Next Article in Journal
Impact of General Practitioner Education on Acceptance of an Adjuvanted Seasonal Influenza Vaccine among Older Adults in England
Previous Article in Journal
The Effects of Different Exercise Approaches on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Adults: A Randomised Controlled Trial
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Procrastination in University Students: A Proposal of a Theoretical Model

Luis Araya-Castillo
Mildred Burgos
Patricia González
Yuracid Rivera
Nicolás Barrientos
Víctor Yáñez Jara
Francisco Ganga-Contreras
6,* and
Walter Sáez
Facultad de Ingeniería y Empresa, Universidad Católica Silva Henríquez, Santiago 8330225, Chile
Escuela de Administración y Negocios, Universidad Miguel de Cervantes, Santiago 8320170, Chile
Escuela de Psicología, Universidad Miguel de Cervantes, Santiago 8320170, Chile
Facultad de Administración y Negocios, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Providencia 7500912, Chile
Instituto de Salud Pública, Universidad Andrés Bello, Santiago 7591538, Chile
Facultad de Educación y Humanidades, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica 1000007, Chile
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Behav. Sci. 2023, 13(2), 128;
Submission received: 23 December 2022 / Revised: 19 January 2023 / Accepted: 23 January 2023 / Published: 2 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Educational Psychology)


Procrastination is a phenomenon that affects university students and consists of not finishing a task or finishing it late, which has a direct impact on their academic performance. This is relevant because, in a context of high competition, higher education institutions and their decision-makers need to be aware of the factors that influence university students’ procrastination in order to implement actions that favor student attraction and retention. Based on the above, this research aims to propose a theoretical model of procrastination in university students, based on the literature review and content validation assessment through a semi-structured questionnaire. The proposed model is made up of nine dimensions: Psychological, Physiological, Social, Academic, Leisure, Time Management, Resources, Labor, and Environmental. Dimensions were obtained based on adequate levels of content validity provided by the literature and the questionnaire. In the future, the research proposes to study the way in which these dimensions are present in procrastination and design a scale that allows for their measurement.

1. Introduction

In our daily lives, we have to perform multiple tasks in different areas. This leads people to two paths: carrying out the task as soon as possible or postponing it; the latter being part of the tendency to delay the start or completion of a task [1], an act also known as procrastination [2]. This situation is not isolated: some research studies have found that the majority of people who procrastinate are young adults, [3,4,5]. Studies conducted in Latin America concluded that approximately 61% of people show some level of procrastination, while 20% do so on a regular basis [6,7]. This behavior is therefore present in a large majority of people, affecting areas of life such as work, health, and academia [8]. However, the fact that most affected people are young raises questions about the influence of procrastination in academia and higher education, a system that is relevant to every society. So much so that some people believe that the wealth or poverty of countries depends to a large extent on the quality of their higher education [9] as it is considered a key element in economic prosperity [10], vital for social progress [11], the central link in developing talent and culture [12], and essential for sustainable development and improvement of people’s well-being [13].
The above serves as a context for the purpose of this study, which is to propose a theoretical model of the factors involved in academic procrastination in university students. This is relevant because education basically focuses on the progressive development of students’ knowledge and skills, and on the creation of an environment of safety and healthy interaction among students, professors, and the rest of the people in the institution [14,15,16]. Understanding the factors that explain procrastinating behavior is not only relevant for students and universities but also for society as a whole, since, among all sectors, higher education is the one that relates the most to the growth of a society and its socio-economic development [17].
Therefore, this research studies the higher education sector in a way that is rigorous, practical, and functional for public policymakers and managers [18]. This analysis does not only have implications for Chile, as it shows that education has similar dynamics in other countries, except perhaps in low-income countries [19]. In order to meet the study aim, a literature review on academic procrastination was carried out based on a multidimensional approach, reviewing theories and areas of application in Latin American countries since 2008. As a result, six major dimensions were identified that cover the related aspects. Results were transferred to a semi-structured questionnaire for content validation and then applied to a theoretical sample. The responses identified nine dimensions, of which four are repeated from the theory (psychological, academic, physiological, and environmental dimensions) and five are highlighted from the questionnaire (social, time management, resources, leisure, and labor dimensions).

1.1. Procrastination

Procrastination is a relatively old phenomenon, as psychologist William James already recognized the emotional cost generated in people who suffered from it more than 120 years ago [20]. Lay [21] pointed out that procrastination considers importance to the individual whose action is being postponed, while Milgram, Mey-Tal, and Levison [22] discussed whether the performance of a task is voluntary or imposed, and Steel [2] wondered whether the person is aware of the negative consequences of this postponement [23].
Along these lines, Steel and Ferrari [5] defined procrastination as an insufficiency in self-regulation processes that causes the voluntary delay of planned activities [24] or an ineffective lifestyle that leads to a failure in the fulfillment and commitment to set targets. In this light, procrastination involves the action of not finishing a task or finishing it late, and this process is generally accompanied by feelings of nervousness or restlessness, and discouragement [25].
This habit is considered destructive since the cost of such behavior may cause psychological stress due to overexertion to meet deadlines [26], when not fulfilling responsibilities may lead to negative consequences and when the positive consequences of performing the task are higher [27,28].
The literature on the topic has been intensified in recent years, with several descriptive studies relating procrastination to other variables [24], including its status during the COVID-19 pandemic [29].

