This dissertation presents a literature review on procrastination and more specifically research involving the domain of academic procrastination, characteristics/traits academic procrastinators exhibit, and two different types of academic procrastinators. Even though a comprehensive theory has not been established, social cognitive theory, attribution theory, and motivation theories contribute to our understanding of academic procrastination. Studies that investigate prevalence of high school and college students who procrastinate in international settings, and more specifically in the United States, are reviewed, along with the literature on the relationship between academic procrastination and achievement. Research has demonstrated with relative consistency that academic procrastination has significant adverse effects on academic progress (Ferrari et al., 2005; Moon & Illingworth, 2005) and that high percentages of undergraduate college students self-report they engage in academic procrastination (Steel, 2007). The literature review is followed by an investigation that utilizes an adapted version of the Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (Özer & Ferrari, 2011), a self-report instrument, to measure students’ academic procrastination. The purpose of this study was to investigate (a) the percentage of undergraduate college and high school students who self-report academic procrastination; (b) the frequency of academic procrastination among undergraduate college and high school students for the specific academic tasks of studying for exams, completing reading assignments, and writing papers; and (c) the relationship between academic procrastination and achievement of undergraduate college and high school students. Both on specific tasks and overall, significantly more college students report higher procrastination than high school students. Unexpectedly, this study did not find a significant relationship between academic procrastination and academic achievement, as measured by grade point average. This study highlights the importance of considering students’ age when examining academic procrastination.

Denna studie undersökte aktiv prokrastinering och tillfredsställelse med studieprocess. Prokrastinering kan definieras som ett uppskjutande av arbetsuppgifter med negativa konsekvenser som följd. Till skillnad från traditionell prokrastinering är aktiv prokrastinering adaptiv till sin natur och förknippad med fördelaktiga personliga egenskaper och konsekvenser, vilket lett till att kritiker inte anser att det kan kallas för prokrastinering. Syftet med studien var att undersöka aktiva prokrastinerares tillfredsställelse med sin studieprocess i syfte att nyansera bilden av aktiv prokrastinering samt att utröna huruvida aktiv prokrastinering går att definiera som en form av prokrastinering. Data samlades in genom självskattningsformulär som delades ut till studenter på Linnéuniversitetet. Grupperna aktiva, passiva och ickeprokrastinerare jämfördes på variabeln tillfredsställelse med studieprocess och korrelationer gjordes. Signifikanta skillnader mellan alla grupper hittades, där ickeprokrastinerare var mest tillfredsställda, och passiva prokrastinerare minst tillfredsställda. Resultatet indikerar att aktiva prokrastinerare upplever negativa aspekter av sitt beteende, trots dess adaptiva natur. Självskattningsformuläret för aktiv prokrastinering utvärderas och implikationer av studien diskuteras. / This study examined active procrastination in relation to satisfaction with the studying process. Procrastination can be defined as a delay of tasks that lead to negative consequences for the individual. In contrast to traditional procrastination, active procrastination is adaptive in nature and associated with positive characteristics and consequences, which has spawned criticism that active procrastination cannot properly be defined as procrastination. The purpose of this study was to examine active procrastinator’s satisfaction with their studying process in order to nuance the view of active procrastination as well as determining whether active procrastination can be defined as a form of procrastination. Data was collected through self-report questionnaires distributed to students at Linnaeus University. The groups active, passive and non-procrastinators were compared on the variable satisfaction with the studying process, and correlations were made. All groups were statistically different, with non-procrastinators being the most satisfied and passive procrastinators the least satisfied. The results indicate that active procrastinators experience negative aspects of their behaviour, despite its adaptive nature. The measure of active procrastination is evaluated and implications of the present study are discussed.

No description available.