Debra Glick Et Al. - A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in...

8/20/2019 Debra Glick Et Al. - A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in Academic Procastination

1/38

Author's Accepted Manuscript

A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in Academic Pro-

crastination

Debra M. Glick, Daniel J. Millstein, Susan M.Orsillo

PII: S2212-1447(14)00026-X

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002Reference: JCBS46

To appear in: Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

Received date: 16 May 2013Revised date: 1 November 2013Accepted date: 7 April 2014

Cite this article as: Debra M. Glick, Daniel J. Millstein, Susan M. Orsillo, APreliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in AcademicProcrastination, Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jcbs.2014.04.002

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted forpublication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, andreview of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form.Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered whichcould affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journalpertain.

www.elsevier.com/locate/jcbs

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.04.002


2/38

A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in Academic

Procrastination

Debra M. Glick (corresponding author), Daniel J. Millstein, and Susan M. Orsillo

Suffolk University

41 Temple Street

Boston, MA 02114

[email protected]

617-824-0336

Running Head: PSYCHOLOGICAL INFLEXIBILITY AND ACADEMIC

PROCRASTINATION


Procrastination


3/38

Abstract

Estimates of the prevalence of academic procrastination are troublesome given the

negative associations among procrastination, academic performance, and psychological and

physical well-being. Multiple theories aimed at understanding factors that cause and maintain

procrastination have been proposed, but none fully account for this problematic behavior. We

hypothesize that procrastination can be understood as reflecting a state of psychological

inflexibility, characterized by several processes, including experiential avoidance (i.e., attempts

to avoid or escape from unpleasant internal experiences), diminished present moment awareness

(i.e., diminished mindfulness), and difficulty articulating and engaging in valued activities.

The goal of the current studies was to explore the potential association between

psychological inflexibility and procrastination. Two samples of students completed measures of

trait procrastination, trait anxiety, and psychological flexibility. As predicted, procrastination was

positively associated with anxiety and negatively associated with psychological flexibility. In

addition, psychological inflexibility added to the prediction of procrastination over the

contribution of trait anxiety. Implications for increased understanding of, and interventions for,

procrastination are discussed.

KEYWORDS: Academic procrastination; Psychological flexibility; Experiential avoidance;

Mindfulness; Acceptance; Academic values


4/38


Procrastination

Procrastination is prevalent among students in higher education, with estimates that

college students engage in this behavior between 30-60 percent of the time (Rabin, Fogel &

Nutter-Upham, 2010). Moreover, it has been suggested that graduate students procrastinate on

academic tasks even more frequently than do undergraduate students (Onwuegbuzie, 2000).

This high rate of procrastination is of concern given its adverse consequences on academic

performance, physical health, and psychological well-being. Procrastination is negatively

correlated with final overall course grades, (Steel, Brothen, & Wambach 2001) as well as grades

on assignments such as papers (Tice & Baumeister, 1997) and exams (Steel et al., 2001; Tice &

Baumeister, 1997). Students who self-report more procrastination exhibit more symptoms of

physical illness and stress, and visit the health center more than do students lower in

procrastination (Tice & Baumeister, 1997). Specifically, procrastination is associated with

increased stress, as well as delays in seeking medical treatment (Sirois, Melia-Gordon, & Pychyl,

2003). Further, individuals high in trait procrastination have been shown to have weaker

intentions to engage in health-promoting behaviors such as improving their diets or getting more

sleep (Sirois, 2004). In addition, procrastination has been linked with poor mental health (Stead,

Shanahan, & Neufeld, 2010), a failure to seek mental health services, (Stead et al., 2010) and

suicide proneness (Klibert, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Luna, & Robichaux, 2005). Given these

adverse effects, it is not surprising that the majority of students desire to reduce their

procrastination (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984).

The development and provision of effective interventions for procrastination requires a

strong, cohesive theoretical explanation of the behavior. Unfortunately, despite a recent increase


5/38

in scientific research, much has yet to be learned about the causes and maintaining factors of

procrastination (Steel, 2007). One common theory is that procrastination results from an inability

to manage time (e.g., Burka & Yuen, 1983) and many of the most popular interventions for

procrastination focus on increasing time management skills (e.g., Levrini & Prevatt, 2012).

Although a meta-analysis provides some support for this theory (Steel, 2007), other studies that

more directly examined time management and academic procrastination have not revealed a

significant relationship between the two (e.g., Ackerman & Gross, 2005; Pychyl, Morin, &

Salmon, 2000). Moreover, there is limited empirical support for the notion that time management

strategies decrease procrastination (Van Erde, 2003).

Research also supports a relationship between procrastination and various unwanted

internal experiences. Procrastination has been found to be associated with trait anxiety (e.g.,

Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), task-related anxiety (e.g., Fritzsche, Young, & Hickson, 2003),

and statistics anxiety (e.g., Macher, Paechter, Papousek, & Ruggeri, 2012). Moreover,

procrastination has been linked with several constructs that involve intolerance or fear of

unwanted internal experiences such as frustration intolerance (e.g., Dryden 2012), fear of

negative evaluation (e.g., Bui, 2007), and fear of failure (e.g., Beck, Koons, & Milgrim, 2000).

With regard to fear of failure, the relationship with procrastination was highest for people with

low perceived competence, whereas those with higher perceived competence were more likely to

begin working on tasks ahead of time (Haghbin, McCaffrey, & Pychyl, 2012). One possible

explanation for these findings could be that some individuals procrastinate in an attempt to avoid

a variety of aversive experiences such as fear, anxiety, and self-evaluative, anxiety-provoking

thoughts. Support for this notion comes from a series of studies suggesting that procrastination

may serve an emotion regulatory function (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013).


6/38

Although engaging in pleasant leisure activities and taking breaks can be an effective

way of dealing with academic stress, research demonstrates that students who pursue these

activities as a way to enhance mood and avoid discomfort experience a paradoxical increase in

distress (e.g., Patry, Blanchard & Mask, 2007; Pychyl, Lee, Thibodeau, & Blunt, 2000). Further,

students appear to be more likely to procrastinate when they believe they have the ability to

impact (or control) their mood. Tice and colleagues (2001) demonstrated lower levels of

procrastination among students who were led to believe that their mood was temporarily fixed

than those who were led to believe their mood was changeable. This finding suggests that

students who accept that they are unable to change or control their internal experiences may be

less likely to procrastinate.

