The unintentional procrastination scale

Procrastination refers to the delay or postponement of a task or decision and is often conceptualised as a failure of self-regulation. Recent research has suggested that procrastination could be delineated into two domains: intentional and unintentional. In this two-study paper, we aimed to develop a measure of unintentional procrastination (named the Unintentional Procrastination Scale or the 'UPS') and test whether this would be a stronger marker of psychopathology than intentional and general procrastination. In Study 1, a community sample of 139 participants completed a questionnaire that consisted of several items pertaining to unintentional procrastination that had been derived from theory, previous research, and clinical experience. Responses were subjected to a principle components analysis and assessment of internal consistency. In Study 2, a community sample of 155 participants completed the newly developed scale, along with measures of general and intentional procrastination, metacognitions about procrastination, and negative affect. Data from the UPS were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis and revised accordingly. The UPS was then validated using correlation and regression analyses. The six-item UPS possesses construct and divergent validity and good internal consistency. The UPS appears to be a stronger marker of psychopathology than the pre-existing measures of procrastination used in this study. Results from the regression models suggest that both negative affect and metacognitions about procrastination differentiate between general, intentional, and unintentional procrastination. The UPS is brief, has good psychometric properties, and has strong associations with negative affect, suggesting it has value as a research and clinical tool

A metacognitive model of procrastination

BACKGROUND: procrastination refers to the delay or postponement of task or decision-making initiation or completion and is often conceptualised as a failure of self-regulation. Recent research has suggested that metacognitions play a role in procrastination and that unintentional procrastination (UP), as opposed to intentional procrastination (IP), may be the most problematic form of this behaviour. We aimed to test a metacognitive model of procrastination that was grounded in the Self-Regulatory Executive Function model. METHODS: a convenience sample of 400 participants were recruited and completed (at least partially) a battery of online questionnaires that measured IP and UP, metacognitions about procrastination, depression, and Cognitive Attentional Syndrome (CAS) configurations. Initially, we tested series of hypotheses to establish the relationships between the experimental variables and to test whether CAS configurations would independently predict UP when controlling for age, depression, IP, metacognitions about procrastination, and whether an individual reported that they had been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder. RESULTS: CAS configurations, depression, and metacognitions independently predicted UP. Additionally, path analysis revealed that the study data was an excellent fit to the proposed metacognitive model of procrastination. LIMITATIONS: the study is cross-sectional. CONCLUSIONS: the metacognitive model of procrastination presented in this paper can be used to generate novel interventions to treat this problematic behaviour