcohol, drugs, and high calorie foods in an attempt to improve mood; however, while
these substances may improve mood temporarily, they may also result in serious negative conse-
quences (Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). When distressed, students may experience difficulty controlling
the impulse to engage in activities that provide immediate relief, prioritizing the present self over
the future self (Ferrari & Díaz-Morales, 2007; Sirois & Pychyl, 2013). Thus, students may satisfy
current emotional desires at the expense of future goals (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013).
PA precedes procrastination
The majority of research on the link between affect and procrastination focuses on NA. However, low
positive affect (PA) may also precede procrastination. Positive emotions feel good in the present
moment and increase the likelihood that one will continue to feel good in the future (Fredrickson
& Joiner, 2002). According to the broaden and build theory, positive emotions broaden people’s atten-
tion and cognition, while negative emotions narrow these thought processes (Garland et al., 2010). In
an application of this theory to the workplace, positive emotions enhanced productivity and motiv-
ation, increasing likelihood of success (Martin, 2008). Furthermore, greater positive psychological
resources, including positive emotions such as hope and optimism, are related to better academic
performance (Carmona-Halty, Salanova, Llorens, & Schaufeli, 2018). Positive emotions, such as joy,
motivate individuals to expand physical, intellectual, and social resources (Garland et al., 2010).
According to the broaden-and-build theory, positive emotions help students accomplish academic
tasks by focusing attention and improving motivation and desire for new inquiry. Moreover, positive
emotions help people mindfully attend to the present moment (Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, &
Finkel, 2008), and mindfulness is associated with more persistence on a difficult task (Evans, Baer,
& Segerstrom, 2009). Thus, while negative emotions make it difficult to resist procrastination, positive
emotions may reduce the urge to procrastinate (Tice, Baumeister, & Zhang, 2004).
2S. POLLACK AND J. HERRES
Procrastination precedes NA
While prior research shows that more NA and less PA precede procrastination, other research shows
that changes in affect follow procrastination. In their theory of virtuous and vicious circles, Wäschle
et al. (2014) explains how procrastination leads to the perception that goal achievement is not poss-
ible, which stirs up negative emotions, such as disappointment, and creates a tendency for students
to anticipate failure the next time a similar task comes along. Consequently, students may not be able
to resist avoiding the task completely as to avoid this failure, thus allowing for a negative feedback
loop with amplified procrastination, the perception of low goal achievement, and negative emotions.
Students frequently reach out to university counselors for help decreasing their level of procras-
tination because of the emotional distress caused by this behavior (Schowuenburg, Lay, Pychyl, &
Ferrari, 2004). Trait procrastination is positively related to stress, depressiveness, anxiety, fatigue,
and reduced life satisfaction (Beutel et al., 2016). In one study, researchers found that avoidant pro-
crastination was associated with guilt and stress ratings over a 14-week time period (Kaftan & Freund,
2019). Thus, prior research shows that greater procrastination is associated with more negative
emotions such as guilt, shame, stress, regret, self-blame, anxiety, and despair (Blunt & Pychyl,
2005; van Eerde, 2003; Zeenath & Orcullo, 2012). Flett, Haghbin, and Pychyl (2016) discovered that
individuals who engaged in academic procrastination and procrastinatory cognitions had higher
levels of depression. Avoiding an undesirable task provides short-term momentary relief from nega-
tive emotions (Pychyl, Lee, Thibodeau, & Blunt, 2000), but it may lead to increased NA over time
(Ferrari, 2010).
Procrastination precedes PA
Little research has been conducted to examine affective consequences following more productive
days in which procrastination is relatively low. According to Wäschle et al. (2014), higher goal achieve-
ment is associated with higher self-efficacy. The theory of vicious and virtuous circles can be applied
to the current study by comparing high goal achievement to lower procrastination and higher self-
efficacy with positive affect that comes along with it. For example, the more students accomplish
their goals in a timely manner, the better offthey are going to feel about themselves and their aca-
demic capabilities. In a recent study, researchers found that trait procrastination was associated with
lower levels of next-day positive affect among college students (Sirois & Giguére, 2018). Another
recent study showed that a productive work environment increases overall emotional well-being
(Rivkin, Diestel, & Schmidt, 2018). Furthermore, motivation, persistence, and engagement in
school-related activities and tasks is related to enjoyment of schoolwork and general positive
emotions (Hagenauer & Hascher, 2014). A daily diary study showed that productivity led to increased
positive mood the following day (Lavy & Littman-Ovadia, 2017; Lavy, Littman-Ovadia, & Bareli, 2014).