This model of procrastination is consistent with the more general theory of psychological

problems proposed by Hayes and colleagues (1996; 1999; 2012). Hayes et al (1996) initially

proposed that experiential avoidance (EA), an unwillingness to remain in contact with certain

private experiences (e.g. thoughts, emotions, physical sensations) accompanied by

counterproductive or harmful attempts to alter or avoid these experiences, was a pathological

process underlying many forms of psychopathology. These processes have become further

specified and currently the term psychological inflexibility, defined by six key psychological

processes (i.e., the “hexaflex” model; experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, dominance of the

conceptualized past or future, attachment to the conceptualized self, lack of values clarity, and

unworkable action/inaction) is used to describe the model (Hayes, 2004). The hexaflex model of

psychological inflexibility can be further divided into two, somewhat overlapping processes

(Ciarrochi, Bilich, & Godsell, 2010). The first includes experiential avoidance and low

mindfulness (experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, dominance of the conceptualized past or


7/38

future, attachment to the conceptualized self) whereas the second involves a lack of clarity and

commitment to personal values (lack of values clarity, unworkable action/inaction, dominance of

the conceptualized past or future, attachment to the conceptualized self). A growing literature

supports the notion that psychological inflexibility is related to greater levels of depression,

anxiety, stress, and overall psychological distress (e.g., Bond et al., 2011; Chawla & Ostafin,

2007). Moreover, there is mounting evidence for the efficacy of Acceptance and Commitment

Therapy (ACT) and other acceptance-based behavioral therapies aimed at enhancing

psychological flexibility in addressing a wide range of psychological problems. The goal of the

current study was to explore the potential association between psychological inflexibility and

procrastination. Specifically in two separate samples of students, we examined whether

experiential avoidance, diminished mindfulness and low academic values would contribute to the

variance in procrastination over and above the previously demonstrated contribution of trait

anxiety.

One study has already established a relationship between procrastination and

mindfulness, as measured by two of the four scales of the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness

Skills (KIMS; Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004), the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS;

Brown and Ryan 2003) and a 3-point scale measuring the extent to which participants practiced

mindfulness in a given week (Sirois & Tosti, 2012). Despite its cross-sectional design, this study

also found preliminary evidence that mindfulness mediates the effects of procrastination on

stress and health.

We hope to replicate and expand on this study by assessing the relationship between

mindfulness and academic procrastination in the larger context of the model of psychological

inflexibility proposed by Hayes and colleagues (1996; 1999; 2004; 2012). If measures of some


8/38

of the key psychological processes thought to underlie psychological inflexibility are associated

with procrastination, this finding may have some implications for the use of ACT and other

ABBTs as interventions for this problematic behavior.

Study 1 Method

Participants

Participants in this study were 258 undergraduate psychology students attending a large,

urban university in the Northeast. The sample ranged in age from 18 to 26 ( M = 19.51, SD =

1.77) and was comprised of 72% women (n = 185). Seventy-four percent of participants self-

identified as White (Non-Hispanic), 7% as Asian/Pacific Islander, 4% as Other, 3% as

multiracial, 2% as Black/African American, 2% as Middle Eastern, and


9/38

80, with high scores indicating higher levels of trait anxiety. The STAI-T has strong

psychometric properties within student samples (Ramanaiah, Franzen, & Schill, 1983;

Spielberger, 2010). Internal consistency for the present sample was excellent (Cronbach’s alpha

= .89).

Action and Acceptance Questionnaire (AAQ; Hayes, Strosahl, Wilson, Bissett,

Pistorello, Toarmino, et al. (2004). The AAQ is a scale that was originally developed to measure

experiential avoidance, a construct proposed to relate to psychological flexibility. However, in

the literature it has been referred to as both a measure of experiential avoidance/acceptance and

one of psychological flexibility (e.g., Varra, Hayes, Roget, & Fisher, 2008). Several versions of

the measure exist, including the AAQ-II (Bond et al., 2011), which was not available at the time

we collected our data. We used a 16-item version of the measure, which we obtained from the

developer (Steven Hayes, personal communication, 1999). Items on this measure are rated on a

7-point Likert-type scale from 1 ( Never True) to 7 ( Always True). The AAQ can be scored such

that higher scores reflect more acceptance or more experiential avoidance. In the current study,

we scored the AAQ such that higher scores reflect less experiential avoidance or higher

psychological flexibility. The AAQ shows moderate correlations with measures of related

constructs such as thought suppression, thought control, anxiety, and depression (see Hayes et

al., 2004). For the present sample, Cronbach’s alpha was .65.

Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS; Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004). The

KIMS is a 39- item scale designed to measure four skills of mindfulness: Observing – attending

to internal and external experience, Describing – labeling noticed phenomena, Acting with

awareness – engaging in present moment activity without distraction, and Accepting (or

allowing) without judgment . Items are scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 ( Never or


10/38

Very Rarely True) to 5 (Very Often or Always True), with higher scores indicating a greater

degree of mindfulness. A factor analysis of the KIMS supported a four factor solution and inter-

correlations among the scales ranged from .09 to 34 (Baer et al., 2004). Thus, individual scales,

rather than a total score, are typically derived from the measure. In the present sample, the

Cronbach’s alphas were .82, .84, .76, and .87 for Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness,

and Accepting without Judgment , respectively.

Academic Values Questionnaire (AVQ). The AVQ was designed for the present

study to assess the extent to which students value academics and education, based on values as

conceptualized in the ACT model (Hayes, Wilson, & Strosahl, 2012; Wilson & Murrell, 2004). It

consists of five items (e.g. “Learning is personally fulfilling for me”) scored on a 5-point Likert-

type scale from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Scores can range from five to 25,

with higher scores indicating greater endorsement of statements reflecting a high value placed on

academics. Internal consistency for this scale was good (Cronbach’s alpha = .80). This measure

was developed by reviewing values measures (e.g. Wilson, Sandoz, Kitchen, & Roberts, 2010)

as well as measures specifically related to academics and motivation (Vallerand et al., 1992) and

generating items that would effectively represent this construct. Although there is limited

psychometric data available on this measure as it was developed for the current study, some

evidence for its validity comes from other studies. For example, the AVQ moderated the

relationship between an acceptance based behavioral therapy (ABBT) for procrastination and the

proportion of assigned reading students completed relative to the amount they intended to read

such that ABBT was more effective for students with higher academic values (Glick & Orsillo,

2013). In addition, an ABBT workshop for first-year college and law school students led to

increases in AVQ scores relative to a control group (Danitz & Orsillo, 2013).


