《做好我们该做的事情——对学术拖延行为的扎根研究毕业论文外文翻译.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《做好我们该做的事情——对学术拖延行为的扎根研究毕业论文外文翻译.doc（14页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、Doing the Things We Do:A Grounded Theory of Academic ProcrastinationMost people view procrastination as a negative personalitytrait.Procrastinators are thought to be indifferent to the quality of their work and possibly of lower cognitive ability than their nonprocrastinating peers. Previous empiric
2、al studies have supported this view of procrastination, revealing that procrastination results in lost time, poorer health, decreased long-term learning, and lower self-esteem (Burns, Dittman, Nguyen, & Mitchelson, 2000; Ferrari,Johnson, & McCown, 1995; Milgram, Dangour, & Raviv,1992; Tice & Baumeis
3、ter, 1997; Wolters, 2003). A number ofstudies also have indicated that procrastination may be linked to anxiety and fear of failure (Ferrari & Tice, 2000). These findings suggest that procrastination is an impediment to academic success because it decreases the quality and quantity of learning while
4、 increasing the severity of stress and negative outcomes in studentslives (Ferrari et al., 1995; Milgram, Gehrman, & Keinan, 1992).However, previous studies have reported that many college students procrastinate despite these apparent consequences (Conti,2000; Saddler & Buley, 1999). More than 70% o
5、f college studentsreported that they procrastinate regularly, and roughly 20% do so habitually (Schouwenburg, 1995). Higher ability students procrastinated more than lower ability students, and procrastination tends to increase as students advance in their academic careers and became more self-regul
6、ated (Ferrari, 1991). These findings suggest that procrastination is common among college students. Theyalso suggest that procrastination among successful college students may have little impact on performance or perhaps may be adaptive because it allows individuals to achieve a sustained level of f
7、low and better use of their study time (Brinthaupt & Shin, 2001;Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Sommer, 1990; Tullier, 2000). Alternatively,if procrastination does not play an adaptive role in some situations, then many college students may be under achieving because of regular procrastination.We begin by o
8、verviewing the rationale for the study and summarizing our methodology. We then define the construct of academic procrastination as intentionally deferring or delaying work that must be completed, consider its dimensionality, and review existing research. We describe several studies that report adap
9、tive aspects of procrastination. Next, we discuss the three main goals ofthis research. The present studyThe purpose of the present research was to construct a grounded theory of procrastination on the basis of college students reports about their own procrastination. We did so for several reasons.O
10、ne is that there is relatively little research on procrastination,even though it is a commonly occurring phenomenon among college students. Second, most of the existing research has reportedcorrelations between self-reported procrastinatory behavior and academic outcomes, such as grades and study ti
11、me. We hoped to expand on this research by providing a more in-depth descrip-tive account of academic procrastination. Third, and most important to us, there is no existing theory or process model of procrastination.We conducted the present research to examine the process by which procrastination oc
12、curs and to propose a preliminary paradigm model (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) that can be tested in future research.We selected grounded theory methodology because it is ideally suited to construct a data-based theory that can be used as a basis for future research (Creswell, 1998; Strauss & Corbin, 199
13、8).Currently, the existing literature on academic procrastination ischaracterized by lack of an explicit, testable theory and the view that procrastination has a negative impact on academic success.Given the widespread nature of the phenomenon, we wondered how college students view their procrastina
14、tion, and whether their experiences are aligned to the prevailing views in the literature.We believed that a grounded theory analysis would help researchers identify additional aspects of procrastination that might explain its widespread continued occurrence.Grounded theory is an iterative, inductiv
15、e method of data collection based on individual and group interviews that attempts todescribe a core phenomenon in detail and to relate it to potentialcauses, consequences, and situational conditions that affect it(Creswell, 1998; Strauss & Corbin, 1994). Grounded theory uses participants experience
16、s as data to construct and validate the emergent theory. The end product of grounded theory is a paradigm model that systematically links antecedents, situational conditions,coping strategies, and consequences to the phenomenon of interest (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). These include conditions that elic