More specifically, work engagement and productivity triggered desirable outcomes such as positive
emotions and work satisfaction. Overall, evidence from these prior studies shows support for the idea
that procrastination leads to lower levels of PA.
The Current Study
Despite evidence indicating a bidirectional relationship between affect and procrastination, no study
has tested the direction of effects between these factors. Additionally, research has not assessed the
relationship between daily affect and daily procrastination, as opposed to trait levels of these con-
structs. Intensive longitudinal designs enable tests of direction of effects using cross-lag panel analy-
sis (Bolger & Laurenceau, 2013). We utilized an intensive longitudinal design that included daily
surveys administered weekday evenings over the course of two weeks. The purpose of this study
was to investigate the bidirectional relationship between college students’daily affect and the
extent to which they procrastinate each day. We hypothesized that students who reported more
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING 3
NA and less PA on weekday evenings would report increases in procrastination the following day. We
also hypothesized that procrastination would lead to more NA and less PA the following day. Thus,
we expected to find a bidirectional relationship between affect and procrastination. Results of this
study would inform counselors as to which target of change would yield the best outcomes for stu-
dents, the problematic behavior of procrastination itself or the emotions that drive this behavior.
Method
Participants and Procedure
A random selection of 1,200 undergraduate students (ages 18 years and older) currently attending
classes at a public liberal arts college in the Eastern United States were recruited for a web-based
survey study measuring students’emotional well-being. Of 184 students who participated in the
initial survey, 57 agreed to participate in a follow up daily diary survey measuring participants’
daily mood and daily events (86.3% cisgender female, 9.8% cisgender male, 2% transgender male;
70.2% non-Hispanic White; 19.6% freshmen, 23.5% sophomores, 33.5% juniors, and 23.5% seniors).
Fifty-three of the participants who agreed to participate in the daily diary (93%) completed more
than one daily survey and were included in the cross-lag analyses. On average, there were 3–4
fewer participants in the daily survey each day with 24 participants completing all 10 daily
surveys. Participants needed to complete at least two daily surveys in order to assess their change
in affect and procrastination over time. Participants who reported more procrastination, on
average, completed fewer daily surveys (r=−.29, p= .032). Average amount of NA (r=−.11, p
= .418) and PA (r=−.09, p= .497) did not correlate with the number of surveys completed.
The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at The College of New Jersey. A
random selection of 1,200 students were emailed a link to an online survey assessing psychological
constructs related to campus sexual assault, such as depression and posttraumatic stress disorder
symptoms (manuscripts in preparation, author names have been removed for blind review). The
survey first displayed an informed consent form and participants indicated their consent by clicking
“yes”to continue to the survey. At the end of the survey, participants were provided with a second
informed consent form describing follow-up daily diary surveys. Participants indicated their consent
to participate in the daily diary by entering an email address at the end of the consent form. They
were encouraged to use a non-college affiliated email or to use a new email account with non-iden-
tifying information in order to maintain anonymity. Participants who agreed to participate in the
follow-up daily diary were emailed a link to the survey each weekday evening (Monday-Friday) for
two weeks (10 days total). Those who consented to participate in the daily diary were sent a link
to the diary survey each weekday evening at 6:00pm. A reminder email was sent at 10:00pm, and
participants were told that they had until 2:00am to complete the survey. Responses outside of
that time frame (i.e., before 6:00pm or after 2:00am) were discarded from the dataset. The diary
survey, which took approximately 5–10 min to complete each evening, was sent only on weekday
evenings to allow participants to report on events that occurred over typical class days and to maxi-
mize the likelihood of participants completing the survey at a consistent time each day. Participants
in the daily diary received a $20 gift card for completing all 10 daily surveys (n= 24), a $15 gift card for
completing 8–9 daily surveys (n= 14), and a $10 gift card for completing 5–7 daily surveys (n= 11).
Survey responses were downloaded from Qualtrics and stored as deidentified data in SPSS.
