Procrastination Behaviour and Academic Satisfaction among University Students: The Mediating Role of Self-regulated Learning

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3790025/v1

Download PDF

Article

Procrastination Behaviour and Academic Satisfaction among University Students: The Mediating Role of Self-regulated Learning

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3790025/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

This study examines the impact of procrastination on academic satisfaction, with a specific focus on the intermediate influence of self-regulated learning. Three hundred nine undergraduate students at a Chinese university were assessed in this study using a questionnaire. The survey evaluated levels of procrastination, self-regulated learning, and academic satisfaction. The results indicated a strong inverse relationship between procrastination, self-regulated learning, and academic satisfaction. Moreover, the tendency of students to delay tasks was found to be a significant predictor of their ability to govern their learning, which in turn predicted their academic satisfaction. The Bootstrap analysis approach confirmed that self-regulated learning partially mediates the association between procrastination and academic satisfaction. This study offers empirical evidence for the influential mechanisms and internal structural connections between procrastination and academic satisfaction. Furthermore, the findings provide more precise recommendations for teachers and students to improve academic satisfaction.

Biological sciences/Psychology

Health sciences/Health occupations

procrastination

self-regulated learning

academic satisfaction

mediating effect

Academic satisfaction(AS) refers to the level of personal fulfilment that students derive from their educational experience¹ and their perceived assessments of different parts of faculty, degrees, and faculty qualifications². Researchers have increasingly highlighted academic satisfaction as a significant measure for evaluating student progress and the excellence of higher education³. Research has demonstrated that academic satisfaction is linked to various academic factors, such as self-efficacy⁴, motivation^5,6, procrastination^7,8, and instructional mode⁹, among other variables. Procrastination(PT) significantly hampers academic satisfaction. Procrastination is a prevalent hindrance many university students encounter as they strive for academic excellence and contentment in their educational journey¹⁰.

According to a survey by Steel and Ferrari¹¹, a significant proportion of college students in higher education settings, ranging from 50–95%, engage in regular procrastination. Student procrastination refers to the inclination to delay taking action or making decisions related to learning¹². This conduct can result in higher levels of academic stress, reduced effectiveness, and lower academic performance¹³. Balkis highlights in the literature review that procrastination will likely result in adverse outcomes, leading to intricate and challenging management of students' psychological adaptation and motivation in the learning process⁷. Given the circumstances, it is pretty probable that procrastination will have negative consequences on one's academic satisfaction. These findings emphasise the significance of mitigating students' tendency to procrastinate to enhance academic satisfaction.

Nevertheless, studies investigating the association between procrastination and academic satisfaction have primarily focused on analysing the connection between these variables^7,8. The lack of empirical information about improving students' self-regulation skills to overcome academic expectations and hurdles is a noticeable gap in the current study. Hence, the objective of this study was to investigate the influence of procrastination on academic satisfaction among university students and to determine if self-regulated learning acts as a mediator in elucidating the connection.

Procrastination and Academic Satisfaction

Research has demonstrated that comprehending the reasons for procrastination and its repercussions for college students is vital for their educational journey. Svartdal et al.¹⁴ asserted that procrastination can be influenced by a student's psychological disposition, inclination to acquire knowledge, and social milieu. Self-determination theory (SDT) posits that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations can affect an individual's self-directed actions, as supported or controlled by internal and external factors¹⁵. According to Cavusoglu and Karatas¹⁶, students will willingly acknowledge the impact of both internal and external motivation on their learning behaviours, depending on the significance they attach to their goals, notwithstanding the presence of procrastination. In the context of SDT, a significant amount of research on procrastination has centred around examining elements such as the satisfaction of needs, academic coping strategies, motivation, and instructors' teaching style about its occurrence^16–20. This further implies that apprehensions over student procrastination might be addressed through various approaches.

Researchers have recently expanded their investigation of student procrastination to include the specific notion of academic satisfaction. For instance, Bhat and Jan⁸ discovered a negative correlation between academic procrastination and academic satisfaction. They observed that students who procrastinate in their academic pursuits tend to experience lower satisfaction with their academic performance. Similarly, Balkis discovered a negative correlation between procrastination and academic satisfaction⁷. In contrast, Scheunemann et al.²¹ argued in their research that students with greater pleasure in their academic performance exhibit a stronger tendency to procrastinate. This phenomenon is attributed to variations in study times, and the authors further elucidated that individuals with higher satisfaction levels may possess greater confidence. They do not require more academic behaviours to attain a more satisfying academic accomplishment. Given these findings, it is imperative for researchers not only to concentrate on the association between procrastination and academic satisfaction²² but also to uncover a more profound connection. Previous research has primarily focused on students' overall satisfaction, neglecting to analyse the various components of academic satisfaction. This oversight may lead to unforeseen connections between procrastination and academic satisfaction²¹. Hence, this study employed an academic satisfaction scale comprising self-study, hardware, and teaching. The aim was to elucidate the internal structural relationship between academic satisfaction and procrastination by maximising the amount of information provided.