17、it the phenomenon, contextual factors that affect how the phenomenon is enacted, strategies for implementing the phenomenon,and consequences. Our main goal was to construct a paradigm model on the of college studentself-reports. Dedinition of procrastinationDefinitions of procrastination vary from a
18、uthor to author. Some are quite general in nature, such as Schouwenburg (1995), who defined procrastination as the behavior of postponing tasks. Others are more specific, such as Solomon and Rothblum (1984), who described procrastination as the act of needlessly delaying tasks past the point of disc
19、omfort. Lay (1994) defined procrastination in terms of an intention behavior discrepancy, in which a delay of behavior does not become procrastinatory unless the individual has some genuine intent to complete the task. The greater the discrepancy between intent and behavior, the more severe the proc
20、rastination.Most researchers have emphasized three core criteria for procrastination:It must be dilatory, needless, and counterproductive(Schouwenburg, 1995). One problem with these criteria is that the extent to which behavior is needless or counterproductive is very difficult to document objective
21、ly. we define procrastinationfor present purposes as intentionally deferring or delaying work that must be completed. Relating procrastination to behavioral and affective outcomesA number of researchers have examined relationships between procrastination and academic and nonacademic outcomes. Most s
22、tudies reported negative correlations between procrastination,grades, learning, and completion of course work. For example,Rothblum, Solomon, and Murakami (1986) found that procrastination related negatively to course grades and positively to anxiety.Tice and Baumeister (1997) reported that self-rep
23、orted procrastinators received lower final and term paper grades in one experiment, but they failed to replicate this finding in a second experiment. Tuckman (1991) found a negative correlation between procrastination and completion of course-related homework.Several studies have reported a correlat
24、ion between procrastination and anxiety and affective dimensions of ones educational experiences. For example, Tice and Baumeister (1997) found that procrastination initially reduced stress and negative health symptoms in college students but, later in the same semester, produced higher stress and m
25、ore negative symptoms. Solomon and Rothblum(1984) and Lay, Edwards, Parker, and Endler (1989) reported a positive correlation between procrastination and anxiety. Alexander and Onwuegbuzie (2006) found a negative relationship between self-report measures of hope and fear of failure. They suggested t
26、hat increased hope may serve as a coping mechanism for procrastination.A variety of studies also have examined the relationship betweenprocrastination and socialaffective variables. Ferrari et al.(1995) reported positive correlations between procrastination and self-handicapping, task avoidance, per
27、fectionism, irrational beliefs,and depression. Negative correlations were reported for selfesteem,internal locus of control, and personal standards. Schouwenburg(1995) found a negative correlation betweenprocrastination and conscientiousness but no relationship with fear of failure. Lay (1994) repor
28、ted a modest yet significant correlation between procrastination and dejection. Flett, Blankstein, and Martin(1995) concluded that procrastination increases anxiety anddepression. Milgram, Gehrman, and Keinan (1992) reported similar findings. Wolters (2003) found a positive relationship between proc
29、rastination and work-avoidance goals and a negative relationship with self-efficacy.The studies cited above and those reviewed by Ferrari et al.(1995) consistently have reported positive correlations between procrastination and undesirable behaviors or affective outcomes(e.g., failure to complete as
30、signments and low self-esteem). These data suggest either a negative relationship or no relationship at all between procrastination, grades, and overall course achievement.Thus far, it seems reasonable to conclude that there are maladaptiveaspects of procrastination that are related to undesirable a
31、cademicoutcomes in the r0.10 to 0.30 range.In contrast, several studies have examined adaptive aspects of procrastination. Lay et al. (1989) reported that procrastinators experienced a greater sense of challenge and peak experience immediately prior to exams. Sommer (1990) and Vacha and McBride (199
32、3) found that students who procrastinate were more likely to cram, and that crammers outperformed noncrammers by using a greater variety of study strategies to achieve maximum efficiency. Sommer argued that savvy students maximize the efficiency of their study time through a carefully orchestrated c
33、ycle of procrastination and cramming. Brinthaupt and Shin (2001)further explored the relationship of cramming to maximum efficiency and peak experience. They reported that crammers performed better on tests and reported higher levels of “flow” than noncrammers. They argued that cramming increases fl
34、ow because it increases the level of task challenge and demands a higher level of performance from the student. Collectively, these studies suggest that procrastination improves efficiency, challenge, and flow.The present study had three goals. Our first goal was to construct a paradigm model that s
35、ystematically relates five aspects of the procrastination experience. These aspects include conditions that are antecedents of procrastination, a detailed analysis of the phenomenon itself, situational conditions that affect the phenomenon,strategies used by individuals to take action, and consequen
36、ces of taking action. Our second goal was to explore in more detail adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination. Previous research has focused largely on maladaptive aspects of procrastination(Ferrari et al., 1995; Schouwenburg, 1995; Solomon &Rothblum, 1984; Tice & Baumeister, 1997). In con
37、trast, we believe that there may be adaptive aspects of procrastination, such as a greater ability to engage in sustained work and increased flow(Brinthaupt & Shin, 2001; Sommer, 1990; Tullier, 2000). We sought to identify these factors and clarify how and why they benefit learners. Our third goal w
38、as to identify emergent principles that guide students procrastination. These principles would be suitable objects of study in future research and may help promote theory development and testing. Discussion The purpose of this research was to explore the procrastination phenomenon in more detail. We
39、 did so by interviewing successful college students about their own procrastination behavior. The study was exploratory in nature and based on verbal reports that may be incomplete. We wish to emphasize that the rationale for this study was to construct a preliminary paradigm model that could be tes
40、ted in future research, rather than test an existing theory. We also explored in greater detail the potential adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination. We present our conclusions as claims to be tested and expanded on by future qualitative and quantitative research. Our findings are based
41、 on informantsperceptions and attributions regarding their behavior. One of the key characteristics of a qualitative study is that it focuses on participants perspectives and is not intended to generalize to a broader population (Creswell, 1998).We had three specific research goals. The first goal w
42、as to construct a paradigm model that enabled us to understand procrastination more systematically. We constructed a paradigm model of academic procrastination that included antecedent conditions, an analysis of the phenomenon itself, situational conditions that affect the phenomenon, strategies use
43、d by individuals to take action, and consequences of taking action. This model extended previous research in two ways. One was to examine in greater detail a variety of assumptions, coping strategies, and consequences than previous studies. A second was to view procrastination in a more systematic m
44、anner that focused on the broader issues of why and how college students procrastinate. We believe that the paradigm model shown in Figure 1 presents a systematic analysis of the process of procrastination that will aid future qualitative and quantitative research. We propose that the main findings
45、of the model (i.e., themes, macrothemes, and principles) are consistent with both the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination discussed in previous research.Our second goal was to examine adaptive and maladaptive aspects of procrastination in more detail. Previous research has focused pr
46、imarily on negative aspects, such as anxiety (Ferrari,1991), health problems (Tice & Baumeister, 1997), and lowered work quality (Tuckman, 1991). We identified informants perceptionsof two adaptive and three maladaptive aspects of procrastination.Participants indicated that adaptive aspects had a gr
47、eater impact on their procrastinatory behavior than maladaptive factors.Individuals procrastinated to manage their time more efficiently,reduce boredom, and work more efficiently (Sommer, 1990;Vacha & McBride, 1993). Most students felt that they could not accomplish these objectives without procrast
48、inating. In contrast,maladaptive factors were seen as relatively unimportant. None of our participants reported procrastinating entirely because of laziness or fear of failure, even though most of our participants reported some degree of boredom, laziness, anxiety, or fear of failure. Our findings a
49、re consistent with previous research, although the present study is the first that we know of to give students the opportunity to compare the adaptive and maladaptiveaspects of procrastination. When given that opportunity, our sample was clear that they procrastinated for adaptive reasons despite some of the maladaptive consequences.Our third goal was to identify emergent principles that mayguide students procrastination. We identified six overarching principles affecting academic procrastination, which were
