14
This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut] On: 01 May 2013, At: 23:29 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cedp20 Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey Robert M. Klassen a & Elçin Kuzucu b a University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada b Konya Education District, Konya, Turkey Published online: 09 Jan 2009. To cite this article: Robert M. Klassen & Elçin Kuzucu (2009): Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey, Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 29:1, 69-81 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410802478622 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and- conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

  • Upload
    elcin

  • View
    220

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 01 May 2013, At: 23:29Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational Psychology: AnInternational Journal of ExperimentalEducational PsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cedp20

Academic procrastination andmotivation of adolescents in TurkeyRobert M. Klassen a & Elçin Kuzucu ba University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canadab Konya Education District, Konya, TurkeyPublished online: 09 Jan 2009.

To cite this article: Robert M. Klassen & Elçin Kuzucu (2009): Academic procrastination andmotivation of adolescents in Turkey, Educational Psychology: An International Journal ofExperimental Educational Psychology, 29:1, 69-81

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410802478622

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Page 2: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational PsychologyVol. 29, No. 1, January 2009, 69–81

ISSN 0144-3410 print/ISSN 1469-5820 online© 2009 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/01443410802478622http://www.informaworld.com

Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Robert M. Klassen*a and Elçin Kuzucu**b

aUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; bKonya Education District, Konya, TurkeyTaylor and Francis LtdCEDP_A_348030.sgm(Received 17 October 2007; final version received 15 September 2008)10.1080/01443410802478622Educational Psychology0144-3410 (print)/1469-5820 (online)Research Article2008Taylor & Francis0000000002008Dr. [email protected]

This article presents a study of academic procrastination and associated motivationvariables in 508 adolescents from a general secondary school in central Turkey.Girls reported higher levels of self-efficacy for self-regulation and predictedhigher Turkish grades than boys, but there was no difference in levels ofprocrastination. Academic self-efficacy was a stronger predictor of procrastinationfor girls than for boys, but for both groups self-efficacy for self-regulation was thestrongest predictor of procrastination. Most participants (83%) reported spendingone hour or more procrastinating per day, with writing tasks the most prone toprocrastination for boys and girls. When procrastinating, Turkish adolescent boyswere more likely to spend time with electronic media (watching TV, emailing,going on-line, and, in particular, playing computer games), whereas girls weremost likely to read books, magazines, and newspapers. The article concludes withimplications for researchers, and also for parents and educators of adolescents.

Keywords: procrastination; motivation; adolescents; self-regulation; self-efficacy;Turkey

Turkish proverb: Bugünün i[scedil] ini yarına bırakma.Translation: Don’t leave today’s job until tomorrow.

Academic procrastination is common and very likely universal, but how it operates asa psychological construct in diverse contexts is not well understood. Motivationresearchers are increasingly exploring how procrastination adversely affects academicachievement, mental health, and socio-academic outcomes, but almost all of theresearch to date has involved undergraduate students, and typically undergraduatestudents from culturally Western settings. This article explores academic procrastina-tion and motivation in adolescents in Turkey, a rapidly changing predominantlyMuslim country with historical and cultural links to both Europe and the Middle East.Through the use of a social cognitive self-regulation theoretical framework, the studyexplores patterns of academic procrastination and motivation in 508 adolescents froman urban secondary school in central Turkey.

Procrastination is defined as the voluntary yet irrational delay of an intended courseof action (Steel, 2007), and frequently results in unsatisfactory performance andemotional upset (Chu & Choi, 2005; Ferrari, O’Callaghan, & Newbegin, 2005;Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). Considerable attention has been given to the procrasti-nation of undergraduates; academic procrastination is a sort of anti-motivation that has

*Corresponding author. Email: email [email protected]**Author began study as Elçin Cetinkale and completed the research as Elçin Kuzucu.

s

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 3: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

70 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

been conceptualised as a failure of self-regulation, and is associated with low levelsof academic self-efficacy and self-esteem, and with high levels of anxiety, stress, andillness (e.g., Ferrari et al., 2005; Howell, Watson, Powell, & Buro, 2006; Schraw,Wadkins, & Olafson, 2007; Tice & Baumeister, 1997; Wolters, 2003). Previous studieshave shown that the rate of problematic academic procrastination among undergradu-ates is at least 70% (Ellis & Knaus, 1977), with some estimates as high as 95% (Steel,2007). The procrastination of university students results in incomplete assignments,cramming, test and social anxiety, use of self-handicapping strategies, fear of failure,and under-achievement, and can result in damaging mental health outcomes such asdepression and anxiety (Dewitte & Schouwenburg, 2002; Ferrari & Scher, 2000;Fritzsche, Young, & Hickson, 2003; Lay & Schouwenburg, 1993; Lee, 2005; Midgley& Urdan, 2001).