1.2. Procrastination in the Academic Field

In the academic field, procrastination can be defined as a behavior that involves always or almost always postponing the start or completion of academic tasks, or always or almost always experiencing problematic levels of anxiety associated with such postponement [30]. Likewise, Álvarez-Blas [31] defined academic procrastination as an unnecessary and unjustified delay in study-related tasks. In line with this, Schouwenburg [32] pointed out that there are two types of academic procrastination: sporadic and chronic. Sporadic academic procrastination refers to a one-off behavior while chronic academic procrastination is the generalized habit of delaying studying [33].
Literature relates procrastination to other (moderating or controlling) variables, such as self-efficacy [34], fear of failure [35] task aversion [36], lack of self-regulation [37], or disruptive classroom behavior [38], among others. Likewise, different studies have found that academic procrastination is associated with factors generated by academic tasks and limited time planning skills [39,40,41,42,43,44].
Other research studies aimed at understanding and explaining the manifestations of procrastination in everyday and academic life have associated them with mental representations; this may be because students may be imagining something that is not explicit or observable in the environment, but that is a problem that they somehow need to solve [45]. In line with this argument, a study conducted in Ecuador links performance and emotional regulation as predictors of academic procrastination in university students, with no difference between men and women [46].
Other authors have also shown a negative correlation between academic performance and university procrastination [47,48,49]. Although an ideal university student is successful, the demands of higher education lead to a high percentage of students not being able to achieve academic success due to procrastinating behavior among other issues [50].
In line with this, Cardona [51] mentioned that academic procrastination entails various consequences, including poor academic performance, demotivation, burnout, academic stress, and even dropping out of school. This is relevant as an estimated 80% to 90% of university students show dilatory behaviors at some point [24].
It is therefore possible to argue that there are multiple factors associated with dropping out and/or academic failure in higher education, and the emphasis on a specific factor depends on the authors’ perspective [52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60].
The postponement of responsibilities is a phenomenon characteristic of modern societies. Academic procrastination is a variable of interest in the context of higher education due to the consequences of homework avoidance at the university. Academic procrastination has been studied by different disciplines or explanatory models, mainly in the field of psychology. However, since this is a phenomenon of human behavior, it is to be assumed that there are other factors that intervene in this condition.
Rosario et al. [61] conducted research on this variable in non-Latin American contexts and found out that about 20% of adults admit to procrastinating in routine tasks, about 25% of the adult non-student population report that procrastination is a significant problem, and in 40% of cases it has caused financial loss at both personal and organizational levels.
As for academic procrastination, studies by Tice and Baumeister [62] and Landry [63] have proven the extent of the problem, where approximately 20% of United States college students show persistent academic procrastination, while behaviors associated with procrastination are observed in more than 80% of them. Additionally, studies such as those by Rothblum, Solomon, and Murakami [64], Rothblum [65] and Tice and Baumeister [62] show that academic procrastination is significantly related to poor academic performance, personal stress, and physical health in college students [63]. These authors identify influential factors such as performance, personal stress, and health.
While there is a great deal of research on academic procrastination in Latin America, there is little research on the specific elements associated with the concept. Therefore, it is necessary to find reliable information and data to determine the variables that influence academic procrastination in detail, considering the students’ environment, cultural context, and socio-demographic variables, among others. This also explains the interest in the theoretical review of the variable in order to find the elements that influence the concept.

2. Materials and Methods

This research is of a conclusive descriptive nature and a cross-sectional or sectional cut [66]. The aim of this study is to suggest a theoretical model for university procrastination based on background information from the literature, and validate it by applying a semi-structured questionnaire to a theoretical sample. To search for dimensions of the theoretical model of procrastination in university students, a literature review was carried out on different scales applied to this topic in the Scopus and Scielo databases, using the concepts (in English and Spanish) of “procrastination scales”, “academic procrastination”, “university procrastination”, and “student procrastination”, and focusing on the research in Latin American countries between 2008 and 2022. Scopus is used because it is the multidisciplinary database with the largest number of journals, in addition to having a strong Latin American presence in its catalog [67]. Scielo, on the other hand, is used because it is a regional database that integrates geographic collections from Latin American and African countries, whose main purpose is to make science generated in these territories visible [68,69]. The literature review made it possible to identify a series of factors that were grouped into six dimensions proposed by the researchers, determined mainly by their closeness or linkage to the concept according to the research reviewed. The results of this search were used later in an online questionnaire (conducted on the SurveyMonkey platform) completed mainly by students belonging to a group of Chilean universities located in the metropolitan region who volunteered to do so. The survey was applied from August 2017 to August 2019, and its dissemination was carried out through different academic networks that the authors have in the universities of the metropolitan region. A total of 320 responses were obtained from those invited to participate. All participating subjects gave their informed consent at the time of answering the questionnaire. The sample was non-probabilistic by convenience and consisted of students from different universities, programs, and modes of study. In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to write down the factors that best represent procrastination in academic tasks. This information allowed us to identify the dimensions and items that should be considered in the model proposal. Content validity was understood as the degree to which the measure captures the domain of the concept under study [70]. Content validity is relevant in the development stage of the measurement instrument as it shows that the indicators included in the survey are a representative sample of the set to be used [71]. Figure 1 summarizes the above steps.

Sample Description

The sample consisted of 320 people living in Chile, 62.19% of whom are female and 37.81% are male. The age ranges from 18 to 62 years and most respondents (79.69%) live in the metropolitan region, 8.13% in Valparaíso, 4.69% in the Bío-Bío region, 3.13% in the Araucanía region, 0.63% in the Tarapacá region, and 0.31% in the Coquimbo region. Respondents were also asked to specifically report their municipality of residence. The most frequently reported municipalities are Santiago, Puente Alto, La Florida, Ñuñoa, Maipú, Cerrillos, Quilicura, Lampa, Paine, Pudahuel, Renca, Maule, etc. As for their nationality, 96.88% are Chilean, while 3.12% are foreign nationals. The level of education of the sample was as follows: 63.75% of respondents have not completed a university undergraduate degree, 9.69% have completed a university undergraduate degree, 7.50% have completed secondary education, 5.63% have not completed a university postgraduate degree, 3.75% have completed a higher level technical degree, 3.44% have not completed a higher level technical degree, 2.50% have not completed studies at a professional institute, 2.19% have completed studies at a professional institute, and 1.55% have completed a university postgraduate degree. As for the level of undergraduate study, the most frequently reported degrees by respondents were audit, commercial engineering, psychology, human resources, social work, and accounting. As for employment, 44.69% of respondents are students, 40% study and work, 8.75% work, 4.06% are unemployed job seekers, and 2.50% are not in paid employment. As for the level of household income, 18% have an income between USD 0 and 336 (CLP 0 and 300,000), 29.93% have an income between USD 336 and 672 (CLP 300,000 and 600,000), 20.44% have an income between USD 672 and 1008 (CLP 600,000 and 900,000), 14.75% have an income between USD 1008 and 1344 (CLP 900,000 and 1,200,000), and 16.88% have an income over USD 1680 (CLP 1,500,000). In terms of the composition of the family unit, respondents report a range from two to five members.