Measures
Daily mood
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) measured par-
ticipants’affect each weekday evening over a two-week period. The PANAS includes 20-items asses-
sing different types of emotions on a 1 (very slightly or not at all)to5(extremely) scale. Emotions
4S. POLLACK AND J. HERRES
included interested, distressed, excited, and upset. Items were summed to create scores for two sub-
scales: PA and NA. Scores for each subscale could range from 10 to 50, with higher scores indicating
higher levels of that type of affect. Using the method described by Cranford et al. (2006), the current
sample showed good within-person internal consistency, calculated as the proportion of variability
due to change in affect ratings over time (NA = .84; PA = .90) and good between-person internal con-
sistency in the daily diary context, calculated across persons and times (NA = .98; PA = .98).
Daily procrastination
Participants completed a 42-item Diary of Events Scale (Herres & Kobak, 2015) in which participants
indicated the extent to which they experienced different interpersonal (e.g., “Had a disagreement
with a friend.”) and noninterpersonal events (e.g., “Did poorly on a school or work task.”). Items
were rated on a 1 (Not at all true) to 4 scale (Very true). The scale also included the following
seven items adapted from Lay’s Procrastination Inventory (Lay, 1986): (1) “In preparing for some dead-
line, I often wasted time by doing other things”; (2) “I did an assignment just before it should be
handed in”; (3) “I most often got right out of bed when it was time to get up in the morning”; (4)
“Even with jobs that require little else except sitting down and doing them, I found that they
seldom got done for days”; (5) “I generally delayed before starting on work I have to do”; (6) “I
found myself saying, ‘I’ll do it tomorrow’;”and (7) “Ifinished a task sooner than necessary.”–
reverse coded. A multilevel CFA showed that the seventh item from the procrastination scale had
a low factor loading (b= 0.002, p= 0.98). With this item removed, fit statistics showed that a one-
factor model for procrastination fit the data well (Х
2
(7) = 8.48, p= .293; RMSEA = 0.022; SRMR
Within = 0.024; SRMR Between = 0.000; CFI = 0.997). The six remaining procrastination items were
averaged to create a procrastination scale that had good between-subject reliability (.95), as well
as good reliability of change in procrastination ratings over time (.97).
Analysis
Preliminary analyses included descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations among study vari-
ables. A single multilevel model conducted in MPlus version 8 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2017)
tested the within-subject relationship between daily affect (both NA and PA) and next day procras-
tination (cross-lagged effect), controlling for prior levels of procrastination (autoregressive effect). The
model also included the reverse effect of procrastination on daily affect, controlling for prior levels of
NA and PA. Level one predictors were grand mean-centered and intercepts were free to vary at the
between-subject level. MPlus uses full information maximum likelihood estimation to account for
missing data and maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors (MLR), which is
robust to nonnormality.
Results
First, descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations were calculated for our study variables (see
Table 1). There was significant variance in NA, PA, and procrastination at both the within- and
between-subjects levels. According to within-subject correlations, participants reported more NA
and less PA on days in which they reported more procrastination. Daily NA and PA were negatively
Table 1. Descriptive statistics, between-subject correlations (Below Diagonal), and within-subject correlations (Above Diagonal)
among study variables.
M SD ICC 1. 2. 3.
1. Negative Affect 1.81 0.51 .37 –−0.22** 0.26**
2. Positive Affect 2.31 0.61 .34 0.33* –−0.12*
3. Procrastination 2.41 0.46 .38 0.62** −0.06 –
Note. *p < .05, **p< .01. Between-subject, N= 57 participants. Within-subject, N= 432 observations.
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING 5
correlated; however, according to the between-subject correlations, average levels of NA across the
diary days positively correlated with average levels of PA. Different PA-NA correlations at the within-
person vs. the between-person levels are consistent with prior research (Rush & Hofer, 2014; Steven-
son et al., 2019). Participants who reported higher average levels of NA across the diary days also
reported higher average levels of procrastination. Average PA was not significantly correlated with
average levels of procrastination (see Table 1). Results of the multilevel regression examining the
direction of effects between affect and procrastination showed that NA predicted next-day procras-
tination (b= 0.12, p< .05). However, PA did not predict next day procrastination (b= .07, p= .07), and
procrastination did not predict next-day NA (b= .06, p= .25) or PA (b= .03, p= .67). The autoregres-
sive effects were all significant, showing relative stability in daily affect and procrastination (see Figure
1). The model explained 40% of the variance in daily procrastination, 36% of the variance in daily NA,
and 35% of the variance in daily PA.