Among all of the variables that have been investigated in relation to academicprocrastination, self-related constructs such as self-regulation, self-efficacy, and self-esteem have received the most attention. Procrastination can be understood using self-regulation models, wherein procrastinating behaviours reflect a self-regulation deficitand low confidence in achieving (e.g., Steel, 2007; Wolters, 2003). University studentswho display high self-efficacy for self-regulation tend to procrastinate less than studentswith less confidence in their academic self-regulation (Senécal, Koestner, & Vallerand,1995). Ferrari (2001) found that chronic procrastinators failed to regulate performanceskills effectively, and were more likely to perform poorly under pressure. Procrastina-tion has also been linked to low levels of self-efficacy. Tuckman (1991) noted an inverserelationship between self-efficacy beliefs and procrastination among college students,and Chu and Choi (2005) proposed that high self-efficacy leads students to initiate tasksand persist on tasks in the face of challenges, whereas low self-efficacy may lead toprocrastinating behaviours. Finally, researchers have proposed that procrastination islinked to self-esteem: some individuals may avoid task initiation or completion due tofeelings of academic or global low self-worth (e.g., Ferrari, 1994; Steel, 2007). Numer-ous strands of research have led to the conclusion that beliefs about the self are stronglyrelated to procrastination behaviours, at least in adults and undergraduates.

For such a common and troubling psychological phenomenon, surprisingly littleresearch has been directed at levels and correlates of procrastination outside of univer-sity-aged student samples: ‘[A]lmost nothing is known about the severity of procras-tination in children and adolescents’ (Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995, p. 237). Inone of the few studies exploring adolescent procrastination, Owens and Newbegin(2000) found that adolescents who procrastinate in Maths or English show significantlylower self-esteem than adolescents who do not report procrastination in these domains.Milgram and colleagues (Milgram, Marshevsky, & Sadeh, 1995; Milgram & Toubiana,1999) found that adolescents attributed procrastination to a lack of self-regulationbehaviours, such as problems with time management. Although the research investi-gating adolescent procrastination is limited, initial results suggest that low self-esteemand self-efficacy, coupled with poor self-regulation, contribute to academic procrasti-nation, although the relationships may vary according to sex (e.g., Pychyl, Coplan, &Reid, 2002). In Steel’s recent meta-analysis of procrastination research, males werefound to be more likely to procrastinate than females (Steel, 2007), although other stud-ies have found conflicting support for sex-related procrastination differences (e.g.,Flett, Blankstein, & Martin, 1995; Howell & Watson, 2007). Although a handful ofstudies have explored sex differences in procrastination, few studies have exploredadolescent procrastination outside of culturally Western settings, even though an

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 4: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 71

extensive body of evidence highlights the importance of investigating motivationbeliefs in diverse cultural settings (Boekaerts, 2003).

The current study explores academic procrastination and motivation in a sample ofadolescents in a general high school in central Turkey, and is the first study of adoles-cent procrastination in a non-Western setting. A few studies have explored academicperformance and motivation in Turkish adolescents living in Turkey and in other Euro-pean countries (e.g., Güneri, Sümer, & Yildirim, 1999; Hortacsu, 1989; Phalet & Claes,1993; Sahin & Sahin, 1995; Verkuyten, Thijs, & Canatan, 2001). Güneri et al. (1999)found that Turkish adolescents’ definitions of self were heavily swayed by family andsocial influences, and that cognitive and behavioural functioning were closely tied toself-identity. Phalet and Claes (1993) explored achievement motivation and familyorientation in Turkish and Flemish adolescents living in Belgium. They found nodifferences in achievement motivation between the two groups, but found that the indi-vidual motivation beliefs of the Turkish adolescents were intertwined with loyalty tofamily. Verkuyten et al. (2001) conducted a series of studies exploring the academicmotivation of Turkish adolescents living in the Netherlands and, similar to Phalet andClaes (1993), found that for the Turks individual motivation was an important predictorof achievement, but also that family-influenced motivation beliefs and perceivedcompetence were strong predictors of educational achievement. For Turkish adoles-cents, similar to adolescents in a wide variety of cultural contexts, family-orientedmotivation beliefs combine with individual motivation beliefs to influence academicachievement in school settings.

The goal of the current study is to report an exploration of the procrastination andmotivation of a group of adolescents in one Turkish secondary school. AlthoughTurkish adolescents may rely on familial and collectivist sources of academic moti-vation more heavily than is the case in other, more individualistic, European settings(e.g., Verkuyten et al., 2001), individual motivation remains salient in all cultures:‘[I]nterdependence does not obliterate a personal self … [and] beliefs in one’s abilityto produce desired effects foster accomplishments in all cultures’ (Bandura, 1997, p.32). In addition, the increasing globalisation of adolescence means that there arefewer cultural distinctions between adolescents in different settings (Arnett, 2002).