3. Results

3.1. Literature Review

Based on the literature review and the search of a multidimensional approach to the variable, theoretical advances and areas of application of academic procrastination were reviewed. The aim was to carry out a complete review of the literature regarding studies that suggest and/or validate models (scales) of university procrastination and their dimensions in Latin-American countries. This is shown in Table 1.
Following the literature review, a total of 37 papers were found that use models with scales. This is the background for proposing the theoretical model: “Procrastination of University Students” (PUS). The PUS model is multidimensional and reflexive, as the latent variable (procrastination construct in university students) causes the observed variables (procrastination dimensions) [102]. The first proposal of the theoretical model is composed of 6 dimensions linked to procrastination in higher education students; namely: (1) Psychological; (2) Physiological; (3) Socio-demographic; (4) Academic; (5) Cultural; and (6) Environmental. The theoretical model considers the dimensions that are mostly incorporated by the studies in the academic literature, as well as the aspects or elements considered by each study. Table 2 shows detailed information on the dimensions, considered aspects, and authors.
The six proposed dimensions cover all the relevant aspects reviewed in the literature; therefore, they can be used for content validation. The results show that the “Psychological” dimension includes factors such as motivation, personality dimensions, emotional intelligence, time management, and so on. The “Physiological” dimension is composed of biological variables: anxiety, self-regulation of learning, and vigor, among others. The “Socio-demographic” dimension is made up of aspects, such as gender, age, socio-economic and demographic variables. The “Academic” dimension includes control variables, distance learning, academic performance, level of education, dropping out, academic performance, GPA, study habits, and academic satisfaction, among others. The “Cultural” dimension mainly contains personal individual elements. Lastly, the “Environmental” dimension involves aspects such as risk factors, difficulties in performing tasks, lack of time, levels of dedication, and peer influence.

3.2. Questionnaire

The literature review yielded six dimensions that theoretically link a number of elements with procrastination in university students. These dimensions were assessed through a semi-structured online questionnaire on a sample of 320 respondents studying in Chilean universities. Respondents were asked to write down the factors or dimensions that best represent procrastination in academic tasks and relate them to a number of items on the topic.
As background information, respondents were asked several questions about how they deal with tasks on a daily basis from the point of view of procrastination. Table 3 shows the results when the respondents were asked to choose an item with which they most identify. From a total of 309 responses, 60.95% of respondents identified most with “I do my tasks in order of priority”; 19.37% with “I do my tasks whenever I have time”; 16.51% with “I do my tasks depending on the backlog”; 1.9% with “I do not do any task”; and 1.27% with “I only do the tasks I manage to get done”.
In order to validate the content of the first proposal of the Theoretical Model “Procrastination of University Students”, the following question was asked: “What are the dimensions that best represent procrastination in academic tasks?” A total of 320 responses were collected, covering nine dimensions, from which four are repeated in the literature review and five enhanced their importance thanks to the questionnaire. The dimensions are Psychological, Social, Academic, Physiological, Time Management, Leisure, Resources, Environmental, and Labor. Table 4 shows the importance given by respondents to each dimension and its component elements.
The dimension that best represents procrastination in academic tasks according to the respondents was the Psychological one, with 22.91% of preferences, and the “lack of motivation” factor was the most chosen one (22.24%). This was followed by the Social dimension, with 19.34% of preferences, with the factor “family aspects” as the most relevant with 28.83%. In third place was the Academic dimension with 13.15%, where the “educational model” was the most representative factor with 21.85% of preferences. The Physiological dimension reported 12.28% of preferences, where “physiological needs” was the most relevant factor (26.6%). Time Management ranked fifth among the dimensions, with 9.58%, and “lack of time” as the dominant factor with 40.91%. The Leisure dimension emerged as a new dimension with 9.28% of preferences, with “recreational activities” as the most chosen factor (30.03%). Resources and Environmental dimensions showed similar percentages, with 5.31% and 5.10%, respectively, where “economic resources” dominated the former (84.43%), and “conflictive environment” the latter (41.03%). The Labor dimension least represented procrastination according to the respondents, with “workload” as the dominant factor with 70% of preferences.

3.3. Limitations

Owlia and Aspinwall [103] established that validity comprises two aspects: quantitative validity and qualitative validity. Qualitative validity identifies the dimensions linked to procrastination in the literature and reviews their validity through a questionnaire. Qualitative validity determines whether the measures capture the key factors of an unobservable construct, which is also in line with content validity. The latter is relevant for full validation and the subsequent scaling of the PUS model. Future research studies are expected to collect information through individual interviews, focus groups, and expert opinions, seeking to achieve category saturation [104]. The proposal, therefore, is to use qualitative tools as they allow for analyzing phenomena in greater depth than quantitative tools [105]. The proposal includes the following: fifteen in-depth interviews to be conducted to find out students’ perceptions of the procrastination construct and the dimensions that they consider relevant in evaluation; four focus groups to study and analyze students’ perceptions in interaction; and four experts in university procrastination can also participate, who should be asked to evaluate the proposed scale for procrastination in university students. This information will be used to validate the results obtained from the semi-structured online questionnaires applied to the students.