Procrastination and self-regulated learning

Tuckman¹² defined procrastination as a behavioural inclination resulting from inadequate self-regulation, leading to the postponement of task completion or hindering the advancement of subsequent tasks. According to Hensley²³, procrastination is a dysfunctional learning activity when individuals cannot effectively regulate or control their task schedule. Similarly, the research conducted by Grunschel et al.²⁴ conclusively established that academic procrastination stems from students' inability to regulate their behaviour effectively. Schunk and Zimmerman²⁵ define self-regulated learning as the proactive adjustment of students' cognitive, affective, and behavioural components to attain task goals. Individuals with self-regulated solid learning abilities demonstrate superior aptitude in managing their time, acting independently, setting and achieving goals, and maintaining enthusiasm for learning²⁶. The findings of this study indicate a clear negative relationship between self-regulated learning and procrastination. Specifically, the results suggest that as students' level of procrastination increases, their ability to engage in self-regulated learning decreases^27,28. This study will specifically address this issue.

There is increasing evidence that procrastination is a negative result of inefficient self-regulation, as supported by studies conducted by Balkis & Duru²⁹, Hensley²³, Howell & Watson³⁰, and Steel¹⁰. Nevertheless, a notable feature of studies on the complex and varied factors contributing to the development of procrastination is the absence of a systematic approach¹⁰. There is a requirement for a more organised and research-oriented body of knowledge that considers the multifaceted character of procrastination. Several experts contend that the inclination to delay is primarily linked to a deficiency in flexibility, self-directed learning, proactive behaviour, and strategic decision-making^31,32. The primary objective of this study is to expand the existing knowledge on procrastination research by investigating the underlying mechanisms that contribute to the complex relationship between procrastination and self-regulated learning. This study will analyse procrastination among students by considering their motivation, approach strategies, behavioural outcomes, and social-environmental resources based on the self-regulated learning model and examining elements of self-regulation to investigate possible relationships with procrastination and find potential tactics for mitigating students' procrastination tendencies.

Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Satisfaction

Zimmerman³³posited that self-regulated learning entails a dynamic learning process in which students deliberately employ cognitive, motivational, and behavioural strategies. Students practise self-regulation by integrating goal setting, time management, self-evaluation, and self-motivation³⁴. Students with advanced self-regulated learning demonstrate significantly more effective learning³⁵. It is widely agreed upon that students go through various aspects of the self-regulation process that directly impact their academic performance and are the most accurate indicators of academic success, thus enhancing their academic achievement^36–38.

Prior research has demonstrated the beneficial impact of students' self-regulated learning on their academic performance, academic achievement, and satisfaction, with empirical data providing corroborating evidence. Multiple research studies have demonstrated that learners can enhance their academic performance and satisfaction by engaging in high-quality self-regulated interactions^39,40. Therefore, assessing the level of student satisfaction serves as an indicator of the student's proficiency in self-regulating their learning. However, most researchers have primarily focused on the correlation between self-regulated learning and satisfaction^40–42or the correlation between academic performance and academic achievement and satisfaction^43–46, and have not addressed the relevance of self-regulated learning to the specific concept of academic satisfaction within a particular field To address this research deficiency, this study will concentrate on comprehending the correlation between self-regulated learning and academic satisfaction, and explore the processes via which they interrelate.

Moreover, according to the Self-Determination Theory, the progress of students' motivation is strongly connected to their ability to govern their learning, their sense of competence, and the perceived significance of their learning experiences. This connection improves learning performance when students actively participate in learning activities or successfully finish learning tasks⁴⁷. The crucial function of motivation cannot be disregarded when considering students' self-regulated learning. Boekaerts⁴⁸proposes that student learning is a process of self-regulation driven by motivation, which involves the individual's inclination to learn, level of involvement, and status of effort. When motivated, students are naturally engaged in reaching learning objectives or finishing learning assignments. As Self-Determination Theory states, different motives exhibit variety⁴⁹. Thus, being influenced by different types of motivation will provide outcomes of diverse characteristics.