Discussion
The current study tested the direction of the effects between daily affect and procrastination. More
specifically, we examined whether affect preceded procrastination or vice versa in a sample of liberal
arts college students. The results supported the hypothesis that NA preceded increases in procrasti-
nation the next day. However, results did not support the effect for PA. In addition, our hypothesis
that procrastination would precede changes in daily NA and PA was not supported. Thus, findings
indicate that the relationship between affect and procrastination is not bidirectional; procrastination
occurs more frequently following days in which students experience more NA, but it does not precede
changes in NA or PA.
Our finding that NA precedes procrastination is consistent with prior research and theory (Sirois &
Pychyl, 2013; Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). For example, Sirois and Pychyl (2013) theorized that when
individuals are faced with a task that they view as aversive or anxiety-provoking, they experience
a failure in emotion regulation. Unable to healthily manage negative emotions, individuals give in
Figure 1. Cross-lag model of within-subject regression paths between variables measured across two consecutive time points.
Coefficients are unstandardized. *p< .05, **p< .01, ***p< .001
6S. POLLACK AND J. HERRES
to a desire for quick mood repair by engaging in procrastination behavior. This is consistent with prior
findings that college students procrastinate as a result of prioritizing current and immediate
emotional needs over meeting long term goals (Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). Tice et al. (2001) theorized
that NA interferes with motivation and drive to complete tasks. In other words, when upset, people
are less likely to prioritize activities that would help them achieve long term goals. Self-efficacy theory
(Bandura, 1986) provides another possible explanation for this effect. Per the self-efficacy theory, indi-
viduals avoid tasks when they lack confidence in their abilities due to either high anxiety or weak self-
efficacy. Thus, procrastination may be an avoidance response to anxiety, weak self-efficacy, or both.
Future research should explore potential mechanisms that explain the effect of NA on procrastina-
tion, such as a lack of self-control, low energy, or poor self-efficacy. Per the theory of virtuous and
vicious circles (Wäschle et al., 2014), there may be a negative cycle of low self-efficacy and procras-
tination. Avoidance of anxiety-provoking tasks through procrastination only momentarily relieves NA,
as the task remains incomplete (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013; Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000).
While negative emotions preceded next-day procrastination, positive emotions did not. Our
second hypothesis that more PA would precede less next-day procrastination was in response to
the broaden-and-build theory, which states that positive emotions increase motivation and attention
(Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002). The non-significant findings suggest that positive emotions may not
have as strong of an influence on behavior as negative experiences (Fredrickson et al., 2008),
perhaps because individuals tend to place a higher emphasis on negative experiences over positive
or neutral ones (Rozin & Royzman, 2001). In addition, college students report more negative emotions
than positive ones due to the fact that negative emotions require more attention and effort to regu-
late and result in greater physiological arousal (Rozin & Royzman, 2001). Due to the daily format of our
study design, PA may not have had as salient and lasting of an effect on procrastination as NA. These
reasons may explain why our study does not support the influence of PA on students’proclivity to
procrastinate the next day.
Although NA predicted increases in procrastination, the opposite direction of effects was not sup-
ported: procrastination did not precede changes in affect. Prior research showed that procrastination
was associated with depressiveness, anxiety, and fatigue, and reduced life satisfaction across the life-
span (Beutel et al., 2016). In another study, researchers found that avoidant procrastination resulted in
changes in guilt and stress rates over a 14-week time period (Kaftan & Freund, 2019). Given the differ-
ences in the time frames between these prior studies and our own, it is possible that our null findings
for the effect of procrastination on NA may be because it takes longer than a single day for changes in
affect to occur following procrastination. Future research should examine the relationship between
affect and procrastination over varying time frames to determine whether effects observed in this
study are specific to day-to-day changes in these variables. If negative emotional consequences of
procrastination do not develop immediately, students may not attribute gradual worsening of
mood to their unproductive behavior and continue to procrastinate. Conversely, if effects of procras-
tination on affect are only immediate and fleeting, students may develop a habit of procrastinating in
an attempt to prolong the relief it provides.
Limitations
While we were unable to measure concurrent associations between momentary procrastination and
affect, we did find that participants reported more NA and less PA on the same day they experienced
more procrastination (Flett et al., 2016). However, participants who reported higher levels of average
NA across the daily surveys also reported higher levels of average PA. This may be because positive
correlations among self-report measures at least partly reflect a reporting bias resulting from method
invariance: participants tend to endorse similar levels across survey items (Kline, Sulsky, & Rever-Mor-
iyama, 2000). Thus, the fact that participants who endorsed extreme ratings for NA tended to endorse
extreme ratings for PA may not reflect a true positive association among these constructs. Further-
more, the current study focused on day-to-day relationships among affect and procrastination and
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING 7
did not allow these relationships to vary at the between-subject level. The study did not have enough
power to fit a random slopes model, and the cross-lagged effects were no longer significant when
slopes were free to vary between subjects. Thus, future research with a larger sample should
explore between-person differences in the relationships between affect and procrastination.