4. Conclusions

This research studies the factors that influence procrastination among university students in Latin America on this topic because none of the previous studies have covered the factors affecting this concept. The aim was to collect information in relation to the actions that have an impact on the backlog of academic tasks. After data collection, the dimensions that directly affect the student’s procrastination were considered through a repetitive search, and the content validity was given by the questionnaire. The analysis seems to conclude that the factors that mainly influence university students to postpone the fulfillment of an obligation or the development of action have to do with the psychological, social, and academic dimensions and the factors that integrate them.
These results are in line with other international studies that deem these dimensions relevant. Even so, they also highlight areas such as resources and labor, which for a certain percentage of students are distracting elements that prevent the fulfillment of their academic tasks. This is not a novelty, since due to the configuration of higher education systems in Latin America (and in Chile), many students must work in order to pay for their university studies, making both roles compatible. Academic procrastination is not a subject of the establishment of a repertoire of activities but is rather a self-regulatory model that includes aspects such as autonomous learning goals.
The aim of the research was to propose a theoretical model of procrastination in university students, which was achieved by means of quantitative instruments. However, the model still needs to corroborate its full validation through qualitative methods in order to carry out the corresponding factorial analysis, which will make the model reliable and accurately prove that procrastination in university students is explained by the aforementioned dimensions. This is not a trivial task, as a scale measuring procrastination in university students can finally be developed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.A.-C.; Methodology, M.B.; Validation, V.Y.J.; Formal analysis, N.B.; Investigation, P.G. and Y.R.; Writing—review & editing, F.G.-C. and W.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and ethics committee review and approval was waived, as the survey was made available on an online platform for potential respondents to answer voluntarily. The survey was developed following institutional protocols and regulations for this type of research.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Solomon, L.J.; Rothblum, E.D. Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates. J. Couns. Psychol. 1984, 31, 503–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Steel, P. The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychol. Bull. 2007, 133, 65–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Day, V.; Mensink, D.; O’Sullivan, M. Patterns of academic procrastination. J. Coll. Read. Learn. 2000, 30, 120–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Carranza, R.; Ramírez, A. Procrastinación y características demográficas asociados en estudiantes universitarios. Apunt. Univ. Rev. Investig. 2013, 3, 95–108. [Google Scholar]
  5. Steel, P.; Ferrari, J. Sex, education and procrastination: An epidemiological study of procrastinators’ characteristics from a global sample. Eur. J. Personal. 2013, 27, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ferrari, J.; O’Callaghan, J.; y Newbegin, A. Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays amog aduts. N. Am. J. Psychol. 2005, 7, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ferrari, J.; Tice, D. Procrastination as a Self-Handicap for men and women: A task-avoidance strategy in laboratory setting. J. Res. Personal. 2007, 34, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Parada, B.E.; Schulmeyer, M.K. Procrastinación académica en estudiantes universitarios. Rev. Aportes Comun. Cult. 2021, 1, 51–66. [Google Scholar]
  9. Hota, P.; Sarangi, P. Quality Revolution of Higher Education: A Study in India. Srusti Manag. Rev. 2019, XII, 49–56. [Google Scholar]
  10. Vnoučková, L.; Urbancová, H.; Smolová, H. Business and Management Higher Education Quality: A Case Study of a Czech Private University. Period. Polytech. Soc. Manag. Sci. 2019, 27, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Batool, S.; Nadeem, A.; Asif, M. Managing Higher Education Quality Enhancement in Pakistan through Communication Skill to achieve International Opportunities. J. Manag. Sci. 2018, 12, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, Q.; Fan, Y. Research on the Impact of Internet Development on the Quality of China’s Higher Education. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 2018, 18, 1531–1539. [Google Scholar]
  13. Choudhary, M.; Paharia, P. Role of leadership in quality education in public and private higher education institutions: A comparative study. J. Progress. Educ. 2018, 11, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bernard, A. The Child-Friendly School: A Summary; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  15. Capelleras, J.L.; Veciana, J.M. Calidad de servicio en la enseñanza universitaria: Desarrollo y validación de una escala de medida. Rev. Eur. Dir. Econ. Empresa 2004, 13, 55–72. [Google Scholar]
  16. Torres, E.; Araya-Castillo, L. Construcción de una escala para medir la calidad del servicio de las universidades: Una Aplicación al Contexto Chileno. Rev. Cienc. Soc. 2010, 16, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Senthilkumar, N.; Arulraj, A. SQM-HEI–determination of service quality measurement of higher education in India. J. Model. Manag. 2011, 6, 60–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Thieme, C.; Araya-Castillo, L.; Olavarrieta, S. Grupos estratégicos de universidades y su relación con el desempeño: El caso de Chile. Innovar 2012, 22, 105–116. [Google Scholar]
  19. Larraín, C.; Zurita, S. The new student loan system in Chile’s higher education. High. Educ. 2008, 55, 683–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Klassen, R.; Krawchuk, L.; Rajani, S. Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2008, 33, 915–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lay, C.H. Por fin, mi artículo de investigación sobre la dilación. Rev. Investig. Pers. 1986, 20, 474–495. [Google Scholar]