Nevertheless, motivational behavioural orientation can potentially impact students' academic satisfaction, regardless of whether it leads to procrastination or self-regulated learning practices. Existing research has only partially investigated the connection between procrastination, self-regulated learning, and satisfaction or academic accomplishment. This restricted literature includes studies by García-Ros et al.⁵⁰, Gendron⁵¹, and Roh^52,53. However, none of these studies specifically focus on academic satisfaction. It is essential to acknowledge that incorporating academic satisfaction as a crucial notion in student learning outcomes is merely a component of a broader research undertaking. Furthermore, self-regulated learning was employed as a mediating factor to investigate its role in reducing students' procrastination and enhancing their academic satisfaction. The objective is to differentiate between the calibre of self-regulated learning propelled by motivation and enhancing the level of student academic contentment.

Participants

The participants in this study were undergraduate students from various grades at a comprehensive university in China. All participants willingly chose to participate in the survey. Data was collected via an online electronic questionnaire. The questionnaire provided explicit labels indicating the survey's purpose and completion instructions. Respondents were explicitly informed that the questionnaire was solely intended for research data collection. A total of 309 students were surveyed, with 176 (57%) female and 133 (43%) male. To mitigate the impact of bias resulting from varying levels of competency across different disciplines, only students in their second, third, and fourth years of study who were pursuing the same major were chosen for the study. The distribution of students was as follows: 116 sophomores, accounting for 37.5 per cent of the total; 113 juniors, representing 36.6 per cent; and 80 seniors, making up 25.9 per cent.

Instruments

Procrastination questionnaire

The General Procrastination Scale (GPS), established by Lay⁵⁴, assessed students' procrastination behaviour. The scale consists of 20 items. The scale was selected to determine people's level of procrastination due to its strong internal consistency and stability, making it highly effective in evaluating procrastination behaviour across different situations. The scale has 20 items and is estimated using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 to 5, with "very inconsistent" being a score of 1 and "very consistent" representing a score of 5. Questions 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, 14, 15, 18, and 20 have reversed scores. The scale is unidimensional, and the values for all items are aggregated to generate a cumulative score, where higher numbers signify a greater degree of procrastination. The scale had a high level of internal consistency, with a coefficient of 0.803 and a split-half dependability of 0.795, according to Bao's study⁵⁵. The current investigation yielded a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.931 for the scale.

Self-regulated learning questionnaire

The Self-Regulated Learning Questionnaire, amended by Zhang⁵⁶ from the translation of Schunk and Ertmer's questionnaire⁵⁷, was employed. The assessment comprises four dimensions: motivation for learning (including self-efficacy, attribution, anticipation, and curiosity), methodology and strategy, behavioural performance, and utilisation of socio-environmental resources. It consists of 15 questions. A 5-point scale was employed, where "l" denoted complete non-compliance and "5" signified full compliance. The cumulative score, which reflected the self-regulated learning ability, was calculated by summing the scores of each question item. Higher scores indicated a greater level of self-regulated learning ability. The overall questionnaire demonstrates a high internal consistency, with a value of 0.85, showing good reliability and validity. The study found that the Cronbach alpha coefficient for the overall questionnaire scale was 0.910, indicating strong internal consistency. This score was higher than the alpha coefficients for the four subscales: motivation for learning (α = 0.716), method strategy (α = 0.788), behavioural outcome (α = 0.771), and social environment resources (α = 0.786).

Academic satisfaction scale

The academic satisfaction of students was assessed using the scale devised by Wang⁵⁸. The scale consists of 12 questions. Through this study's pre-test and expert review process, one question with linguistic ambiguity and data factor analyses did not meet the criteria, resulting in the retention of the final 11 measurement items. The study incorporated three dimensions: self-learning satisfaction, hardware satisfaction, and instruction satisfaction. A five-point Likert scale was employed, ranging from very non-compliant to compliant on a range of 1 to 5, respectively. Higher scores on the scale corresponded to greater levels of academic satisfaction. The study found that the overall Cronbach alpha coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.887, indicating strong reliability. This number was more significant than the reliability test findings for the three variables of student learning satisfaction (α = 0.788), hardware satisfaction (α = 0.807), and teacher satisfaction (α = 0.825).

Descriptive statistics

The data were analysed with SPSS version 26.0. The analysis focused on the results of the descriptive statistics to ascertain the scores of the sample across various scales and subsequently examine the characteristics of the participants. Table 1 displays the variables' maximum, minimum, mean, and standard deviation. The table data shows that the average values of self-regulation and academic satisfaction among the students are 53.5 and 37.99, respectively, indicating high levels. The average total score of students' procrastination behaviour is 70.42, suggesting a higher level of severity in their procrastination behaviour.