Additionally, given that past research suggests that men self-report higher procrastination levels
than women (Beutel et al., 2016), future research should consider potential gender differences in
the effects of affect on procrastination. Future research should also examine differences across
other student characteristics, such as race/ethnicity, to determine whether findings would generalize
to all students.
Moreover, the initial survey assessed campus sexual assault and related psychological factors
(PTSD symptoms, perceived stress, coping, and alcohol use), while the follow-up daily diary measured
students’daily experiences and affect. In addition to measuring procrastination, the diary of events
scale included positive and negative interpersonal, work/school, and personal well-being events. Pro-
crastination was the primary focus of the current study; however, assessing the other variables in the
initial survey and in the daily survey could have potentially influenced procrastination or affect scores.
Further, given the observational nature of the study, it is important to identify potential third vari-
ables that may explain or enhance the relationship between NA and next-day procrastination. For
example, rumination and mindfulness have also been linked to procrastination (Evans et al., 2009).
Perhaps these variables could serve as targets of intervention for students hoping to increase their
productivity and improve their overall emotional well-being. In addition to the need to consider
other variables that contribute to one’s daily affect and procrastination, it would be beneficial for
future research to examine specific negative emotions that have the strongest impact on procrasti-
nation behavior, such as shame, guilt, fear, or sadness. With this information, counselors could target
specific emotions that are likely to interfere most with students’productivity.
Implications
Current interventions for procrastination emphasize the development of behavioral skills such as self-
monitoring and self-reward, self-control techniques, and stress and time-management (Haycock,
McCarthy, & Skay, 1998). However, the current findings suggest a need for interventions that focus
on emotion regulation strategies that help to reduce NA. Teaching students that procrastination
may occur in response to distress places an emphasis on affect regulation over other behavioral
changes that may not get to the heart of the problem, such as learning good study habits. Fostering
acceptance and tolerance of negative emotions among college students could help students better
regulate NA (Berking et al., 2012), and, in turn, improve their productivity. Acceptance-based thera-
peutic interventions such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999),
Affect Regulation Training (ART; Berking, Meier, & Wupperman, 2010), Emotion Focused Therapy (EFT;
Greenberg, 2002), and mindfulness-based treatments (e.g., Hofmann, Sawyer, Witt, & Oh, 2010) facili-
tate a positive, non-judgmental attitude toward aversive emotional experiences, while increasing tol-
erance for negative affective states (Berking et al., 2012). Acceptance strategies could help improve
students’productivity by shifting their frame of mind away from their distress, while energizing and
motivating them to focus on meeting long term goals (Boland, Riggs, & Anderson, 2018). While cog-
nitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is effective at reducing procrastination (Van Eerde & Klingsieck, 2018),
acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) may be better than CBT at reducing procrastination and
negative affect in the long term (Wang et al., 2017).
Sirois and Pychyl (2013) explained that in order to be more productive, one must find something
positive or worthwhile about a task, even if that task also provokes anxiety. Finding deeper personal
meaning in academic work may help reduce associated NA and decrease the desire for students to
seek short-term relief through procrastination. Thus, future research should examine whether chan-
ging cognitive thought processes (Rozental, Forsell, Svensson, Andersson, & Carlbring, 2015), accept-
ing negative emotions, and being more mindful when it comes to school work would improve
8S. POLLACK AND J. HERRES
students’mood and decrease the amount in which they procrastinate. The current study emphasizes
the powerful role emotions play in the everyday lives of college students. Though further research is
needed on the relationship between affect and procrastination, findings suggest that adaptive
coping and emotion regulation strategies could help increase students’productivity so that they
may make progress toward achieving long-term goals.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
Joanna Herres http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1059-3634
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Berking, M., Meier, C., & Wupperman, P. (2010). Enhancing emotion-regulation skills in police officers—results of a con-
trolled study. Behavior Therapy,41, 329–339. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2009.08.001
Berking, M., Poppe, C., Luhmann, M., Wupperman, P., Jaggi, V., & Seifritz, E. (2012). Is the association between various
emotion-regulation skills and mental health mediated by the ability to modify emotions? Results from two cross-sec-
tional studies. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry,43, 931–937. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2011.09.009
Beutel, M. E., Klein, E. M., Aufenanger, S., Brähler, E., Dreier, M., Müller, K. W., …Wölfing, K. (2016). Procrastination, distress
and life satisfaction across the age range—A German representative community study. Plos ONE,11,1–12. doi:10.