  22. Milgram, N.N.; Mey-Tal, G.; Levison, Y. Procrastination, generalized or specific, in college students and their parents. Personal. Individ. Differ. 1998, 25, 297–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Guzmán-Pérez, D. Procrastinación: Una Mirada Clínica. Master’s Thesis, Instituto Superior de Estudios Psicológicos, Barcelona, Spain, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  24. Rodríguez, A.; Clariana, M. Procrastinación en estudiantes universitarios: Su relación con la edad y el curso académico. Rev. Colomb. Psicol. 2017, 26, 45–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ferrari, J.; Johnson, J.; McCown, W. Procrastination and Task Avoidance; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  26. Furlan, L.; Heredia, D.; Piemontesi, S.; Illbele, A.; Sánchez-Rosas, J. Adaptación de la escala de procrastinación de Tuckman para estudiantes universitarios. In Proceedings of the II Congreso Internacional de Investigación y Práctica Profesional en Psicología XVII Jornadas de Investigación Sexto Encuentro de Investigadores en Psicología del MERCOSUR, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 22–24 November 2010; Facultad de Psicología—Universidad de Buenos Aires: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  27. Aziz, N.; Zain, Z.; Mafuzi, R.M.; Mustapa, A.M.; Najib, N.H.; Lah, N.F. Relative importance index (RII) in ranking of procrastination factors among university students. In AIP Conference Proceedings; AIP Publishing: Melville, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  28. Mann, L. Procrastination Revisited: A Commentary. Aust. Psychol. 2016, 51, 47–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Unda-López, A.; Osejo-Taco, G.; Vinueza-Cabezas, A.; Paz, C.; Hidalgo-Andrade, P. Procrastination during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. García-Ayala, C. Comprendiendo la procrastinación con el modelo ABC del Albert Ellis. Rev. Mex. Gac. Esc. Med. Justo Sierra 2009, 2, 4. [Google Scholar]
  31. Álvarez-Blas, O. Procrastinación general y académica en una muestra estudiantes de secundaria de Lima. Persona 2010, 13, 159–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Schouwenburg, H.C. Procrastination in academic settings: General introduction. In Counseling the Procrastinator in Academic Settings; Schouwenburg, H.C., Lay, C.H., Pychyl, T.A., Ferrari, J.R., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  33. Clariana, M. Procrastinació Acadèmica; Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona: Barcelona, Spain, 2009; Volume 210. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ferrari, J.; Parker, J.T.; Ware, C.B. Academic procrastination: Personality correlates with Myers-Briggs types, self-efficacy, and academic locus of control. J. Soc. Behav. Personal. 1992, 7, 495–502. [Google Scholar]
  35. Haghbin, M.; McCaffrey, A.; Pychyl, T.A. The complexity of the relation between fear of failure and procrastination. J. Ration.-Emot. Cogn.-Behav. Ther. 2012, 30, 249–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Blunt, A.K.; Pychyl, T.A. Task aversiveness and procrastination: A multi-dimensional approach to task aversiveness across stages of personal projects. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2000, 28, 153–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Balkis, M.; Duru, E. Procrastination, self-regulation failure, academic life satisfaction, and affective well-being: Underregulation or misregulation form. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 2015, 31, 439–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Roig, M.; DeTommaso, L. ¿Are college cheating and plagiarism related to academic procrastination? Psychol. Rep. 1995, 77, 691–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jackson, T.; Weiss, K.; Lundquist, J.; Hooper, D. The impact of hope, procrastination and social activity on academic performance of mid-western college students. Education 2003, 124, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  40. Argumedo, D.; Díaz, K.; Calderon, A. Evaluación de la confiabilidad y la estructura familiar de tres escalas de procrastinación crónica. Rev. PUCP 2005, 23, 113–138. [Google Scholar]
  41. Klassen, R.; Kuzucu, E. Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey. Educ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 69–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chan, L. Procrastinación académica como predictor en el rendimiento académico en jóvenes de educación superior. Temática Psicológica 2011, 7, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Clariana, M.; Cladellas, R.; Del Mar, M.; Gotzens, C. La influencia del género en variables de la personalidad que condicionan el aprendizaje: Inteligencia emocional y procrastinación académica. Rev. Electrónica Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2011, 14, 87–96. [Google Scholar]
  44. Khan, M.J.; Arif, H.; Noor, S.S.; y Muneer, S. Academic procrastination among male and female university and college students. FWU J. Soc. Sci. 2014, 8, 65. [Google Scholar]
  45. Paz, A.; Aranda, R.; Juana, M.; Delgado, M.; Sayas, Y. Representaciones mentales sobre la procrastinación en estudiantes de psicología de la UNMSM. Rev. Electrónica Psicol. Iztacala 2014, 17, 1148. [Google Scholar]
  46. Moreta-Herrera, R.; Durán-Rodríguez, T.; Villegas-Villacrés, N. Regulación Emocional y Rendimiento como predictores de la Procrastinación Académica en estudiantes universitarios. J. Psychol. Educ. 2018, 13, 155–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wesley, J.C. Effects of ability, high-school achievement and procrastinatory behavior on college performance. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1994, 54, 404–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Moon, S.M.; Illingworth, A.J. Exploring the dynamic nature of procrastination: A latent growth curve analysis of academic procrastination. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2005, 38, 297–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kim, K.R.; Seo, E.H. The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: A meta-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2015, 82, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wilson, B.; Bguyen, T. Belonging to Tomorrow: An Overview of Procrastination. Int. J. Psychol. Stud. 2012, 4, 211–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cardona, L. Relaciones Entre Procrastinación Académica y Estrés Académico en Estudiantes Universitarios. Bachelor’s Thesis, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  52. Barrie, S.; Ginns, P.; Prosser, M. Impacto temprano y resultados de una perspectiva de aprendizaje centrada institucionalmente y centrada en el alumno sobre la garantía de calidad de la enseñanza. Evaluación Evaluación Educ. Super. 2005, 30, 641–656. [Google Scholar]