Table 1．Descriptive statistical analysis of variables

Variables	Item	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	SD
SRL	15	19.00	74.00	53.35	8.97
AS	11	18.00	54.00	37.99	6.94
PT	20	20.00	100.00	70.42	12.37
Motivation	4	4.00	20.00	13.84	2.68
Methodological Strategies	4	4.00	20.00	14.31	2.70
Behavioral outcomes	4	4.00	20.00	14.22	2.80
Social Environment Resources	3	3.00	15.00	10.98	2.30
Self-learning satisfaction	4	3.00	15.00	14.03	2.50
Hardware Satisfaction	3	4.00	20.00	9.59	2.85
Teaching Satisfaction	4	18.00	54.00	14.37	6.94
Note：SRL=Self-regulated learning；AS=Academic satisfaction； PT= Procrastination

Correlation between variables

The assessment of potential correlation between the variables involved computing the Pearson correlation coefficient. Table 2 demonstrates that there is a significant and negative correlation between students' self-regulated learning and procrastination behaviour (r = -0.504, p < .01). Additionally, there is an effective and negative correlation between academic satisfaction and procrastination (r = -0.656, p < .01). Furthermore, self-regulated learning is significantly and positively correlated with academic satisfaction (r = 0.511, p < .01). More precisely, students' tendency to delay tasks was found to be linked in a step-by-step manner with the techniques they used, the results of their actions, their will to learn, and the resources available to them in their learning environment, with each factor being less influential than the one before it. Procrastination was found to be positively associated with self-satisfaction with learning, instructor contentment with teaching, and hardware satisfaction in academic satisfaction, in a declining sequence. The correlation between methodological tactics in self-regulated learning and teacher-teaching and academic satisfaction is robust. The effect size between the variables in the table indicates a normative small-to-medium association, consistent with the effect size range suggested by Cohen (2013). In addition, when considering the relationship between variables of the same dimension, the correlation coefficients between the variables range from 0.266 to 0.656. None of these coefficients exceeds 0.80, suggesting no multicolinearity between the variables⁵⁹.

Table 2．Descriptive statistical analysis of variables

Variables	PT	SRL	AS	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
PT	1
SRL	-.504^**	1
AS	-.656^**	.511^**	1
Motivation	-.406^**	.847^**	.408^**	1
Methodological Strategies	-.506^**	.871^**	.520^**	.634^**	1
Behavioral Outcomes	-.424^**	.879^**	.416^**	.636^**	.717^**	1
SocialEnvironment Resources	-.384^**	.824^**	.402^**	.624^**	.614^**	.631^**	1
Self-learning Satisfaction	-.569^**	.446^**	.845^**	.369^**	.435^**	.390^**	.327^**	1
Hardware Satisfaction	-.523^**	.365^**	.853^**	.304^**	.383^**	.266^**	.296^**	.608^**	1
Teaching Satisfaction	-.566^**	.477^*	.838^**	.356^**	.494^**	.390^**	.393^**	.521^**	.590^**	1
Note：PT=Procrastination; SRL=Self-regulated learning；AS=Academic satisfaction；1=Motivation; 2=Methodological Strategies; 3=Behavioral Outcomes; 4=Social Environment Resources; 5=Self-learning Satisfaction; 6=Hardware Satisfaction; 7=Teaching Satisfaction p<.05，p<.01，**p<.001.

Mediation test of self-regulated learning between procrastination and academic satisfaction

The study utilised structural equation modelling (SEM) with AMOS 24.0 to examine the structural relationship between the variables. SEM was employed to conduct path analysis on procrastination, self-regulated learning, and academic satisfaction. Figure 1 displays the outcomes of the model test. The path coefficients of the model were determined using Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) because the sample size exceeded the recommended threshold of 200, ensuring that the parameter estimates and standard errors are asymptotically unbiased, consistent, and valid⁶⁰. The chi-square statistic (χ2), canonical fit index (NFI), goodness of fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), non-canonical fit index (TLI), comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were employed to assess the overall model fit. Hu and Bentler (1999) proposed that the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) should be 0.06 or lower for a satisfactory model fit. However, some researchers have argued that an RMSEA value of 0.08 or below is acceptable⁶¹. Furthermore, it is typically advised that the χ2/ df ratio should be less than 3, and the NFI and CFI values should be greater than 0.90. Additionally, the GFI, AGFI, and TLI values must be greater than 0.9 for the model to be acceptable, as Hu and Bentler⁶²and Schumacker and Lomax⁶³suggested. The values of the indicators are documented in Table 3.