1371/journal.pone.0148054
Blunt, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2005). Project systems of procrastinators: A personal project-analytic and action control perspec-
tive. Personality and Individual Differences,38, 1771–1780. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.019
Boland, J., Riggs, K. J., & Anderson, R. J. (2018). A brighter future: The effect of positive episodic simulation on future pre-
dictions in non-depressed, moderately dysphoric & highly dysphoric individuals. Behavior Research and Therapy,100,
7–16. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2017.10.010
Bolger, N., & Laurenceau, J. P. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling
research. New York: Guilford Press.
Carmona-Halty, M., Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2018). How psychological capital mediates between study-
related positive emotions and academic performance. Journal of Happiness Studies,doi:10.1007/s10902-018-9963-5
Cranford, J. A., Shrout, P. E., Iida, M., Rafaeli, E., Yip, T., & Bolger, N. (2006). A procedure for evaluating sensitivity to within-
person change: Can mood measures in diary studies detect change reliably? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
32, 917–929. doi:10.1177/0146167206287721
Doherty, W. (2006). An analysis of multiple factors affecting retention in Web-based community college courses. The
Internet and Higher Education,9, 245–255. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.08.004
Evans, D. R., Baer, R. A., & Segerstrom, S. C. (2009). The effects of mindfulness and selfconsciousness on persistence.
Personality and Individual Differences,47, 379–382. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.03.026
Ferrari, J. R. (2010). Still procrastinating? The no regrets guide to getting it done. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Ferrari, J. R., & Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2007). Procrastination: Different time orientations reflect different motives. Journal of
Research in Personality,41, 707–714. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.006
Flett, A. L., Haghbin, M., & Pychyl, T. A. (2016). Procrastination and depression from a cognitive perspective: An exploration
of the associations among procrastinatory automatic thoughts, rumination, and mindfulness. Journal of Rational-
Emotive and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy,34, 169–186. doi:10.1007/s10942-016-0235-1
Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions,
induced through loving-kindness mediation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,95, 1045–1062. doi:10.1037/a0013262
Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological
Science,13, 172–175. doi:10.1111/14679280.00431
Garland, E. L., Fredrickson, B., Kring, A. M., Johnson, D. P., Meyer, P. S., & Penn, D. L. (2010). Upward spirals of positive
emotions counter downward spirals of negativity: Insights from the broaden-and-build theory and affective neuro-
science on the treatment of emotion dysfunctions and deficits in psychopathology. Clinical Psychology Review,30,
849–864. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.002
Greenberg, L. (2002). Emotion-focused psychotherapy: Coaching clients to work through their feelings. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING 9
Hagenauer, G., & Hascher, T. (2014). Early adolescents’enjoyment in learning situations at school and its relation to
student achievement. Journal of Education and Training Studies,2,20–30. doi:10.11114/jets.v2i2.254
Haycock, L. A., McCarthy, P., & Skay, C. L. (1998). Procrastination in college students: The role of self- efficacy and anxiety.
Journal of Counseling and Development,76, 317–324. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1998.tb02548.x
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy. New York: Guilford.
Herres, J., & Kobak, R. (2015). The role of parent, teacher, and peer events in maintaining depressive symptoms during
early adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,43, 325–337. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9896-3
Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. (2010). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and
depression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,78, 169–183. doi:10.1037/a0018555
Kaftan, O. J., & Freund, A. M. (2019). A motivational perspective on academic procrastination: Goal focus affects how stu-
dents perceive activities while procrastinating. Motivation Science,5(2), 135–156. doi:10.1037/mot0000110
Kline, T. B., Sulsky, L. M., & Rever-Moriyama, S. D. (2000). Common method variance and specification errors: A practical
approach to detection. The Journal Of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied,134, 401–421. doi:10.1080/
0022390009598225
Kljajic, K., & Gaudreau, P. (2018). Does it matter if students procrastinate more in some courses than others? A multilevel
perspective on procrastination and academic achievement. Learning and Instruction,58, 193–200. doi:10.1016/j.
learninstruc.2018.06.005
Lavy, S., & Littman-Ovadia, H. (2017). My better self: Using strengths at work and work productivity, organizational citizen-
ship behavior, and satisfaction. Journal of Career Development,44,95–109. doi:10.1177/0894845316634056
Lavy, S., Littman-Ovadia, H., & Bareli, Y. (2014). Strengths deployment as a mood-repair mechanism: Evidence from a diary
study with a relationship exercise group. The Journal of Positive Psychology,9, 547–558. doi:10.1080/ 17439760.2014.