11/38

Procedure

After providing informed consent, each participant completed an online survey.

Participants were then debriefed as to the purpose of the study.

Study 1 Results

Mean scores and standard deviations on the PASS, the STAI, the AAQ, the subscales of

the KIMS, and the AVQ are presented in Table 1. The response patterns to individual items on

the PASS suggest that one third to one half of the students in this sample reported nearly always

or always procrastinating on important academic tasks. Specifically, 41% of students in the

sample reported almost always or always procrastinating on writing papers, 40% endorsed this

level of procrastination for studying for exams, and 50% reported they almost always or always

procrastinate on assigned reading. There were no differences in procrastination across different

demographic groups (i.e. gender, race, school year).

Rates of procrastination in the current sample were high, but consistent with those found

in other student samples (e.g., Solomon & Rothblum, 1984; Onwuegbuzie, 2004) In contrast,

trait anxiety was higher in this sample than the norms for college students (Spielberger, 1983)

and higher than the cut-off for high anxiety used in other studies using mixed control and clinical

samples (see Phaf & Kan, 2007). Self-reported mindfulness was roughly equivalent to that found

among other samples of college students (e.g., Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004). To our knowledge,

norms for college students have not been reported for the 16-item AAQ. Finally, although the

AVQ was designed for the present study and therefore has not been normed, the average

suggests that participants strongly agreed with most statements, indicating that they highly

valued academics.


12/38

Missing data for all variables were less than 5%. However, scores on the STAI, PASS

and the AVQ were non-normally distributed. Given the nature of our sample (students), we did

not expect the AVQ to be normally distributed. As the residuals of this variable were normally

distributed (an assumption for multiple regression), we used the untransformed variable in

subsequent analyses. In contrast, the skewness of the STAI and the PASS may have been

impacted by the presence of outliers. After examining boxplots (Williamson, Parker, &

Kendrick, 1989) we removed 21 participants from subsequent analyses. We also conducted

square root transformations (Tabatchnick & Fidell, 2013), which yielded normally distributed

variables suitable for our analyses.

The relationship between procrastination and psychological inflexibility is apparent in the

intercorrelations among the variables that are presented in Table 2. As expected, procrastination

was significantly positively correlated with trait anxiety and significantly negatively associated

with acceptance/psychological flexibility, three of the four mindfulness subscales (no

relationship was detected between the Observe subscale of the KIMS and the PASS), and

academic values.

To determine whether acceptance/psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and values

contribute to the variance in procrastination over and above the effects of anxiety, a hierarchical

linear regression was conducted with the STAI entered in the first step, and the AAQ, the three

subscales of the KIMS that were correlated with procrastination ( Describe, Act with awareness,

and Accept without judgment ; the Observe subscale was dropped due to its lack of correlation

with procrastination), and the AVQ in the second step. As expected, anxiety was significantly

associated with procrastination (r² ∆ = .06; p < .001). Further, the combined effects of

acceptance/psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and academic values significantly contributed


13/38

to the variance accounted for in procrastination above and beyond that predicted by anxiety alone

(r² ∆ = .22; p < .001). Results are shown in Table 3.

Study 1 Discussion

Our results provide preliminary support for the relationship between procrastination and

psychological inflexibility. Specifically, we found that procrastination is associated with lower

acceptance/psychological flexibility, lower levels of mindfulness, and a lower degree of

academic values. Despite the fact that the combined effect of the questionnaires chosen to

measure psychological flexibility significantly improved the prediction of procrastination over

anxiety, only two measures were uniquely associated with procrastination when all predictors

were accounted for. Although we did not have a priori hypotheses about each specific measure,

the negative association between the Act with Awareness subscale of the KIMS and

procrastination, consistent with the findings of Sirois and Tosti (2013) suggest that a tendency

toward mindless, automatic behavior in daily life could play a unique role in procrastination. The

relationship between the Describe subscale of the KIMS, which measures the extent to which

individuals acknowledge and label their experience, and procrastination, was not examined by

Sirios and Tosti (2013). However, this aspect of mindfulness has previously been demonstrated

to be associated with the widest range of constructs (Baer et al., 2004), suggesting that the ability

to apply word’s to one’s experience is strongly associated with psychological functioning in

general, and perhaps procrastination in particular. It is unclear as to why the other three

measures did not uniquely contribute to the prediction of procrastination. It may be that the

relatively strong association between the AAQ and the Accept without Judgment subscale of the

KIMS with the STAI diminished the unique influence of these two measures on procrastination,

particularly given the magnitude of the bivariate correlations between the Accept without


14/38

Judgment subscale of the KIMS and procrastination found in the current study and in the study

conducted by Sirios and Tosti (2013). Given that both psychological flexibility and mindfulness

are proposed to be multifaceted constructs, more research is needed into the unique contributions

of individual components to the development and maintenance of procrastination.

Nonetheless, psychological inflexibility appears to contribute to procrastination over and

above the effects of anxiety, suggesting that anxiety alone does not fully account for

procrastination. Instead, the desire to avoid experiencing this anxiety may lead students to

engage in procrastination. These findings fit into the broader literature on procrastination as a

self-regulatory failure (Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996), specifically facets pertaining to task

aversiveness and distractibility (Steel, 2007).

Although this study provides modest support for our hypotheses, the study is limited by

the particular questionnaires that we used to measure key psychological constructs. For

example, the internal consistency of the AAQ in the current sample was relatively low.

Moreover, since the completion of Study 1, more concise measures of mindfulness, informed by

the bi-dimensional definitions proposed by Kabat-Zinn (1994) and Bishop and colleagues

(2004), have been developed. Thus, in Study 2, we attempted to replicate the relationship

between psychological inflexibility and procrastination a second student sample. However, in

this study we used the revised version of the AAQ (AAQ-II) which was developed to address

some perceived shortcomings with the previous version (e.g., problems with internal consistency

in some samples, possible issues with item complexity, and unstable factor structure; Bond et al.,

2011) and a more concise measure of mindfulness.


15/38

Study 2 Method

Participants

Participants in this study were 118 undergraduate and graduate students attending two

large, urban universities in the Northeast. Graduate students were included in order to facilitate

recruitment and contribute to the variability of the sample. The sample ranged in age from 18 to

34 ( M = 21.12, SD = 3.09) and was comprised of 59% women (n = 69). Seventy percent of

participants self-identified as White, 14% as Asian, 4% as multiracial, 4% as Black/African

American, 4% as other, and 2% declined to state their race. Twelve percent of the participants

were freshmen, 22% sophomores, 27% juniors, 27 % seniors, and 12% graduate students. Of the

students who provided information on their academic majors, 42% selected business, 17%

natural sciences, 28% social sciences, 1% humanities, 8% other, and 4% were undecided or did

not provide an answer. Participants earned course credit or were paid for their participation.

Materials

As in Study 1, the PASS, STAI, and AVQ were administered. Internal consistency was

.88, .91, and .84, respectively.

Action and Acceptance Questionnaire II (AAQ-II; Bond et al., 2011). The AAQ-II, the

most recent revision of the AAQ is a seven-item Likert-type self-report measure that assesses

acceptance/psychological flexibility. The AAQ-II appears to measure the same concept as the

AAQ-I (r = .97) but with better psychometric consistency (Bond et al., 2011).

Items are rated from 1 ( Never True) to 7 ( Always True) and scores range from 7-49, with

higher scores corresponding to greater psychological flexibility. In the present sample, the

internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach’s alpha = .90).


16/38

The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHL-MS; Cardaciotto et al., 2009) is a 20-item

Likert-type scale designed to measure aspects of mindfulness. Items are rated from 1 ( Never ) to 5

(Very Often). A factor analysis of the PHL-MS supported a two-factor solution. Thus, the

measure contains two subscales: Awareness – continuously attending to present-moment

experiences, and Acceptance – being aware of, open to, and compassionate towards experiences.

In the present study the Cronbach alphas were .79 for Awareness and .91 for Acceptance.

Procedure

During the first two weeks of the semester, participants received an online survey as part

of a larger study on procrastination (i.e., students were aware of the nature of the study)

containing the PASS, STAI, AAQ, PHL-MS, and AVQ. They were later debriefed as to the

purpose of the study.

Study 2 Results

Mean scores and standard deviations on the PASS, the STAI, the AAQ-II, the subscales

of the PHL-MS are presented in Table 4. Rates of self-reported procrastination were slightly

higher in this sample 51%, 48%, and 43% of students reporting that they procrastinate “nearly

always” or “always” on writing papers, studying for exams, and completing assigned reading,

respectively. Similar to study 1, procrastination scores were within the expected range for

college students (e.g., Solomon & Rothblum, 1984; Onwuegbuzie, 2004), while anxiety ratings

were higher than college student norms (Spielberger, 1983), and above the cutoff for high

anxiety used in other research (e.g.Phaf & Kan, 2007). Given the high levels of anxiety reported

by participants, the previously established relationship between anxiety and psychological

inflexibility (e.g., Hayes et al., 2004), and the average psychological inflexibility typically

reported by college students (Bond et al., 2011), the levels of psychological inflexibility


17/38

reported by the participants in the present study were surprisingly low. It is possible that students

high in psychological inflexibility self-selected out of the study, which is a limitation associated

with using a sample of convenience. Scores on both the Awareness and Acceptance subscales of

the PHL-MS were within the established range for a non-clinical college student sample

(Cardaciotto et al., 2008).

A series of independent samples t-tests did not reveal any group differences in

procrastination, psychological flexibility, mindfulness, or values between graduate and

undergraduate students or students from the two different universities. Gender, school year, and

ethnic group were also shown to be unrelated to the aforementioned variables, and all

undergraduate and graduate student data were analyzed together.

As in Study 1, all variables were inspected to establish their appropriateness for the

present analyses. We conducted a square root transformation (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013) to fix

the non-normal distribution of the AAQ. While the AVQ was negatively skewed, there was no

expectation that this measure would be normally distributed among a student sample, and no

transformations were performed. All study measures had minimal missing data (less than 5%)

and normally distributed residuals, confirming their suitability for regression analyses.

The relationship between procrastination and psychological inflexibility in this sample

was similar to that found in Study 1. Procrastination was significantly positively correlated with

trait anxiety and significantly negatively correlated with acceptance/psychological flexibility, the

Acceptance subscale of the PHL-MS, and academic values. No relationship was found between

the Awareness subscale of the PHL-MS and the PASS. Intercorrelations are presented in Table

5.


18/38

To determine whether acceptance/psychological flexibility, mindfulness (awareness), and

academic values contribute to the prediction of procrastination over and above the effects of

anxiety, a hierarchical linear regression was conducted with the STAI entered in the first step,

and the AAQ-II, the Acceptance subscale of the PHL-MS (the Awareness subscale was dropped

due to its lack of correlation with procrastination), and the AVQ entered in the second step.

Results showed that anxiety significantly predicted procrastination (r² ∆ = .19; p < .001). In

addition, the combined effects of acceptance/psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and values

added to the prediction of procrastination above that predicted by anxiety alone approached

significance (r² ∆

= .06; p < .05). None of the individual constructs entered in the second step

uniquely contributed to the prediction of procrastination. Results are presented in Table 6.

Overall Discussion/Conclusions

Given the ubiquitous nature of procrastination, and its adverse consequences on academic

performance and emotional and physical well-being, conceptually and empirically informed,

effective interventions are needed. An important first step in this endeavor is identifying the

psychological processes that contribute to the cause and maintenance of procrastination. The

present studies were a modest attempt aimed at preliminarily investigating the relationships

among acceptance/psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and academic values and

procrastination. Using two different samples, and different measures of the key constructs,

results from both studies provided suggest that acceptance/psychological flexibility, some

aspects of mindfulness, and academic values together contribute to the prediction of

procrastination over and above the effects of anxiety. This implies that anxiety alone does not

fully explain procrastination and that the combination of variables we used to measure

psychological flexibility makes an incremental contribution to the model. The analytic strategy


19/38

used in these studies, hierarchical linear regression, is a useful approach to test theoretical

assumptions about the ways in which specific constructs may add to the prediction of a criterion

variable over and above that which can be accounted for by other important constructs

(Wampold & Freund, 1987; Petrocelli, 2003). Nonetheless, these were preliminary analyses that

would benefit from additional replication using more refined strategies.

While not the first study to examine the link between mindfulness and procrastination

(Sirois & Tosti, 2012), the present study did incorporate additional subscales (e.g. Describe on

the KIMS) and measures (e.g. the PHLMS) to help elaborate upon this relationship. The finding

from the current study that the Observe subscale of the KIMS and the Awareness subscale of the

PHLMS were the only mindfulness subscales not correlated with procrastination is consistent

with the growing research suggesting the complexity of the relationship between awareness of,

and attention to, internal experiences and psychological well-being (e.g., Baker, Holloway,

Thomas, Thomas, & Owens, 2004; Lieschetzke & Eid, 2003; Tull, Barrett, McMillan, &

Roemer, 2007; Tull & Roemer, 2007). One possibility for the lack of association on both of these

subscales is the nuanced interpretation of observation and awareness, which can have different

meanings to individuals who are not familiar with the type of attention fostered in mindfulness

practices (Grossman, 2011). It is also possible that awareness without an accepting or

compassionate quality may actually be detrimental, especially if awareness of internal

experiences is associated with a judgmental stance and difficulty-regulating mood (e.g.,

Lieschetzke & Eid, 2003; Roemer, Lee, Salters-Pedneault, Erisman, Orsillo, & Mennin, 2009).

Unlike the other subscales, the Observe subscale of the KIMS has previously been found to be

positively correlated with thought suppression, dissociation, absent-mindedness, and

psychological symptoms (Baer et al., 2006). Thus, it is not surprising that we failed to find a


20/38

negative relationship between the extent to which participants observed, or were aware of their

internal experiences, and procrastination. In the future, researchers may wish to add in a

measure of self-compassion (e.g. Neff, 2003) in order to look at associations between

procrastination and the type of attention participants report.

The characteristics of the students in the current studies might be taken into account when

considering the potential generalizability of our findings. Students in the current sample reported

procrastinating between one-fifth and one-third of the time on major academic activities.

Although these rates are somewhat alarming, they are also consistent with reports from other

samples of college (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984) and graduate (Onwuegbuzie, 2004) students.

Students in the current study also reported levels of mindfulness consistent with other samples

(Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004; Cardaciotto et al., 2009). Our sample may have been more unique

with regard to their self-reported levels of anxiety and experiential avoidance. Participants in

both samples reported relatively high anxiety (see Phaf & Kan, 2007) and students in Study 2

reported relatively low levels of experiential avoidance as compared to those typically reported

by college students (Bond et al., 2011). It is possible that the relationship between psychological

inflexibility and procrastination could be different in college samples with different

psychological characteristics.

The demographic characteristics of the sample may also limit generalizability. Although

Study 2 included a slightly more diverse sample, both were limited in their race and ethnicity

composition. Previous research (Klassen et al., 2010) has demonstrated cross-cultural differences

in how procrastination is perceived, with Singaporean students reporting stronger negative

beliefs about procrastination than Canadian students. While it is possible that the present sample

at a Western university may have similar views on procrastination, Klassen and colleagues


21/38

caution against generalizing their findings to students in other countries. No group differences in

procrastination were found when we compared racial and ethnic groups in both samples, which

is consistent with prior research on race and procrastination (Clark & Hill, 1994). However, it is

also important to note that the current studies were not powered to detect racial or ethnic

differences.

The current studies are also limited on their reliance on self-report, which is especially

problematic due to the lack of a measure of social desirability as well as the difficulty that

individuals who engage in experiential avoidance may have with recognizing and describing

their internal experiences. Furthermore, given that the same data collection method was used to

collect data contemporaneously, false correlations may have emerged. The use of multiple

assessment strategies (e.g. implicit, behavioral) over several time-points would be one potential

solution to this issue of common method variance.

While no moderation models were tested in this study, prior research suggests that the

relationship between fear of failure and procrastination varies based on levels of perceived

competence (Haghbin et al., 2012). Additionally, self-forgiveness has been identified as

mediating the relationship between initial instances of procrastination and subsequent episodes

(Wolf, Pychyl, & Bennet, 2010). Thus, future researchers may consider testing mediation and

moderation models in order to more precisely clarify the associations described in this study.

While the ACT model informed our conceptualization of psychological flexibility, the

combination of measures used in both Study 1 and Study 2 bears clarification from a

methodological perspective. In Study 1, the first version of the AAQ was used, which was

initially developed to assess experiential avoidance (Hayes et al., 2004), but has been described

as both a measure of experiential avoidance and one of psychological inflexibility (e.g., Varra,


22/38

Hayes, Roget, & Fisher, 2008). Thus, additional measures of mindfulness and values were

included to more fully capture the constructs proposed to underlie psychological flexibility.

Although these questionnaires did not fully capture all six ACT processes, other studies have

similarly used a subset of questionnaires to measure psychological flexibility (e.g. Biglan,

Layton, Jones, Hankins, & Rusby, 2011; McCracken, 2013; McCracken & Yang, 2008) or

aspects of it. In Study 2, the revised AAQ (AAQ-II) was used, which is explicitly termed a

measure of psychological flexibility and experiential avoidance (Bond et al., 2011). However,

the items on the AAQ-II were developed to reflect the “dominance or nondominance of internal

events over contingencies in determining values directed actions” (Bond et al., 2011) and no

attempt was made to sample items from all six of the psychological processes proposed to reflect

psychological inflexibility in the development of this measure. Thus, consistent with current

other researchers in this area (e.g. Kangasniemi et al., 2013; McCracken & Velleman, 2010) we

supplemented the AAQ-II with other measures proposed to tap into constructs related to the

psychological flexibility mode. The use of multiple measures in both studies is also beneficial

from a research perspective in order to help address possible inconsistencies in participant

reporting across measures (Kazdin, 2003). Additional research is clearly needed to improve the

measurement of the psychological processes proposed to underlie psychological flexibility.

Another limitation of the present studies is their use of the AVQ, a measure without

validated psychometric properties. Despite the high internal consistency demonstrated in the two

samples and some preliminary evidence for the validity of the measures, much more data on the

reliability and validity of the measure is needed. Also, as constructed, the measure taps into

espoused values but it may or may not reflect enacted values.


23/38

The constructs examined within these studies do bear similarities with existing

characteristics thought to be involved with procrastination. Frustration intolerance, developed in

the context of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), is strongly associated with

procrastination (Dryden, 2012; Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Harrington, 2005). Defined as a set of

irrational beliefs that lead individuals to avoid experiencing emotional discomfort and turn away

from these emotional disturbances rather than working through them (Ellis, 1979), frustration

intolerance does overlap with the main idea of experiential avoidance (Hayes et al., 1996).

Although experiential avoidance is one part of the psychological inflexibility model, the

emphasis on pursuing freely chosen goals and valued actions helps to distinguish the latter

(Hayes et al., 2006). Thus, while frustration may be one state that individuals who procrastinate

attempt to control, they could also struggle with boredom, anxiety, fear of failure, and others.

Psychological inflexibility may serve as a higher order factor that unifies these avoided internal

experiences while also highlighting the contributions of lack of values clarity and unworkable

action/inaction. The present studies attempt to reflect the diverse contributions to procrastination

through measuring variables such as mindfulness and academic values, though it is important to

acknowledge the conceptual overlap with existing constructs such as frustration intolerance.

The present study was the first to conceptualize procrastination as a consequence of low

psychological flexibility rather than focusing on it as a result of either poor time management

(e.g., Burka & Yuen, 1983), anxiety (e.g., Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), or difficulties with self-

regulation (e.g., Patry, Blanchard, & Mask, 2007). Despite the limitations mentioned above, the

results support the benefits of studying psychological flexibility as a potential underlying

mechanism of procrastination. Furthermore, if low psychological flexibility, low mindfulness,

and a lack of connection to values are common precursors of procrastination, then treatments


24/38

aimed at decreasing these tendencies and increasing values-consistent living (see Hayes et al.,

2011; Roemer & Orsillo, 2009) should help to reduce the behavior. In addition, future research

should expand beyond academic procrastination to other areas of procrastination that are likely

to involve emotions and psychological flexibility, including making decisions and initiating

difficult conversations.


25/38

References

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

procrastination. Journal of Marketing Education, 27 , 5-13.

Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., & Allen, K.B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The

Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment , 11(3), 191-206.

Baker, R., Holloway, J., Thomas, P.W., Thomas, S, & Owens, M. (2004). Emotional processing and

panic. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42(11), 1271-1287.

Baumeister, R. F., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological

inquiry, 7 (1), 1-15.

Beck, B.L., Koons, S.R., & Milgrim, D.L. (2000). Correlates and consequences of behavioral

procrastination: The effect of academic procrastination, self-consciousness self-esteem, and self-

handicapping. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15(5), 3-13.

Biglan, A., Layton, G. L., Jones, L. B., Hankins, M., & Rusby, J. C. (2013). The value of workshops on

psychological flexibility for early childhood special education staff. Topics in Early Childhood

Special Education, 32(4), 196-210.

Bishop, S.R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson L., Anderson, N.D., Carmody, J., Segal, Z.V., Abbey, S.,

Speca, M., Velting, D., & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition.

Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230-241.

Bond, F.W., Hayes, S.C., Baer, R.A., Carpenter, K.M., Orcutt, H.K., Waltz, T., & Zettle, R.D. (2011).

Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – II: A revised

measure of psychological flexibility and acceptance. Behavior Therapy, 42, 676-688.

Bui, N.H. (2007). Effect of evaluation threat on procrastination behavior. The Journal of Social

Psychology, 147(3), 197-209.


26/38

Burka, J.B., & Yuen, L.M. (1983). Procrastination: Why you do it, what to do about it . Addison-Wesley

Publishing Company.

Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J.D., Forman, E.M. Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of

present-moment awareness and acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale. Assessment,

15(2), 204-223.

Chawla, N., & Ostafin, B. (2007). Experiential avoidance as a functional dimensional approach to

psychopathology: An empirical review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(9), 871-890.

Ciarrochi, J., Bilich, L., & Godsell, C. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a mechanism of change in

acceptance and commitment therapy. Assessing mindfulness and acceptance processes in clients:

Illuminating the theory and practice of change, 51-75.

Clark, J. L., & HILL JR, O. W. (1994). Academic procrastination among African-American college

students. Psychological Reports, 75(2), 931-936.

Danitz, S.B. & Orsillo, S. (2013) .The mindful way through the semester: An investigation of the

effectiveness of an acceptance-based behavioral therapy program on psychological wellness in

first year students. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Dryden, W. (2012). Dealing with procrastination: The REBT approach and a demonstration session.

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 30(4), 264-281.

Ellis, A., & Knaus, W. J. (1977). Overcoming procrastination: Or how to think and act rationally in

spite of life's inevitable hassles. Institute for Rational Living.

Ellis, A. (1979). Discomfort anxiety: A new cognitive behavioral construct A. Ellis, W. Dryden (Eds.),

The essential Albert Ellis, Springer, New York (1979)


27/38

Fritzsche, B.A., Young, B.R., & Hickson, K.C. (2003). Individual differences in academic

procrastination tendency and writing success. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1549-

1557.

Glick, D.M. & Orsillo, S. (2013) An Investigation of the Efficacy of Acceptance-based Behavioral

Therapy for Academic Procrastination. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Grossman, P. (2011). Defining mindfulness by how poorly I think I pay attention during everyday

awareness and other intractable problems for psychology's (re) invention of mindfulness:

comment on Brown et al.(2011). Psychological Assessment, 23(4). 1034-1040.

Haghbin, M., McCaffrey, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2012). The complexity of the relation between fear of

failure and procrastination. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 30(4),

249-263.

Harrington, N. (2005). It’s too difficult! Frustration intolerance beliefs and procrastination. Personality

and Individual Differences, 39(5), 873-883.

Hayes, S.C., Wilson, K.G., Gifford, E.V., Follette, V.M., & Strosahl, K. (1996). Experiential avoidance

and behavioral disorders: A functional dimensional approach to diagnosis and treatment. Journal

of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64(6), 1152-1168.

Hayes, S.C.,Stroshal,K.D., & Wilson, K.G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An

experiential approach to behavior change. New York: Guilford Press.

Hayes, S.C., Strosahl, K., Wilson, K.G., Bissett, R.T., Pistorello, J., Toarmino, D., & McCurry, S.M.

(2004). Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a working model. The

Psychological Record , 54(4), 553-578.

Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy: The

process and practice of mindful change (2nd ed.). New York, NY US: Guilford Press.


28/38

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life .

Hyperion Press.

Kangasniemi, A. M., Lappalainen, R., Kankaanpää, A., Kulmala, J., Hakonen, H., & Tammelin, T.

(2013). Towards a physically more active lifestyle based on one's own values: study design of a

randomized controlled trial for physically inactive adults. BMC public health, 13(1), 671.

Kazdin, A. E. (2003). Research design in clinical psychology (Vol. 3). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Klassen, R.M., Ang, R.P., Chong, W.H., Krawchuk, L. L., Huan, V.S., Wong, I.Y.F., & Yeo, L.S.

(2010). Academic procrastination in two settings: Mortivation correlates, behavioral patterns,

and negative impact of procrastination in Canada and Singapore. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 59(3), 361-379.

Klibert, J.J., Langhinrichsen-Rohling J., & Saito, M. (2005). Adaptive and maladaptive aspects of self-

oriented versus socially prescribed perfectionism. Journal of College Student Development,

46(2), 141-156.

Levrini, A., & Prevatt, F. (2012). Succeeding with adult ADHD: Daily strategies to help you achieve

your goals and manage your life. Washington, D.C., US: American Psychological Association.

Lieschetzke, T., & Eid, M. (2003). Is attention to feelings beneficial or detrimental to affective well-

being? Mood regulation as a moderator variable. Emotion, 3(4), 361-377.

Macher, D., Paechter, M., Papousek, I, & Ruggeri, K. (2012). Statistics anxiety, trait anxiety, learning

behavior, and academic performance. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27(4), 483-

498.

McCracken, L. M. (2013). Committed Action: An Application of the Psychological Flexibility Model to

Activity Patterns in Chronic Pain. The Journal of Pain.


29/38

McCracken, L. M., & Velleman, S. C. (2010). Psychological flexibility in adults with chronic pain: a

study of acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based action in primary care. Pain, 148(1), 141-

147.

McCracken, L. M., & Yang, S. Y. (2008). A contextual cognitive-behavioral analysis of rehabilitation

workers' health and well-being: Influences of acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based action.

Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(4), 479.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2000). Academic procrastinators and perfectionistic tendencies among graduate

students. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality.

Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Academic procrastination and statistics anxiety. Assessment and Evaluation in

Higher Education, 29(1), 3-19.

Patry, D.A., Blanchard, C.M., & Mask, L. (2007). Measuring university students’ regulatory coping

styles: Planned breathers or avoidance? Leisure Sciences, 29, 247-265.

Petrocelli, J. V. (2003). Hierarchical multiple regression in counseling research: Common problems and

possible remedies. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development , 36 (1), 9-22.

Phaf, R.H., & Kan, K. (2007). The automaticity of emotional stroop: A meta-analysis. Journal of

Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 38 184-199.

Pychyl, T.A., Morin, R.W., & Salmon, B.R. (2000). Procrastination and the planning fallacy: An

examination of the study habits of university students. Journal of Social Behavior and

Personality, 15(5), 135-150.

Rabin, L.A., Fogel, J., & Nutter-Upham, K.E. (2010). Academic procrastination in college students: The

role of self-reported executive function. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology,

33(3), 344-357.


30/38

Ramanaiah, N. V., Franzen, M., & Schill, T. (1983). A psychometric study of the State-Trait Anxiety

Inventory. Journal of personality assessment , 47 (5), 531-535.

Roemer, L., Lee. J.K., Salters-Pedneault, K., Erisman, S.M., Orsillo, S.M., & Mennin, D.S. (2009).

Mindfulness and emotion regulation difficulties in generalized anxiety disorder: Preliminary

evidence for independent overlapping contributions. Behavior Therapy, 40(2), 142-154.

Roemer, L., & Orsillo S.M. (2009). Mindfulness and acceptance-based behavioral therapies in practice.

New York: Guilford Press.

Sirois, F. M. (2004). Procrastination and intentions to perform health behaviors: The role of self-efficacy

and the consideration of future consequences. Personality and Individual Differences, 37 (1),

115-128.

Sirois, F. M., Melia-Gordon, M. L., & Pychyl, T. A. (2003). “I'll look after my health, later”: an

investigation of procrastination and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(5), 1167-

1184.

Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood regulation:

Consequences for future self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(2), 115-127.

Sirois, F. M., & Tosti, N. (2012). Lost in the moment? An investigation of procrastination, mindfulness,

and well-being. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 30(4), 237-248.

Solomon, L.J., & Rothblum, E.D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-

behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(4), 503-509.

Spielberger, C.D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Palo-Alto, CA:

Consulting Psychologist Press.

Spielberger, C. D. (2010). State Trait anxiety inventory. Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology.


31/38

Stead, R., Shanahan, M.J., & Neufeld, R.W.J. (2010). “I’ll go to therapy, eventually”: Procrastination,

stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(3), 175-180.

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential

self-regulatory failure. P sychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65-94.

Steel, P., Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2001). Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood.

Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 95-106.

Tabatchnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th

ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tice, D.M., & Baumeister, R.F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and

health: The costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychological Science, 8(6), 454-458.

Tull, M.T., Barrett, H.M., McMillan, E.S., & Roemer, L. (2007). A preliminary investigation of the

relationship between emotion regulation difficulties and posttraumatic stress symptoms.