Table 3．Fit metrics for structural equation modeling

Items	χ2/df	NFI	GFI	TLI	CFI	AGFI	RMESA
Values	2.266	0.967	0.969	0.971	0.981	0.939	0.064

Table 3 reveals that all the model's fitted values were within the permitted range, indicating a successful model fit. The findings depicted in Figure 1 indicate that delay had a notable detrimental impact on self-regulated learning and academic satisfaction (β= -0.54, p < 0.01; β= -0.57, p < 0.01), respectively. Additionally, self-regulated learning significantly positively influenced academic satisfaction (β= -0.30, p < 0.01). The mediating effect was subsequently examined using the bias-corrected percentile Bootstrap approach involving 5,000 replicate draws. The findings in Table 4 reveal that procrastination significantly negatively impacts academic satisfaction, with a total effect value of -0.64 (95% CI [-0.74, -0.55]). The direct effect size of procrastination on academic satisfaction is -0.50 (95% CI [-0.60, -0.39]). The mediating effect of procrastination on academic satisfaction through self-regulated learning was shown to have a value of -0.14, with a 95% confidence interval of [-0.23, -0.08]. Given that the confidence intervals for each effect value do not encompass zero, it can be concluded that the mediating impact of self-regulated learning between procrastination and academic satisfaction is statistically significant and partially mediating.

Table 4．Bootstrap analysis of mediated effects test

	Effect	Estimate	Boot LL CI	Boot UL CI
AS <--- PT	Direct effect	-0.50	-.60	-.39
AS<---SRL<---PT	Indirect effect	-0.14	-.23	-.08
	Total effect	-0.64	-.74	-.55

The direct effect of procrastination on academic satisfaction

The study findings suggest a strong and negative correlation between procrastination and academic satisfaction. Students' procrastination behaviours significantly predicted their high levels of academic satisfaction, consistent with previous research findings⁷^,⁸. While previous research has established a robust correlation between procrastination and academic satisfaction, the underlying causal processes for these connections have not been sufficiently elucidated. The current study found a strong association between procrastination and students' levels of self-satisfaction with learning and contentment with teacher teaching, which is more significant than any other factor. In conjunction with the content of the SDT, students' procrastination behaviours can be influenced by several aspects, such as intrinsic self-motivation, need satisfaction and external support. Shih²⁰ illustrates that when students' competency needs are fulfilled, they approach challenging learning assignments positively and embrace obstacles with optimism. Students exhibit increased confidence in fulfilling academic responsibilities and meeting deadlines, decreasing procrastination and enhancing self-learning satisfaction.

Furthermore, students who receive pedagogical support for teacher autonomy have superior motivation and self-regulation to combat procrastination and are more likely to engage in self-directed learning¹⁷. Students who lack motivation and self-regulation in dealing with procrastination are considerably less inclined to perceive their lecturers' instruction, impacting their level of satisfaction. This discovery contributes to the existing body of research by elucidating the mechanism of internal structural connections between procrastination and academic satisfaction.

The mediating role of self-regulated learning between procrastination and academic satisfaction

The study discovered a direct impact of procrastination on students' academic satisfaction and an indirect effect through the intermediary function of self-regulated learning. The correlation between procrastination and students' self-regulated learning supports prior research indicating that students who frequently postpone are likely to have lower self-regulated learning²⁴^,²⁷. Based on the explanation of motivational terminology in SDT, students procrastinate because they lack self-regulation. The level of autonomy in self-regulation and the development of student's motivation to study is closely associated⁴⁷. In addition, this study's findings support previous research indicating that students with a strong capacity for self-regulated learning tend to demonstrate superior academic performance, accomplishment, and satisfaction³⁹^,⁴⁷^,⁴⁰. The study also found the strongest correlation between the methodological strategies students use in practising self-regulated learning and satisfaction with teaching in academic satisfaction. The present discoveries broaden the scope of investigation on the restricted correlation between self-regulated learning and academic satisfaction, thus deepening our comprehension of the mechanisms underlying the interaction between these two concepts.

Prior research indicates connections between students' self-regulated learning and procrastination and between procrastination and academic satisfaction. However, the potential explanatory mechanisms for these associations have been mainly neglected. Specifically, the mediating role of self-regulated learning in the relationship between procrastination and academic satisfaction has not been adequately examined. This study examined the role of self-regulated learning as a mediating variable in explaining the relationship between procrastination and academic satisfaction. The correlation and path analyses revealed a significant inverse relationship between students' level of self-regulated learning and their tendency to procrastinate.

Additionally, higher levels of self-regulated learning were associated with more practical approach tactics and improved behavioural outcomes during their studies. Greater levels of self-regulation among students are positively correlated with increased academic satisfaction. Scheunemann et al.²¹suggest that individuals can use self-regulation skills to cultivate a conducive academic atmosphere that promotes satisfaction to reduce procrastination's negative impact. This correlation implies that enhancing students' capacity to self-regulate their learning might be viewed as a novel and feasible approach to mitigate the negative consequences of procrastination on student contentment.