936963
Lay, C. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality,20, 474–495. doi:10.1016/
0092-6566(86)90127-3
Martin, A. J. (2008). The role of positive psychology in enhancing satisfaction, motivation, and productivity in the work-
place. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,24(1-2), 113–133. doi:10.1300/J075v24n01_07
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus User’s Guide. Eighth Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., & Blunt, A. (2000). Five days of emotion: An experience sampling study of under-
graduate student procrastination. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality,15, 239–254.
Rivkin, W., Diestel, S., & Schmidt, K.-H. (2018). Which daily experiences can foster well-being at work? A diary study on the
interplay between flow experiences, affective commitment, and self-control demands. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology,23,99–111. doi:10.1037/ocp0000039
Rozental, A., Forsell, E., Svensson, A., Andersson, G., & Carlbring, P. (2015). Internet-based cognitive—behavior therapy for
procrastination: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,83(4), 808–824. doi:10.
1037/ccp0000023
Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology
Review,5, 296–320. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
Rush, J., & Hofer, S. M. (2014). Differences in within-and between-person factor structure of positive and negative affect:
Analysis of two intensive measurement studies using multilevel structural equation modeling. Psychological
Assessment,26, 462–473.
Schowuenburg, H. C., Lay, C. H., Pychyl, T. A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2004). Counseling the procrastinator in academic settings.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Senecal, C., Koestner, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2010). Self-regulation and academic procrastination. The Journal of Social
Psychology,135, 607–619.
Sirois, F. M., & Giguére, B. (2018). Giving in when feeling less good: Procrastination, action control, and social temptations.
British Journal of Social Psychology,57, 404–427. doi:10.1111/bjso.12243
Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation: Consequences for future self.
Social and Personality Psychology Compass,7, 115–127. doi:10.1111/spc3.12011
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory
failure. Psychological Bulletin,133,65–94. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65
Stevenson, B. L., Dvorak, R. D., Kramer, M. P., Peterson, R. S., Dunn, M. E., Leary, A. V., & Pinto, D. (2019). Within-and
between-person associations from mood to alcohol consequences: The mediating role of enhancement and
coping drinking motives. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,128, 813–822. doi:10.1037/abn0000472
Tice, D. M., Baumeister, R. F., & Zhang, L. (2004). The role of emotion in self-regulation: Differing roles of positive and nega-
tive emotion. In P. Philippot, & R. S. Feldman (Eds.), The regulation of emotion (pp. 213–226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Tice, D. M., & Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving in to feel good: The place of emotion regulation in the context of general self-
control. Psychological Inquiry,11, 149–159. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1103_03
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 & Social Psychology,80,53–67. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.53
10 S. POLLACK AND J. HERRES
van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination. Personality and Individual
Differences,35, 1401–1418. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00358-6
Van Eerde, W., & Klingsieck, K. B. (2018). Overcoming procrastination? A Meta-Analysis of Intervention Studies. Educational
Research Review,25,73–85. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.002
Wang, S., Zhou, Y., Yu, S., Ran, L. W., Liu, X. P., & Chen, Y. F. (2017). Acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive–
behavioral therapy as treatments for academic procrastination: A randomized controlled group session. Research on
Social Work Practice,27,48–58. doi:10.1177/1049731515577890
Wäschle, K., Allgaier, A., Lachner, A., Fink, S., & Nückles, M. (2014). Procrastination and self-efficacy: Tracing vicious and
virtuous circles in self-regulated learning. Learning and Instruction,29, 103–114. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.09.005
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative
affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,54, 1063–1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Zeenath, S., & Orcullo, D. J. C. (2012). Exploring academic procrastination among undergraduates. International
Proceedings of Economics Development & Research,47,42–46. doi:10.3200/SOCP.149.2.241-257
ANXIETY, STRESS, & COPING 11