  53. Salinitri, G. The effects of formal mentoring on the retention rates for first-year, low achieving students. Can. J. Educ. 2005, 28, 853–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tinto, V. Research and practice of student retention: What next? J. Coll. Stud. Retent. Res. Theory Pract. 2006, 8, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. McLaughlin, P.; Simpson, N. The common first year programme: Some lessons from a construction science course. Teach. High. Educ. 2007, 12, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Creed, P.; Fallon, T.; Hood, M. The relationship between career adaptability, person and situation variables, and career concerns in young adults. J. Vocat. Behav. 2009, 74, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Casillas, A.; Robbins, S.; Allen, J.; Kuo, Y.L.; Hanson, M.A.; Schmeiser, C. Predicting early academic failure in high school from prior academic achievement, psychosocial characteristics, and behavior. J. Educ. Psychol. 2012, 104, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Robotham, D. Student part-time employment: Characteristics and consequences. Educ. + Train. 2012, 54, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ukpong, D.; George, I. Length of study-time behavior and academic achievement of social studies education students in the University of Uyo. Int. Educ. Stud. 2013, 6, 172–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Melo, A.; Ramos, J.; Hernández, P. La educación superior en Colombia: Situación actual y análisis de eficiencia. Borradores Econ. 2014, 808, 1–50. [Google Scholar]
  61. Rosario, P.; Costa, M.; Nunez, J.C.; Gonzalez-Pienda, J.; Solano, P.; Valle, A. Academic procrastination: Associations with personal, school, and family variables. Span. J. Psychol. 2009, 12, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Tice, D.; Baumeister, R. Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress and health: The costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychol. Sci. 1997, 8, 454–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Landry, C. Self-Efficacy, Motivational Outcome Expectation Correlates of College Students’ Intention Certainty. Disertación para Optar al Título de Doctor en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales. Ph.D. Thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  64. Rothblum, E.; Solomon, L.J.; Murakami, J. Affective, cognitive, and behavioral differences between high and low procrastinators. J. Couns. Psychol. 1986, 33, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rothblum, E. Fear of failure. The psychodynamic, need achievement, fear of success, and procrastination models. In Handbook of Social and Evaluation Anxiety; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  66. Malhotra, N. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation; Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  67. Repiso, R.; Jiménez-Contreras, E.; Aguaded, I. Revistas Iberoamericanas de Educación en SciELO Citation Index y Emerging Source Citation Index. Rev. Española Doc. Científica 2017, 40, e186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Miguel, S. Revistas y producción científica de América Latina y el Caribe: Su visibilidad en SciELO, RedALyC y SCOPUS. Rev. Interam. Bibl. 2011, 34, 187–199. [Google Scholar]
  69. Santa, S.; Herrero-Solana, V. Cobertura de la ciencia de América Latina y el Caribe en Scopus vs web of science. Investig. Bibl. 2010, 24, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nunnally, J.C. Teoría Psicométrica, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  71. Deng, S.; Dart, J. Measuring market orientation: A multi-factor, multi-item approach. J. Mark. Manag. 1994, 10, 725–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Pichen-Fernandez, J.A.; Turpo Chaparro, J. Influencia del autoconcepto y autoeficacia académica sobre la procrastinación académica en universitarios peruanos. Propósitos Represent. 2022, 10, e1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Altamirano Chérrez, C.E.; Rodríguez Pérez, M.L. Procrastinación académica y su relación con la ansiedad. Rev. Eugenio Espejo 2021, 15, 16–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Aspée, J.; González, J.; Herrera, Y. Relación funcional entre procrastinación académica y compromiso en estudiantes de educación superior: Una propuesta de análisis. Perspect. Educ. 2021, 60, 4–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Alegre-Bravo, A.; De Loyola, U.S.I.; Benavente-Dongo, D. Análisis Psicométrico de la Escala adaptada de Procrastinación de Tuckman (APTS). Propósitos Represent. 2020, 8, e562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Burgos-Torre, K.S.; Salas-Blas, E. Procrastinación y Autoeficacia académica en estudiantes universitarios limeños. Propósitos Represent. 2020, 8, e790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Da Silva, P.G.N.; Machado, M.D.O.S.; Couto, R.N.; Oliveira, L.B.S.; Da Fonsêca, P.N. Motivação para leitura e variáveis sociodemográficas como preditoras da procrastinação acadêmica. Psicol. Conoc. Soc. 2020, 10, 139–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Mejia, C.; Ruiz-Urbina, F.; Benites-Gamboa, D.; Pereda-Castro, W. Factores académicos asociados a la procrastinación. Rev. Cuba. Med. Gen. Integral 2019, 34, 61–70. [Google Scholar]
  79. Andrade-Gámez, N.E. La Motivación y la Procrastinación en Matemática. Rev. Científica Hallazgos 2017, 2, 20–29. [Google Scholar]
  80. Dominguez-Lara, S.A.; Campos-Uscanga, Y. Influencia de la satisfacción con los estudios sobre la procrastinación académica en estudiantes de psicología: Un estudio preliminar. Liberabit 2017, 23, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Garzón, A.; Gil, J. Propiedades psicométricas del TMBS en universitarios. Rev. Electrónica Investig. Educ. 2017, 19, 50–60. [Google Scholar]