Our primary goal pertains to the relationship of procrastination – a form of amoti-vation – with self-related beliefs like self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-regulation inTurkish adolescents. Our secondary goal involves developing a better description of howday-to-day academic procrastination operates in adolescents in one Turkish secondaryschool. Gaining a stronger understanding of the procrastination and motivation of Turk-ish adolescents will assist motivation researchers in understanding relationships amongimportant motivation variables in a uniquely-situated European/middle-Eastern countrythat is a blend of collectivism, modernism/traditionalism, and secular/religious influ-ences. Practitioners in Turkey will gain a better understanding of motivation in adoles-cents in a Turkish school and will be better able to devise appropriate support andinterventions to improve academic achievement.

Our research questions were:

(1) What are the relationships among procrastination and motivation variables inadolescents in a Turkish secondary school?

(2) On what tasks do participants most often procrastinate, and how much do theyreport procrastinating each day?

(3) Are there gender differences in levels and patterns of procrastination?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 5: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

72 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

Method

Participants

Participants were 508 adolescents (49% female) from a general high school (i.e.,three-year, co-educational secondary school) in a large urban center in Central Anato-lia, one of seven geographical regions in Turkey. School officials describe the schoolas middle SES, with moderate levels of achievement in comparison to other secondaryschools in the city. The mean age of participants was 15.74 (SD = 1.10) and partici-pants were roughly evenly distributed in Years 9–11. Although ethnicity data were notcollected, school officials describe the students’ ethnicity as 98% Turkish (2% Kurd-ish). Appropriate permissions and consent were gathered from school officials,parents, and participants, with the end result a participation rate of over 95%.

Measures

Participants completed a 58-item survey consisting of demographic items plusmeasures of procrastination and three motivation variables shown to be related toprocrastination in previous studies – academic self-efficacy, self-efficacy for self-regulation, and self-esteem. We used Tuckman’s 16-item procrastination measure,which provides a measure of ‘the tendency to waste time, delay, and intentionally putoff something that should be done’ (Tuckman, 1991, p. 479). Recent studies (e.g.,Howell et al., 2006) have used Tuckman’s measure with resulting strong reliabilityand validity evidence. Procrastination was measured using a four-point scale,anchored by ‘That’s not really me’ (1) and ‘That’s me for sure’ (4). Examples of itemson the procrastination scale include ‘I needlessly delay finishing jobs, even whenthey’re important,’ and ‘I postpone starting on things I don’t like to do.’ In order toestablish convergent validity of the Tuckman procrastination measure, which has notpreviously been used in non-Western settings, we also administered a three-itemprocrastination scale devised by Ackerman and Gross (2005).

We used the academic self-efficacy scale from the Motivated Strategies forLearning Questionnaire (MSLQ) to assess participants’ confidence in their capabili-ties to carry out the tasks necessary for successful academic performance (Pintrich,Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1993). The MSLQ is widely used for measuring moti-vational orientations and strategy use; it has been found to show strong reliabilityand is also correlated with procrastination (e.g., Saddler & Buley, 1999). Weadapted the MSLQ self-efficacy measure by omitting the three expectancy-valueitems from the original eight items, and by rephrasing the remaining five items withthe preface ‘I am confident’ and the suffix ‘in my classes’ (e.g., ‘I am confident Ican understand the most difficult material presented in the readings in my classes’).This adaptation of the MSLQ measure results in a more theoretically sound measureof self-efficacy, and has been shown to be reliable and valid in previous studies(e.g., Klassen, 2007).

Self-efficacy for self-regulation was measured using the scale included in theacademic motivation study conducted by Zimmerman, Bandura, and Martinez-Pons(1992), and shown to be predictive of procrastination with college-age participants(e.g., Klassen, 2007). The 11 items of the self-efficacy for self-regulation measureassess students’ beliefs in their capability to implement self-regulation strategies (e.g.,‘How well can you organise your coursework?’). Participants completed a seven-pointscale anchored by ‘Not well at all’ (1) and ‘Very well’ (7). Previous studies (e.g.,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 6: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 73

Klassen, 2007; Zimmerman et al., 1992) have shown that this measure has strong reli-ability and validity values.

Self-esteem was measured using Rosenberg’s well-validated scale (Rosenberg,1979), which has been shown to be related to procrastination in college-age participantsin American settings (e.g., Beck, Koons, & Milgrim, 2000; Steel, 2007). The Rosen-berg scale has 10 items which respondents assess on a four-point scale; ‘stronglydisagree’ (1) to ‘strongly agree’ (4) (e.g., ‘On the whole, I am satisfied with myself’).

We asked students three descriptive questions to understand better the context ofprocrastinating behaviours. First: ‘How much time do you procrastinate during a typi-cal school day?’ Second: ‘On what kinds of tasks do you most often procrastinate?’The scale format and tasks (e.g., daily homework, writing assignments, readingassignments) were taken from a study by Ferrari and Scher (2000) and, after receivingfeedback from participants in the pilot study, were adapted for the current study toreflect better the typical tasks encountered by Turkish adolescents. Third: ‘When youare procrastinating, what kinds of things do you do?’ Possible responses were on a listof items generated from a focus group of six Turkish adolescent participants, andmodified slightly in the pilot study.

Finally, in order to collect a measure of academic performance, we asked partici-pants to estimate their grade (as a percentage) in their Turkish-language course, whichis compulsory for all students. (Using percentage as a grading standard reflects thepercentage of content mastered in a given subject.)

The survey was translated from English into Turkish by a professional translator.Meaning-based translation (Larson, 1998) was used to create measures that wereeasily understood in Turkish. In order to ensure the accuracy of translation and itsfaithfulness to the original meaning, changes in sentence structure and wording in thetranslated version reflected differences in thought patterns and syntax differencesbetween the two languages (Larson, 1998). The Turkish version of the procrastina-tion and motivation survey was then back-translated into English by an independentprofessional translator, and checked and compared by the second author, a bilingualexpert in educational psychology. The final versions of the Turkish scales weredeemed adequate by the professional translators and by the second author. Aftercompleting the back translations, the scales were piloted on a small group of Turkishadolescents. Minor wording changes were made to clarify three measures.

Procedure

A pilot study involving 12 adolescents in the target school was conducted in order toassess participants’ understanding of the survey. After a few minor changes weremade to the survey to maximise understanding, participants completed the survey ingroups of 30–40 in the classrooms of this school. Participants were given a brief intro-duction to the survey, and were given support by the second author and by two class-room teachers who circulated and offered help to the participants as needed. Aftercompleting the survey, participants were debriefed about the purposes of the study.

Results

Reliabilities of the procrastination (α = .82), academic self-efficacy (α = .84), andself-efficacy for self-regulation (α = .87) measures were acceptable, and congruent

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 7: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

74 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

with the range found in previous studies. However, the reliability coefficient for theRosenberg self-esteem scale was lower than expected (α = .63).

Correlation coefficients among procrastination, self-esteem, academic self-efficacy,self-efficacy for self-regulation, and estimated grade in Turkish are provided for boysand girls in Table 1. Procrastination was most strongly associated with self-efficacy forself-regulation in both groups, followed by academic self-efficacy and self-esteem. Forthe boys, but not the girls, predicted Turkish grade was significantly correlated withprocrastination, but the relationship was relatively weak (r = −.18, p < .001). The rela-tionship between the Tuckman procrastination measure and the three-item Ackermanand Gross (2005) measure administered as a validity check was robust in both groups(r = .66 and .69 in boys and girls respectively, p < .001).

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to investigate differences betweenmales and females in terms of procrastination, academic self-efficacy, self-efficacyfor self-regulation, self-esteem, and estimated Turkish grade. Means, standard devia-tions, and effect sizes for the five variables for males and females are reported inTable 2. Adolescent females rated their self-efficacy for self-regulation significantlyhigher than males (F[1,497] = 35.50, p < .001, η2 = .07), and also predicted a signif-icantly higher Turkish grade (F[1,495] = 28.65, p < .001, η2 = .06). There were nosignificant differences between males and females for procrastination, academic self-efficacy, or self-esteem.

In order to examine the pattern of relationships between the three motivation vari-ables and procrastination across groups, we conducted multi-group multiple regres-sion with structual equation modeling (SEM) using the AMOS 16 software package(Arbuckle, 2007). Using SEM to conduct multi-group multiple regression allows for

Table 1. Correlations among procrastination and motivation variables for boys and girls.

1 2 3 4 5

1. Procrastination – −.47** −.59** −.32** −.112. Self-efficacy −.29** – .44** .43** .30**3. SESR −.62** .44** – .21** .18**4. Self-esteem −.27** .22** .20** – .21**5. Turkish grade −.18** .32** .29** .18** –

Note: Girls (n = 248) are above the diagonal and boys (n = 260) are below the diagonal; SESR = self-efficacy for self-regulation; Turkish grade = predicted grade in required Turkish course; **p < .001.

Table 2. Means and standard deviations for procrastination and motivation variables by sex.

Boys(n = 260)

Girls(n = 248)

Total(n = 508) Effect size

M SD M SD M SD η2

Procrastination 34.56 7.32 33.94 8.02 34.26 7.66 .002Academic self-efficacy 26.21 5.80 26.54 4.96 26.37 5.41 .001SESR** 48.89 13.15 55.37 11.88 52.03 12.95 .063Self-esteem 29.67 3.74 29.89 3.81 29.78 3.77 .001Turkish grade** 67.52 14.13 73.72 12.32 70.51 13.63 .052

Note: SESR = self-efficacy for self-regulation; **p < .001.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 8: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 75

simultaneous testing of the contribution of each motivation variable to procrastinationwithin each gender group and the differences between path coefficients across groups(e.g., Park & Huebner, 2005). Table 3 presents the contributions of the three motiva-tion variables to procrastination for boys and girls. The initial model, with all pathsconstrained, fit the data well (χ2[3] = 10.17, p = .02, CFI = .98, RMSEA = .07).Releasing the academic self-efficacy path across groups resulted in a significantimprovement to the model (∆χ2[1] = 10.12, p < .01), suggesting that the academicself-efficacy variable is a significantly stronger predictor of procrastination foradolescent girls than for adolescent boys. Releasing other paths did not result insignificant changes in χ2, suggesting that the other three variables did not signifi-cantly differ across groups. The combined variables, as a group, reliably predictedprocrastination for boys (F[3,259] = 57.02, R2 = .40, p < .001) and for girls (F[3,247]= 57.81, R2 = .42, p < .001). Self-efficacy for self-regulation was the strongest predic-tor of procrastination for both groups. For boys, only self-efficacy for self-regulationand self-esteem significantly predicted procrastination. For girls, self-efficacy forself-regulation, academic self-efficacy, and self-esteem significantly predictedprocrastination.

We asked participants three descriptive questions regarding procrastination prac-tices. The first question – ‘How much time do you spend procrastinating during a typi-cal school day?’ – was presented with five response options: ‘less than 1 hour’, ‘1–2hours’, ‘3–4 hours’, ‘5–6 hours’, and ‘more than 6 hours’. Only 17% of respondentschose less than 1 hour, with 42% of respondents choosing 1–2 hours, 14% choosing3–4 hours, 12% choosing 5–6 hours, and 15% choosing more than 6 hours. There were

Table 3. Path coefficients of motivation variables predicting procrastination for boys and girls.

Boys Girls

B SE B ß B SE B ß

Academic SE −.01 .07 −.02 −.34 .10 −.21**SESR −.33 .03 −.59** −.32 .04 −.47**Self-esteem −.29 .10 −.15* −.28 .11 −.13*

Note: Academic SE = academic self-efficacy; SESR = self-efficacy for self-regulation; for boys, R2 = .40;for girls, R2 = .42; *p < .01; **p < .001.

Table 4. Means and standard deviations for responses to ‘On what tasks do you most oftenprocrastinate?’

Boys(n = 260)

Girls(n = 248)

Total(n = 508)

M SD M SD M SD

Daily homework 3.97 2.11 4.10 2.30 4.03 2.21

Reading assignments 3.75 1.87 3.81 2.14 3.78 2.00Writing assignments 4.17 2.08 4.40 2.28 4.28 2.18Studying 4.09 1.95 3.94 2.16 4.02 2.05Class preparation 3.70 1.88 4.07 1.94 3.88 1.92Talking with teacher 3.58 2.10 3.76 2.05 3.67 2.08

Note: Responses were made on a 1–7 scale, anchored by ‘Not at all’ (1) and ‘Very much’ (7).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 9: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

76 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

no sex differences for the responses to this question. Time spent procrastinating wasweakly but significantly correlated with the Tuckman procrastination measure (r = .14,p = .002). The second question – ‘On what kind of tasks do you most often procrasti-nate?’ – revealed writing tasks as being most prone to procrastination (mean rating of4.29 on a 1–7 scale, SD = 2.18), followed by daily homework (M = 4.03, SD = 2.21)and studying (M = 4.02, SD = 2.05). There were no sex differences in the responsesto this question. The complete results for this question are presented in Table 4. Thesix response options to this question were also collapsed into three categories: classpreparation (studying and preparing for class), daily homework (daily homework, read-ing assignments, and writing papers/reports), and help-seeking (talking with theteacher). There were no sex differences for responses across the three categories, withdaily homework (M = 4.04, SD = 1.75) rated highest (with means adjusted to reflectthe 1–7 scale), followed by class preparation (M = 3.96, SD = 1.80) and help-seeking(M = 3.67, SD = 2.08).

Participants were asked to rate a series of 11 ‘replacement activities’ in response tothe question: ‘When you are procrastinating, what kinds of things do you do?’ Table 5presents the results of a one-way ANOVA conducted to compare the responses of malesand females. After adjusting the p level to .005 using a Bonferroni correction to accountfor multiple comparisons, six responses showed sex differences. Girls were significantlymore likely to read books, magazines, or newspapers when procrastinating, and boyswere significantly more likely to watch TV, email, go online for web-surfing, go onlinefor chat, and play computer games when procrastinating. For girls, the most commonprocrastination activity was reading books, magazines, or newspapers, whereas for boysthe most common procrastination activity was playing computer games.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to extend our understanding of adolescent procrastina-tion and motivation. The results shed light on the psychological correlates of procras-

Table 5. Means, standard deviations, and effect sizes for responses to ‘When you areprocrastinating, what kinds of things do you do?’

Boys(n = 260)

Girls(n = 248)

Total(n = 508)

M SD M SD M SD η2

Watch TV** 3.99 1.98 3.26 2.14 3.64 2.09 .03Email** 3.51 2.33 2.70 2.12 3.13 2.26 .03Go online for web surfing** 4.07 2.34 2.76 2.20 3.44 2.37 .08Go online for chat** 3.85 2.46 2.71 2.20 3.30 2.37 .06Talk with friends 4.00 2.30 3.94 2.30 3.97 2.30 .00Play computer games** 4.19 2.27 2.24 1.88 3.25 2.31 .18Do household tasks 2.15 1.77 2.47 1.81 2.30 1.79 .01Read books or magazines** 3.49 1.94 4.26 2.11 3.86 2.06 .04Get something to eat or drink 4.14 2.03 3.96 2.20 4.05 2.11 .00Have a nap/sleep 3.59 2.15 3.27 2.16 3.43 2.15 .01Do less urgent schoolwork 3.17 1.96 3.16 2.24 3.16 2.10 .00

Note: Responses were made on a 1–7 scale, anchored by ‘Never’ (1) and ‘Always’ (7); **p < .001.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 10: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 77

tination in adolescents, and also confirm that procrastination is a form ofdysfunctional motivation that operates in similar ways in diverse cultural settings. Inaddition, the study presents new data that describe how procrastination functions inthe lives of Turkish adolescent boys and girls: the amount of time spent procrastinat-ing, the types of tasks most often avoided, and the replacement activities adolescentsengage in when procrastinating.

In this study, similar to other studies in Western cultural settings, procrastinationwas strongly correlated with self-beliefs, like academic self-efficacy and self-efficacyfor self-regulation. Although not designed as a cross-cultural investigation, the studyis situated in a particular cultural milieu, and the discovery that the results from thisstudy are consistent with patterns of results in other settings adds strength to theuniversality of social cognitive theories of motivation.

The motivational correlates of academic procrastination found in this study –academic self-efficacy, self-efficacy for self-regulation, and self-esteem –are similarto findings from procrastination studies conducted in other settings (e.g., DeRoma etal., 2003; Ferrari, 2001; Haycock, McCarthy, & Skay, 1998; Howell et al., 2006;Milgram et al., 1995; Saddler & Buley, 1999; Senécal et al., 1995; Steel, 2007; Tuck-man, 1991; Wolters, 2003). For Turkish adolescents, like for adolescents in NorthAmerican settings, procrastination is a failure of self-regulation and, more explicitly,a failure of confidence to self-regulate. Academic self-efficacy, significantly associ-ated with procrastination in previous correlational studies, was more strongly relatedto procrastination for Turkish adolescent girls than boys. Previous studies (e.g., Klas-sen, 2007) have shown adolescent boys to miscalibrate and overstate their capabilitiesin some domains. It may be that the adolescent boys in this study were overconfidentin estimating their academic capabilities, and as a result their academic self-efficacywas less strongly predictive of procrastination.

More than 80% of Turkish adolescents reported spending more than one hourprocrastinating each day, with more than 40% reporting spending three hours or moreprocrastinating during a typical school day. This finding is similar to the statistics citedin other settings (e.g., Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Steel, 2007). Boys were more likely to spendtime on electronic media – web surfing, emailing, on-line chatting, and watching TV– whereas girls were more likely to procrastinate with traditional media, like booksand magazines. Boys and girls were most likely to procrastinate on writing assignments,consistent with findings with university students (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984).Although girls reported higher levels of self-efficacy to self-regulate, they did not reportlower levels of procrastination. In spite of adolescent girls’ higher levels of confidencein self-regulating their learning, they appear to procrastinate as much as adolescent boys.

The amount of time spent procrastinating was only weakly correlated with scoreson the Tuckman procrastination measure. Previous procrastination researchers (e.g.,Chu & Choi, 2005; Knaus, 2000) have pointed out that not all procrastination behav-iours have negative consequences, and that delaying tasks can result in short-term andeven long-term benefits (e.g., lower levels of stress and better physical health). TheTuckman measure focuses largely on negative procrastination (e.g., ‘I am a hopelesstime waster’), whereas responses to the question ‘How much time do you procrasti-nate during a typical school day?’ might not imply harmful procrastination (e.g., ‘Yes,I spend about 2 hours avoiding homework, but when I get started on it, I do a verygood job’). Chu and Choi (2005) propose that active procrastinators fare well underpressure, whereas passive procrastinators fail to complete tasks on time, and suffernegative emotional and achievement consequences.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 11: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

78 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

Implications for practitioners

For parents, teachers, and others working with adolescents in academic settings,adolescent procrastination can be frustrating, because it is an irrational and oftenharmful delay of important tasks. Gaining a better understanding of the correlates andpractice of adolescent procrastination is a helpful first step in providing academicsupport to adolescents.

The strong link between self-efficacy for self-regulation and procrastination is acritical one: as Bandura (1997) suggests, what a person believes about his or hercapabilities is often the most important factor determining future performance. Foradolescent procrastinators – both boys and girls – lack of confidence in ability to self-regulate learning is a key factor related to high levels of task delay. Self-regulation oflearning – the planning, managing, and organising of the learning environment – hasalready been shown to be related to procrastination (e.g., Ferrari, 2001; Senécal et al.,1995; Steel, 2007; Wolters, 2003), and the results from this study show that confi-dence in self-regulating may also be a key factor.

In order to build self-efficacy to self-regulate, those intervening with procrastinat-ing adolescents can turn to the hypothesised sources of self-efficacy, and build success-ful self-regulation experiences, provide positive modelling of self-regulation, offerverbal encouragement, and help students learn to cope with the stress and anxiety thatcomes with academic expectations. Telling adolescents to be more self-regulated willprobably not result in lower levels of procrastination; helping adolescents build up theirself-efficacy for regulating their own learning may pay richer dividends. Adolescents’academic self-regulation is also fostered by parental involvement in schooling (e.g.,Pelegrina, Garcia-Linares, & Casanova, 2003; Purdie, Carroll, & Roche, 2004); parentsmay help reduce procrastination by staying involved in their child’s learning.

Limitations of this study

The data in this study were self-reported, and thus the study would have benefitedfrom external information, especially with regard to student achievement, to verify theaccuracy of participants’ responses. Unfortunately, we were not able to gain access tostudent achievement data, but future studies could profitably explore the role ofprocrastination in predicting actual student achievement.

In addition, cultural dimensions (e.g., collectivism and familial loyalty) were notmeasured here, and conclusions based on presumed cultural beliefs should be drawnwith caution. The increasing influence of the globalisation of adolescence may resultin decreased cultural differences between adolescents from different settings (e.g.,Arnett, 2002), and the results of this study may be unrelated to cultural factors such ascollectivism.

Somewhat surprisingly, procrastination was not strongly related to participants’predicted grade in Turkish, and it may be that this single indicator of academic stand-ing was not an accurate reflection of overall academic functioning. Other researchers(e.g., van Eerde, 2003) have found that combined grade point averages are strongercorrelates of procrastination than grades in a single course. Although the correlationsbetween procrastination and self-report achievement were modest, the findings fromour study (at least for boys) fall within the range reported by Steel (2007).

Our self-esteem measure displayed lower than expected reliability, even thoughthe Rosenberg measure has been shown to be reliable and valid in non-Westernsettings (e.g., Farruggia, Chen, Greenberger, Dmitrieva, & Macek, 2004). In our

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 12: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 79

study, the correlations between self-esteem and procrastination were well within the‘credibility range’ of correlations given in Steel’s procrastination meta-analysis(2007). Although the other measures in this study showed strong reliability andevidence of construct validity through the consistency of their inter-relationships,further exploration of the self-esteem measure using confirmatory factor analysis in aTurkish setting may be warranted in order to show construct validity.

AcknowledgementThe authors wish gratefully to acknowledge funding from the Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada provided to the first author.

ReferencesAckerman, D.S., & Gross, B.L. (2005). My instructor made me do it: Task characteristics of

procrastination. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 5–13.Arbuckle, J.L. (2007). Amos (Version 16.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: SPSS.Arnett, J.J. (2002). The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist, 57, 774–783.Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.Beck, B.L., Koons, S.R., & Milgrim, D.L. (2000). Correlates and consequences of behavioral

procrastination: The effects of academic procrastination, self-consciousness, self-esteemand self-handicapping. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 3–13.

Boekaerts, M. (2003). How do students from different cultures motivate themselves foracademic learning? In F. Salili & R. Hoosain (Eds.), Teaching, learning, and motivation in amulticultural context (pp. 13–31). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Chu, A.H.C., & Choi, J.N. (2005). Rethinking procrastination: Positive effects of “active”procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance. Journal of Social Psychology, 145,245–264.

DeRoma, V.M., Young, A., Mabrouk, S.T., Brannan, K.P., Hilleke, R.O., & Johnson, K.Y.(2003). Procrastination and student performance on immediate and delayed quizzes. Educa-tion, 124, 40–48.

Dewitte, S., & Schouwenburg, H.C. (2002). Procrastination, temptations, and incentives:The struggle between the present and the future in procrastinators and the punctual.European Journal of Personality, 16, 469–489.

Ellis, A., & Knaus, W.J. (1977). Overcoming procrastination. New York: New American Library.Farruggia, S.P., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Dmitrieva, J., & Macek, P. (2004). Adolescent

self-esteem in cross-cultural perspective: Testing measurement equivalence and a media-tion model. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 719–733.

Ferrari, J.R. (1994). Dysfunctional procrastination and its relationship with self-esteem,interpersonal dependency, and self-defeating behaviors. Personality and Individual Differ-ences, 17, 673–679.

Ferrari, J.R. (2001). Procrastination as self-regulation failure of performance: Effects ofcognitive load, self-awareness, and time limits on ‘working best under pressure’. Euro-pean Journal of Personality, 15, 391–406.

Ferrari, J.R., Johnson, J.L., & McCown, W.G. (1995). Procrastination and task avoidance:Theory, research, and treatment. New York: Plenum Press.

Ferrari, J.R., O’Callaghan, J., & Newbegin, I. (2005). Prevalence of procrastination in theUnited States, United Kingdom, and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays amongadults. North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 1–6.

Ferrrari, J.R., & Scher, S.J. (2000). Toward an understanding of academic and nonacademictasks procrastinated by students: The use of daily logs. Psychology in the Schools, 37,359–366.

Flett, G.L., Blankstein, K.R., & Martin, T.R. (1995). Procrastination, negative self-evaluation,and stress in depression and anxiety. In J.R. Ferrari, J.L. Johnson, & W.G. McCown(Eds.), Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 137–167).New York: Plenum Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 13: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

80 R.M. Klassen and E. Kuzucu

Fritzsche, B.A., Young, B.R., & Hickson, K.C. (2003). Individual differences in academicprocrastination tendency and writing success. Personality and Individual Differences, 35,1549–1557.

Güneri, O., Sümer, Z., & Yildirim, A. (1999). Sources of self-identity among Turkish adoles-cents. Adolescence, 34, 535–546.

Haycock, L.A., McCarthy, P., & Skay, C.L. (1998). Procrastination in college students: Therole of self-efficacy and anxiety. Journal of Counseling and Development, 76, 317–324.

Hortacsu, N. (1989). Targets of communication during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence,12, 253–263.

Howell, A.J., & Watson, D.C. (2007). Procrastination: Associations with achievement goalorientation and learning strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 167–178.

Howell, A.J., Watson, D.C., Powell, R.A., & Buro, K. (2006). Academic procrastination: Thepattern and correlates of behavioral postponement. Personality and Individual Differences,40, 1519–1530.

Klassen, R.M. (2007). Using predictions to learn about the self-efficacy of early adolescentswith and without learning disabilities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 173–187.

Knaus, W.J. (2000). Procrastination, blame, and change. Journal of Social Behavior andPersonality, 15, 153–166.

Larson, M.L. (1998). Meaning-based translation: A guide to cross-language equivalence.Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Lay, C.H., & Schouwenburg, H.C. (1993). Trait procrastination, time management, andacademic behavior. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 647–662.

Lee, E. (2005). The relationship of motivation and flow experience to academic procrastina-tion in university students. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 166, 5–14.

Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (2001). Academic self-handicapping and achievement goals: Afurther examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 61–75.

Milgram, N., Marshevsky, S., & Sadeh, C. (1995). Correlates of academic procrastination:Discomfort, task aversiveness, and task capability. The Journal of Psychology, 129, 145–155.

Milgram, N., & Toubiana, Y. (1999). Academic anxiety, academic procrastination, and paren-tal involvement in students and their parents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69,345–361.

Owens, A.M., & Newbegin, I. (2000). Academic procrastination of adolescents in English andmathematics: Gender and personality variations. Journal of Social Behavior and Personal-ity, 15, 111–124.

Park, N., & Huebner, E.S. (2005). A cross-cultural study of the levels and correlates of lifesatisfaction among adolescents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 444–456.

Pelegrina, S., Garcia-Linares, M.C., & Casanova, P.F. (2003). Adolescents and their parents’perceptions about parenting characteristics: Who can better predict the adolescent’sacademic competence? Journal of Adolescence, 26, 651–665.

Phalet, K., & Claes, W. (1993). A comparative study of Turkish and Belgian youth. Journal ofCross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 319–343.

Pintrich, P.R., Smith D.A.F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1993). Reliability and predic-tive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educationaland Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

Purdie, N., Carroll, A., & Roche, L. (2004). Parenting and adolescent self-regulation. Journalof Adolescence, 27, 663–676.

Pychyl, T.A., Coplan, R.J., & Reid, P.A.M. (2002). Parenting and procrastination: Genderdifferences in the relations between procrastination, parenting style and self-worth in earlyadolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 271–285.

Rosenberg, M.J. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.Saddler, C.D., & Buley, J. (1999). Predictors of academic procrastination in college students.

Psychological Reports, 84, 686–688.Sahin, N., & Sahin, N.H. (1995). Dimensions of concerns: The case of Turkish adolescents.

Journal of Adolescence, 18, 46–69.Schraw, G., Wadkins, T., & Olafson, L. (2007). Doing the things we do: A grounded theory

of procrastination. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 12–25.Senécal, C., Koestner, R., & Vallerand, R.J. (1995). Self-regulation and academic procrastina-

tion. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 607–619.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3

Page 14: Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey

Educational Psychology 81

Solomon, L.J., & Rothblum, E.D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitivebehavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503–509.

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review ofquintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65–94.

Tice, D.M., & Baumeister, R.F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance,stress, and health. Psychological Bulletin, 8, 454–458.

Tuckman, B.W. (1991). The development and concurrent validity of the Procrastination Scale.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 473–480.

Wolters, C.A. (2003). Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspec-tive. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 179–187.

van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination.Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 149–158.

Verkuyten, M., Thijs, J., & Canatan, K. (2001). Achievement motivation and academicperformance among Turkish early and young adolescents in the Netherlands. Genetic,Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 127, 378–408.

Zimmerman, B.J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academicattainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal-setting. American Educa-tional Research Journal, 29, 663–676.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

3:29

01

May

201

3