Main content
Self-Report Measures of Procrastination Exhibit Inconsistent Concurrent Validity, Predictive Validity, and Psychometric Properties
- Lisa Vangsness
- Nathaniel Mark Voss
- Noelle Maddox
- Victoria Devereaux
- Emma Martin
- Caytlyn Nystrom
Date created: | Last Updated:
: DOI | ARK
Creating DOI. Please wait...
Category: Project
Description: Procrastination is a chronic and widespread problem; however, emerging work raises questions regarding the strength of the relationship between self-reported procrastination and behavioral measures of task engagement. This study assessed the internal reliability, concurrent validity, predictive validity, and psychometric properties of 10 self-report procrastination assessments using responses collected from 242 students. Participants’ scores on each self-report instrument were compared to each other using correlations and cluster analysis. Lasso estimation was used to test the self-report scores’ ability to predict two behavioral measures of delay (days to study completion; pacing style). The self-report instruments exhibited strong internal reliability and moderate levels of concurrent validity. Some self-report measures were predictive of days to study completion. No self-report measures were predictive of exhibiting a deadline action pacing style. Many of the self-report measures of procrastination exhibited poor factor structures. These results suggest that researchers should exercise caution in selecting self-report measures and that further study is necessary to determine the factors that drive misalignment between self-reports and behavioral measures of delay.
Files
Files can now be accessed and managed under the Files tab.
Citation
Recent Activity
Unable to retrieve logs at this time. Please refresh the page or contact support@osf.io if the problem persists.