  82. Garzón, A.; Gil, J. Propiedades Psicométricas de la Versión en Español de la Prueba Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS). Rev. Iberoam. Diagnóstico Evaluación 2016, 43, 149–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Marquina-Luján, R.J.; Gomez-Vargas, L.; Salas-Herrera, C.; Santibañez-Gihua, S.; Rumiche-Prieto, R. Procrastinación en alumnos universitarios de Lima Metropolitana. Rev. Peru. Obstet. Enfermería 2016, 12, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  84. Navarro-Roldan, C. Rendimiento académico: Una mirada desde la procrastinación y la motivación intrínseca. Katharsis 2016, 21, 241–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Pardo-Bolívar, D.; Perilla-Ballesteros, L.; Salinas-Ramírez, C. Relación entre procrastinación académica y ansiedad-rasgo en estudiantes de psicología. Cuad. Hispanoam. Psicol. 2016, 14, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Tarazona Pérez, F.; Romero Acuña, J.N.; Aliaga Contreras, I.M.; Veliz Rodríguez, M.F. Procrastinación académica en estudiantes de educación en Lenguas, Literatura y Comunicación: Características, modos y factores. Horiz. Cienc. 2016, 6, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Yarlequé, L.; Alva, L.J.; Monroe, J.; Nuñez, E.; Navarro, L.; Padilla, M.; Matalinares, M.; Navarro, L.; Cárdenas, J.C. Procrastinación, estrés y bienestar psicológico en estudiantes de educación superior de Lima y Junín. Horiz. Cienc. 2016, 6, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Medina, M.; Tejada, M. La Autoestima y Procrastinación Académica en Jóvenes Universitarios. Bachelor’s Thesis, Universidad Católica Santa Lucia, Santiago, Chile, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  89. Rico-Palma, C. Procrastinación y Motivación en una Muestra de Estudiantes de la Universidad del Bío-Bío, sede Chillán. Bachelor’s Thesis, Universidad del Bío Bío, Concepción, Chile, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  90. Sureda, J.; Comas, R.; Oliver, M. Plagio académico entre alumnado de secundaria y bachillerato: Diferencias en cuanto al género y la procrastinación. Comunicar 2015, 44, 103–111. [Google Scholar]
  91. Angarita-Becerra, L.D. Algunas relaciones entre la procrastinación y los procesos básicos de motivación y memoria. Rev. Iberoam. Psicol. 2014, 7, 91–102. [Google Scholar]
  92. Furlan, L.A.; Ferrero, M.J.; Gallart, G. Procrastinación académica: Validación de una escala en una muestra de estudiantes de una universidad privada. Liberabit 2014, 20, 293–304. [Google Scholar]
  93. Furlan, L.; Ferrero, M.J.; Gallart, G. Ansiedad ante los exámenes, procrastinación y síntomas mentales en estudiantes de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Rev. Argent. Cienc. Comport. 2014, 6, 31–39. [Google Scholar]
  94. Segovia, J. Trayectorias académicas dilatadas en la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales-Udelar. In Proceedings of the VIII Jornadas de Sociología de la UNLP, Ensenada, Argentina, 3–5 December 2014; Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación, Departamento de Sociología: La Plata, Argentina, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  95. Clariana, M. Personalidad, procrastinación y conducta deshonesta en alumnado de distintos grados universitarios. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 2013, 11, 451–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Furlan, L. Eficacia de una Intervención para Disminuir la Ansiedad frente a los Exámenes en Estudiantes Universitarios Argentinos. Rev. Colomb. Psicol. 2013, 22, 75–89. [Google Scholar]
  97. González-Brignardello, M.P.; Sánchez-Elvira-Paniagua, Á. ¿Puede amortiguar el Engagement los efectos nocivos de la Procrastinación Académica? Acción Psicológica 2013, 10, 115–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Galarregui, M.; Arana, F.; Partarrieu, A. Procrastinación académica y su relación con Perfeccionismo. In Proceedings of the III Congreso Internacional de Investigación y Práctica Profesional en Psicología XVIII Jornadas de Investigación Séptimo Encuentro de Investigadores en Psicología del MERCOSUR, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 27–30 November 2013; Facultad de Psicología-Universidad de Buenos Aires: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  99. Sampaio, R.K.N.; Bariani, I.C.D. Procrastinaçao acadêmica: Um estudo exploratório. Estud. Interdiscip. Psicol. 2011, 2, 242–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Böhrt, R.; Arce, P.; Walker, D.; Romero, C. Modificación de Patrones de Comportamiento Académico Mediante un Programa de Instrucción Personalizada en Estudiantes Universitarios. Ajayu Órgano Difusión Científica Dep. Psicol. UCBSP 2009, 7, 76–112. [Google Scholar]
  101. Rosario, P.; Núñez, J.C.; Salgado, A.; González-Pienda, J.; Valle, A.; Joly, C.; Bernardo, A. Ansiedad ante los exámenes: Relación con variables personales y familiares. Psicothema 2008, 20, 563–570. [Google Scholar]
  102. MacKenzie, S.B.; Podsakoff, P.M.; Podsakoff, N.P. Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Q. 2011, 35, 293–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Owlia, M.S.; Aspinwall, E.M. A framework for measuring quality in engineering education. Total Qual. Manag. 1998, 9, 501–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Araya-Castillo, L.; Pedreros-Gajardo, M. Usos del celular en jóvenes chilenos de bajos recursos. Rev. Latinoam. Cienc. Soc. Niñez Juv. 2013, 11, 109–121. [Google Scholar]
  105. Denzin, N.K.; Lincoln, Y.S. Strategies of inquiry. In Handbook of Qualitative Research; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2000; Volume 2, pp. 367–378. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Summary of research stages.
Figure 1. Summary of research stages.
Behavsci 13 00128 g001
Table 1. Previous Scales on Procrastination.
Table 1. Previous Scales on Procrastination.
Author(s)Country of ApplicationScope of ApplicationDimensionsFactors
Pichen-Fernández and Turpo Chaparro [72]PeruUniversity students2Procrastination, self-efficacy
Altamirano and Rodríguez [73]EcuadorUniversity students3Procrastination, anxiety, gender
Aspée and Herrera [74]ChileUniversity students2Procrastination, student engagement
Estremadoiro, Parada, and Schulmeyer [8]BoliviaUniversity students4Procrastination, time management, psychological processes, academic performance
Alegre-Bravo and Benavente-Dongo [75]PeruUniversity students2Procrastination, academic performance
Burgos-Tower and Salas-Bla [76]PeruUniversity students2Procrastination, self-efficacy
Silva, Machado, Lays, and Fonsêca [77]BrazilUniversity students2Motivation, socio-demographic variables
Mejía, Ruiz-Urbina, Benites-Gamboa, and Pereda-Castro [78]PeruUniversity students3Procrastination, gender, age, academic variables
Andrade-Gámez [79]EcuadorHigh school students3Gender, procrastination, motivation
Domínguez-Lara and Campos-Uscanga [80]PeruPsychology students2Procrastination, satisfaction with studies
Garzón-Umerenkova and Gil-Flores [81]SpainUniversity students4Time management, dropout, distribution of time, academic performance
Rodríguez and Clariana [24]SpainUniversity students3Age, procrastination, academic year
Garzón-Umerenkova and Gil-Flores [82]ColombiaHigher
7Attraction to the task, love of the task, uncertainties about the task, fear of failure, task failure, perfectionism, academic achievement
Marquina-Luján, Gómez-Vargas, Salas-Herrera, Santibañez-Gihua, and Rumiche-Prieto [83]PeruUniversity students2Procrastination, socio-demographic profile
Navarro-Roldán [84]ColombiaPsychology students3Procrastination, motivation, control variables