Behavior Therapy, 38(3), 303-313.

Tull, M.T., & Roemer, L. (2007). Emotion regulation difficulties associated with the experience of

uncued panic attacks: Evidence of experiential avoidance, emotional nonacceptance, and

decreased emotional clarity. Behavior Therapy, 38(4), 378-391.

Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1992). The

Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education.

Educational and psychological measurement , 52(4), 1003-1017.

Van Erde, W. (2003). Procrastination at work and time management training. The Journal of

Psychology, 137(5), 421-434.

Varra, A. A., Hayes, S. C., Roget, N., & Fisher, G. (2008). A randomized control trial examining the

effect of acceptance and commitment training on clinician willingness to use evidence-based

pharmacotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76 (3), 449.


32/38

Wampold, B. E., & Freund, R. D. (1987). Use of multiple regression in counseling psychology research:

A flexible data-analytic strategy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 372.

Williamson, D. F., Parker, R. A., & Kendrick, J. S. (1989). The box plot: a simple visual method to

interpret data. Annals of internal medicine, 110(11), 916-921.

Wilson, K. G., & Murrell, A. R. (2004). Values work in acceptance and commitment therapy.

Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding the cognitive–behavioral tradition. New York: Guilford ,

120-151.

Wilson, K. G., Sandoz, E. K., Kitchens, J., & Roberts, M. E. (2010). The Valued Living Questionnaire:

Defining and measuring valued action within a behavioral framework. The Psychological

Record, 60, 249-272.

Wohl, M.J.A., Pychyl, T.A., & Bennet, S.H. (2010). I forgive myself, now I can study: How self-

forgiveness for procrastinating can reduce future procrastination. Personality and Individual

Differences, 48, 803-808.


33/38

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Ranges for Study 1 Variables (N = 258)

Total

M (SD) Range

PASS 32.74 (8.03) 12 - 60

STAI 43.03 (10.86) 22 - 75

AAQ 62.06 (10.91) 28 - 103

KIMS

Observe 35.67 (7.77) 12 - 57

Describe 26.79 (5.66) 12 - 40

Act 27.26 (5.65) 10 - 42

Accept 29.62 (6.98) 9 - 45

AVQ 22.06 (2.97) 5 - 25

Note: PASS = Procrastination Assessment Scale – Students (Total Problems subscale); STAI =State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Trait Subscale); AAQ = Acceptance and Action Questionnaire;

KIMS – Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS); Observe = Observe subscale of the

Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS); Describe = Describe subscale of the KIMS;Act = Act with awareness subscale of the KIMS; Accept = Accept without judgment subscale of

the KIMS; AVQ = Academic Values Questionnaire


34/38

Table 2.

Intercorrelations Among Procrastination, Anxiety, Psychological Flexibility, Mindfulness, and

Academic Values (Study 1)

Note: PASS = Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students; STAI = State-Trait Anxiety

Inventory-Trait Version; AAQ = Action and Acceptance Questionnaire II; Observe = Observe subscale of the KIMS; Describe = Describe subscale of the KIMS; Act = Act with awareness

subscale of the KIMS; Accept = Accept without judgment subscale of the KIMS; AVQ =

Academic Values Questionnaire*p


35/38

Table 3

Predictors of Procrastination: Anxiety, Psychological Flexibility, Mindfulness, and Academic

Values (Study 1)

Variable r²∆ F∆ df Beta

Step 1 .06** 12.91* 1,215

STAIa

.24*

Step 2 .22** 10.28* 5,210

AAQ -.07

Describe -.21*

Act -.37*

Accept -.06

AVQ -.08

Note: STAI = State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Version; AAQ = Action and Acceptance

Questionnaire II; Describe = Describe subscale of the KIMS; Act = Act with awareness subscale

of the KIMS; Accept = Accept without judgment subscale of the KIMS; AVQ = Academic

Values Questionnaire.Betas reported are those from the final step at which all variables were entered into the equation.

*p < .001

† p < .10

a

Square root transformed variable


36/38

Table 4.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Ranges for Study 2 Variables (N = 118)

Total

M (SD) Range

PASS 33.14 (7.64) 12 – 51

STAI 42.14 (10.08) 21 – 70

AAQ-2 20.87 (8.81) 8 - 48

PHL-MS

Aware 35.49 (5.96) 19 - 50

Accept 30.53 (8.11) 11 - 47

AVQ 22.48 (2.85) 5 – 25

Note: PASS = Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students; STAI = State-Trait AnxietyInventory-Trait Version; AAQ = Action and Acceptance Questionnaire II; Aware = Awareness

subscale of the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHL-MS); Accept = Acceptance subscale of the

PHL-MS; AVQ = Academic Values Questionnaire


37/38

Table 5.

Intercorrelations among Procrastination, Anxiety, Psychological Flexibility, Mindfulness, and

Academic Values (Study 2)

Note: PASS = Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students; STAI = State-Trait Anxiety

Inventory-Trait Version; AAQ = Action and Acceptance Questionnaire II; Aware = Awareness subscale of the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHL-MS); Accept = Acceptance subscale of the

PHL-MS; AVQ = Academic Values Questionnaire

*p < .05

**p < .01

†p < .10a


PASS STAI AAQ-

2a

Aware Accept

STAI .43**

AAQ-2a

-.40** -.82**

Aware .07 -.13 .06

Accept -.20* -.67** .64** .01

AVQ -.21* -.00 .11 -.05 -.17†


38/38

Table 6. Predictors of procrastination: anxiety, psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and

academic values (Study 2)

Variable r²∆ F∆ df Beta

Step 1 .19** 26.46** 1,116

STAI .43*

Step 2 .06* 2.81* 3,113

AAQ-2a

.16

Accept .14

AVQ -.17

Note. STAI = State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Version; AAQ = Action and Acceptance

Questionnaire II; Accept = Acceptance subscale of the PHL-MS; AVQ = Academic Values

QuestionnaireBetas reported are those from the final step at which all variables were entered into the equation.

**p < .001

*p < .05

a


Debra Glick Et Al. - A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in...

Documents

Transcript of Debra Glick Et Al. - A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Psychological Inflexibility in...