To summarise, the present findings enhance the scope of study on procrastination and college student fulfilment, explicitly contributing to the existing literature on the correlation between procrastination and academic contentment. Moreover, discovering that self-regulated learning can mediate between procrastination and academic happiness validates a more comprehensive approach to decreasing students' procrastination tendencies and improving academic satisfaction.

Implications for Educational Practice

This study uncovers an inherent connection between procrastination and academic satisfaction, wherein procrastination has a more significant impact on student's assessment of their self-learning and their professors' contentment with their instruction. In addition, self-regulated learning acts as a mediation factor, mitigating the negative consequences that procrastination might have on academic satisfaction. These findings offer precise pedagogical insights for enhancing students' academic satisfaction, emphasising the importance of teacher instruction and self-regulated learning. When teachers empathise with students and provide them with opportunities for self-fulfilment and choice, kids show a far stronger academic response⁶⁴^,²⁰. Teachers may effectively communicate with students to ensure they meet learning standards and task goals. This helps students grow and adjust their learning strategies while preventing procrastination caused by academic difficulties and stress.

Enhancing the students' self-regulated learning skills from their standpoint is crucial. For instance, students can cultivate interactive support systems with their peers to strengthen and apply critical cognitive thinking abilities and skills in a more profound learning approach, fostering curiosity to investigate open-ended inquiries and expand their knowledge base⁶⁵^,⁴⁰. By adopting this approach, students effectively address academic challenges with a positive and constructive mindset, reducing their tendency to procrastinate²⁰. The development of motivation, cognition, and strategies for self-regulated learning is promoted by self-setting and regulating learning behaviours during the learning process and establishing priorities for task completion when reaching goals. This ultimately improves academic satisfaction⁵⁰.

Limitations and Perspectives

The study findings also demonstrate the presence of certain constraints. Initially, this study employed a scale to quantify procrastination but did not evaluate its many aspects. Future studies should use measures that assess distinct procrastinating behaviours, such as task complexity, physical factors, or procrastination resulting from external human intervention. To examine the connection structure, we can also consider the type of procrastination, whether it is active or passive. Furthermore, the utilisation of cross-sectional data in this study does not provide the means to ascertain procrastination resulting from issues with study times. These findings from Scheunemann et al.'s study suggest that students who reported higher academic satisfaction were more likely to procrastinate due to variations in their study periods²¹. Researchers can measure and assess research variables longitudinally in future studies to analyse potential changes within or between individuals, resulting in more essential insights into causal pathways. Notably, this study exclusively focused on undergraduate students and did not consider individuals with more extensive academic experience. Wu et al.⁴⁰ highlight variations in how students with varying levels of education perceive learning and satisfaction. To elaborate, future research could incorporate the academic background, which pertains to the educational level, to offer distinct perspectives on improving academic satisfaction across various student demographics. This study examines the profound correlation between procrastination and academic satisfaction as a specific academic term, addressing a research gap to some degree. Furthermore, a more thorough and cohesive explanation of the potential mechanisms of influence and relationships between the variables is offered by considering self-regulated learning as a mediating variable. Based on the current results, this explanation holds some reference value for educational practices to reduce procrastination behaviour and increase academic satisfaction.

This study investigated the underlying structural connection between procrastination and academic satisfaction and discovered a noteworthy mediating impact of self-regulated learning. Based on previous research, the findings confirm that the four-dimensional variables of self-regulated learning can mediate the effects of procrastination on different types of satisfaction. Considering both teachers and students themselves, the adverse effects of procrastination and academic satisfaction can be achieved by improving students' self-regulated learning. These findings enhance our understanding of the connection between procrastination and academic satisfaction. However, additional research is required to verify and broaden the conclusions and scope of the present study.

Author contributions

XH：Conceptualization，writing the paper，sofware，validation dates，investigation，review and editing；

FABR: methodology，review and editing，visualization；

JTY: visualization，review.

All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Competing interests

All the authors declares no competing interests.

Data availability

The datasets used and analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Additional information

Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to HUANG XIAO

Ryan, A. M. The peer group as a context for the development of young adolescent motivation and achievement. Child development, 72(4), 1135-1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00338(2001).
Meneghel, I., Martínez, I. M., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. Promoting academic satisfaction and performance: Building academic resilience through coping strategies. Psychology in the Schools, 56(6), 875-890. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22253(2019).
Naidu, P., & Derani, N. E. S. A comparative study on quality of education received by students of private universities versus public universities. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 659-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00081-2 (2016).
Shehadeh, J., Hamdan-Mansour, A. M., Halasa, S. N., Hani, M. H. B., Nabolsi, M. M., Thultheen, I., & Nassar, O. S. Academic stress and self-efficacy as predictors of academic satisfaction among nursing students. The Open Nursing Journal, 14(1). DOI:10.2174/1874434602014010092 (2020).
Chau, S., & Cheung, C. Academic satisfaction with hospitality and tourism education in Macao: The influence of active learning, academic motivation, and student engagement. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 38(4), 473-487.https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2018.1500350 (2018).
Wach, F.-S., Karbach, J., Ruffing, S., Brünken, R., & Spinath, F. M. University students' satisfaction with their academic studies: Personality and motivation matter. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 55. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00055(2016).
Balkis, M. The moderator role of rational beliefs in relation to procrastination, academic achievement and academic satisfaction. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 48(1), 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000001354(2015).
Bhat, S. A., & Jan, K. Examining Academic Procrastination among College Students in Relation to Academic Satisfaction: A Correlational Study. RESEARCH REVIEW International Journal of Multidisciplinary, 8(7), 12-20. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2023.v08.n07.003(2023).
Polat, H., & Karabatak, S. Effect of flipped classroom model on academic achievement, academic satisfaction and general belongingness. Learning Environments Research, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-021-09355-0 (2021).
Steel, P. The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological bulletin, 133(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 (2007).
Steel, P., & Ferrari, J. Sex, education and procrastination: An epidemiological study of procrastinators’ characteristics from a global sample. European Journal of Personality, 27(1), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1851 (2013).
Tuckman, B. W. The development and concurrent validity of the procrastination scale. Educational and psychological measurement, 51(2), 473-480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164491512022(1991).
Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. Procrastination and the priority of short‐term mood regulation: Consequences for future self. Social and personality psychology compass, 7(2), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12011(2013).
Svartdal, F., Pfuhl, G., Nordby, K., & Foschi, G. The interplay of personality traits and perceived overqualification on academic procrastination among Italian college students. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 1996. https://doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2023.v08.n07.003 (2016).
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68(2000).
Cavusoglu, C., & Karatas, H. Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Self-determination theory and academic motivation. The Anthropologist, 20(3), 735-743.https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2015.11891780(2015).
Codina, N., Valenzuela, R., Pestana, J. V., & Gonzalez-Conde, J. Relations between student procrastination and teaching styles: Autonomy-supportive and controlling. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 809. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00809 (2018).
Oram, R., Dou, A., & Rogers, M. Pilot study of self-determination theory and motivational interviewing intervention targeting need satisfaction, motivation, and procrastination. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000331(2022).
Seo, E. H. A comparison of active and passive procrastination in relation to academic motivation. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 41(5), 777-786. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.5.777 (2013).
Shih, S. An examination of academic coping and procrastination from the self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Education and Human Development, 8(1), 57-68. https://doi.org/10.15640/jehd.v8n1a8 (2019).
Scheunemann, A., Schnettler, T., Bobe, J., Fries, S., & Grunschel, C. A longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal relationship between academic procrastination, study satisfaction, and dropout intentions in higher education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37(4), 1141-1164. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10212-021-00571-z(2022).
Orth, U., Clark, D. A., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. Testing prospective effects in longitudinal research: Comparing seven competing cross-lagged models. Journal of personality and social psychology, 120(4), 1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000358(2021).
Hensley, L. C. Reconsidering active procrastination: Relations to motivation and achievement in college anatomy. Learning and individual differences, 36, 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.10.012(2014).
Grunschel, C., Patrzek, J., Klingsieck, K. B., & Fries, S. “I’ll stop procrastinating now!” Fostering specific processes of self-regulated learning to reduce academic procrastination. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 46(2), 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2016.1198166(2018).
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Taylor & Francis. (1994).
Azevedo, R. Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. In Computers as Metacognitive Tools for Enhancing Learning (pp. 199-209). Routledge. (2018).
Utami, M., Arbiansyah, T., & Hidayati, Y. Influence of stress and self regulated learning on academic procrastination. European Journal of Education Studies, 7(7). http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v7i7.3246 (2020).
Yamada et al. How does self-regulated learning relate to active procrastination and other learning behaviors? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 28, 326-343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9118-9(2016).
Balkis, M., & Duru, E. Procrastination, self-regulation failure, academic life satisfaction, and affective well-being: underregulation or misregulation form. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31, 439-459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0266-5(2016).
Howell, A. J., & Watson, D. C. Procrastination: Associations with achievement goal orientation and learning strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(1), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.017 (2007).
Klassen, R. M., Krawchuk, L. L., & Rajani, S. (2008). Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemporary educational psychology, 33(4), 915-931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.07.001(2008).
Wolters, C. A. Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective. Journal of educational psychology, 95(1), 179. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.179 (2003).
Zimmerman, B. J. A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of educational psychology, 81(3), 329. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329 (1989).
Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. Self‐regulation empowerment program: A school‐based program to enhance self‐regulated and self‐motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41(5), 537-550. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10177 (2004)
Magen-Nagar, N., & Cohen, L. Learning strategies as a mediator for motivation and a sense of achievement among students who study in MOOCs. Education and information technologies, 22, 1271-1290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9492-y(2017).
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33(2009).
Schunk, D. H. Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational psychologist, 40(2), 85-94.https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_3(2005).
Zimmerman, B. J. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational psychologist, 25(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2 (1990).
Alqurashi, E. Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments. Distance education, 40(1), 133-148.https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553562(2019).
Wu, Y., Xu, X., Xue, J., & Hu, P. A cross-group comparison study of the effect of interaction on satisfaction in online learning: The parallel mediating role of academic emotions and self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 199, 104776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104776(2023).
Memon et al. Does the impact of technology sustain students’ satisfaction, academic and functional performance: an analysis via interactive and self-regulated learning? Sustainability, 14(12), 7226. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127226(2022).
Yavuzalp, N., & Bahcivan, E. A structural equation modeling analysis of relationships among university students’ readiness for e-learning, self-regulation skills, satisfaction, and academic achievement. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-021-00162-y(2021).
Abuhassna et al. Development of a new model on utilising online learning platforms to improve students’ academic achievements and satisfaction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 1-23. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-020-00216-z (2020).
Doménech-Betoret, F., Abellán-Roselló, L., & Gómez-Artiga, A. Self-efficacy, satisfaction, and academic achievement: The mediator role of students' expectancy-value beliefs. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 1193. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01193 (2017).
Kirmizi, Ö. The influence of learner readiness on student satisfaction and academic achievement in an online program at higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(1), 133-142. (2015).
Korobova, N. A comparative study of student engagement, satisfaction, and academic success among international and American students. Iowa State University. (2012).
Luo, Y., Lin, J., & Yang, Y. Students’ motivation and continued intention with online self-regulated learning: A self-determination theory perspective. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 24(6), 1379-1399.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-021-01042-3(2021).
Boekaerts, M. Self-regulated learning at the junction of cognition and motivation. European psychologist, 1(2), 100-112. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.1.2.100(1996).
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801(2008).
García-Ros et al. Effects of self-regulated learning and procrastination on academic stress, subjective well-being, and academic achievement in secondary education. Current Psychology, 1-15. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-022-03759-8 (2022).
Gendron, A. L. Active procrastination, self-regulated learning and academic achievement in university undergraduates (Doctoral dissertation).http://hdl.handle.net/1828/3524 (2011).
Roh, S.-Z. (2014a). Structural Relationships of Adult e-Learners' Learning Motivation, Self-Regulated Learning, Learning Satisfaction, and Academic Procrastination: Focused on the Mediating Effect of Learning Flow. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information, 17(12 (A)), 6217.
Roh, S. Z. (2014b). A Study on the Relationships of Adult e-Learning Learners’ Learning Motivation, Self-Regulated Learning, Learning Satisfaction, and Procrastination. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Education(pp. 17-19).
Lay, C. H. At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of research in personality, 20(4), 474-495. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(86)90127-3(1986).
Bao, C. A study of the relationship between procrastination behavior and self-esteem and self-efficacy among college students [Master, Southwest University (Chongqing)] (2007)..
Zhang, C. (2007). A Study of College Students' Self-Regulated Learning Ability and Its Associated Psychological Factors [Master, Central China Normal University (CCNU)].
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. Self-regulatory processes during computer skill acquisition: Goal and self-evaluative influences. Journal of educational psychology, 91(2), 251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.251 (1999).
Wang, R. (2009). A Study of the Mediating Effect of Emotional Intelligence in the Relationship between Personality and Academic Satisfaction in the Big Five [Master, Tianjin Normal University].
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 6). pearson Boston, MA. (2013).
Bollen, K. A. Structural equations with latent variables (Vol. 210). John Wiley & Sons. (1989).
Browne, M. W. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testing structural equation models. (1993).
Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 (1999).
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. psychology press. (2004).
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford publications. (2017).
Lock, J., Eaton, S. E., & Kessy, E. Fostering self-regulation in online learning in K-12 education. Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, 12(2), 2.DOI:10.15760/nwjte.2017.12.2.2 (2017).

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Procrastination Behaviour and Academic Satisfaction among University Students: The Mediating Role of Self-regulated Learning

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Review of Literature

Procrastination and Academic Satisfaction

Procrastination and self-regulated learning

Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Satisfaction

Methodology

Participants

Instruments

Procrastination questionnaire

Self-regulated learning questionnaire

Academic satisfaction scale

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1