Pardo-Bolívar, Perilla-Ballesteros, and Salinas-Ramírez [85]ColombiaHigher
4Boredom, time management, peer influence, and health hazards
Tarazona-Pérez, Romero-Acuña, Aliaga-Contreras, and Veliz-Rodríguez [86]PeruHigher
3Indecision, avoidance, activation
Yarlequé, Alva, Nuñez, Navarro, Padilla, Matalinares, Navarro, and Cárdenas [87]PeruUniversity
3Stress, procrastination, psychological well-being
Medina and Tejada [88]PeruUniversity
2Procrastination, self-esteem
Rico-Palma [89]ChileUniversity
4Procrastination, age, gender, motivation
Sureda-Negre, Comas-Forgas and Oliver-Trobat [90]SpainHigher
3Time, teaching model, assessment
Angarita-Becerra [91]ArgentinaHuman
3Psychological processes, sources of motivation, behavior
Domínguez-Lara, Villegas-García and Centeno-Leyva [92]PeruHigher
5Grade Point Average (GPA), study habits, academic satisfaction, expectation to succeed, motivation
Furlan, Ferrero, and Gallart [93]ArgentinaUniversity
5Anxiety, mental symptoms, procrastination, academic performance, gender
Paz, Aranda, Juana, Delgado, and Sayas [45]PeruUniversity
4Risk factors, protective factors, lack of time, stress
Segovia [94]UruguayUniversity
3Gender, age, socio-economic status
Carranza and Ramírez [4]PeruUniversity
2Gender, age
Clariana [95]SpainUniversity
3Procrastination, personality dimensions, dishonest behavior
Furlan [96]ArgentinaHigher
3Anxiety, academic self-efficacy, self-regulation of learning
Guzmán-Pérez [23]SpainUniversity
students and human
4Procrastination, anxiety, demographic variables, biological variables
González-Brignardello and Sánchez-Elvira [97]SpainEngagement3Dedication, vigor and absorption, commitment
Clariana, Cladellas, Badía, and Gotzens [43]SpainPsychology students5Procrastination, academic delay, emotional intelligence, gender, age
Galarregui, Arana, and Partarrieu [98]ArgentinaAcademia2Procrastination, perfectionist traits
Sampaio and Bariani [99]BrazilHigher
4Lack of time, dissatisfaction in performing tasks, not having time, difficulty performing tasks
Alvarez-Blas [31]PeruHigh school students3Procrastination, gender, level of education
Böhrt, Arce, Walker, and Romero [100]BoliviaUniversity
3Procrastination, distance learning, perfectionism
Rosario, Núñez, Salgado, González-Pienda, Valle, Joly, and Bernardo [101]SpainHigh school students3Procrastination, personal variables, anxiety
Table 2. Proposal for a Theoretical Model of Procrastination in University Students.
Table 2. Proposal for a Theoretical Model of Procrastination in University Students.
DimensionsConsidered AspectsPrevious Scales
PsychologicalMotivation, personality dimensions, dishonest behavior, perfectionism, self-esteem, psychological well-being, emotional intelligence, perfectionist traits, time management, time distribution, mental symptoms, psychological processes, dissatisfaction with performing tasks, self-regulation, expectation to succeed, indecision, avoidance, activation, self-regulation, sources of motivation, behavior, postponement of the task, commitment, attraction to the task, fear of failure, boredom, uncertainty about the task.[8,23,43,73,74,77,79,81,82,84,85,86,87,88,89,91,92,93,95,97,98,99,101]
PhysiologicalBiological variables, anxiety, stress, self-regulation of learning, vigor, absorption, health hazards.[23,45,85,87,93,96,97,101]
Socio-demographicGender, age, personal variables, socio-demographic profile, socio-economic level, demographic variables.[4,23,24,31,43,77,78,79,83,89,93,94]
AcademicDropping out, control variables, distance learning, academic performance, academic year, level of education, academic performance, GPA, study habits, academic satisfaction, study patterns, exam performance, academic delay, academic self-efficacy, teacher model, assessment, academic behavior.[8,24,31,43,72,75,76,78,80,81,82,84,87,90,92,93,96,100]
CulturalPersonal variables, planning failure.[101]
EnvironmentalRisk factors, protective factors, difficulty in performing tasks, lack of time, time, dedication, peer influence.[45,85,90,97,99]
Table 3. Respondents’ Results on How they Deal with Tasks.
Table 3. Respondents’ Results on How they Deal with Tasks.
I do my tasks in order of priority188
I do my tasks whenever I have time59
I do my tasks depending on the backlog52
I do not do any task6
I only do the tasks I manage to get done4
Table 4. Percentage of importance for each dimension and its associated factors.
Table 4. Percentage of importance for each dimension and its associated factors.
DimensionPreference PercentageAssociated Factors
Psychological22.91%Lack of motivation, attitude, insecurity in personal skills, psychological factors, stress, boredom, exciting factors, and addictions
Social19.34%Family aspects, socialization, socio-cultural level, personal problems, lack of support, home activities, and love relationships
Academic13.15%Educational model, teacher performance, study habits, administrative-academic management of the university, academic training, interest in the task, academic overload, vocation, and university environment
Physiological12.28%Physiological needs, physical or mental exhaustion, depression, health status, age, pregnancy, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)
Time Management9.58%Lack of time, definition of priorities, task planning, doing everything at the last minute and task overload
Leisure9.28%Recreational activities, technological devices, social media, browsing the Internet, and leisure time
Resources5.31%Transportation, economic resources, academic resources, and technological resources
Environment5.10%Conflicting environment, accessibility, environmental conditions, inappropriate study space and distracting elements
Labor3.05%Workload, working and studying at the same time, work problems, and working hours.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Araya-Castillo, L.; Burgos, M.; González, P.; Rivera, Y.; Barrientos, N.; Yáñez Jara, V.; Ganga-Contreras, F.; Sáez, W. Procrastination in University Students: A Proposal of a Theoretical Model. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 128.

AMA Style

Araya-Castillo L, Burgos M, González P, Rivera Y, Barrientos N, Yáñez Jara V, Ganga-Contreras F, Sáez W. Procrastination in University Students: A Proposal of a Theoretical Model. Behavioral Sciences. 2023; 13(2):128.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Araya-Castillo, Luis, Mildred Burgos, Patricia González, Yuracid Rivera, Nicolás Barrientos, Víctor Yáñez Jara, Francisco Ganga-Contreras, and Walter Sáez. 2023. "Procrastination in University Students: A Proposal of a Theoretical Model" Behavioral Sciences 13, no. 2: 128.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop