Psychological well-being and its relationships with active and passive procrastination

Procrastination affects many people and impacts overall effectiveness of individuals and organisations. While
some studies have examined the correlates of procrastination in terms of impacts on well-being (including
depression and anxiety) and on performance, few studies have examined procrastination as a dichotomous
construct, with most seeing procrastination as unifactorial. One such study defining procrastination as
dichotomous was that of Chu and Choi (2005). The current study examines how psychological well-being is
related to the concepts of active procrastination and passive (traditional) procrastination. Active and passive
procrastination are related insignificantly to each other (we are not dealing with one dimension); but what would
be the relationships among psychological well-being, active procrastination and passive procrastination? The
different forms of procrastination may have different relationships to well-being and research is scarce; and
further, treatment processes for avoiding the negative effects of procrastination should be tailored to the different
forms of procrastination. It was hypothesised that psychological well-being would be related positively to active
procrastination and negatively to passive procrastination. To answer this question, 152 university students aged
between 18 and 54, mean age of 23.3 (SD = 18) completed the Active Procrastination Scale, the Passive
Procrastination Scale, and Ryff’s Scales of Psychological Well-Being. Standard multiple regression was used,
linking psychological well-being, age, gender, active and passive procrastination. The findings show active and
passive procrastination are in fact separate constructs and need to be treated differently. Being an active
procrastinator can be a sign of healthy well-being.