Cited by 143Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesStudent Stress and CopingStress and Burnout Research

Less Adaptive or More Maladaptive? A Meta–analytic Investigation of Procrastination and Coping

Sirois, Fuschia M., Kitner, Ryan·2015·European Journal of Personality

Abstract

Despite the theoretical and empirical accounts of trait procrastination as reflecting avoidance of aversive tasks as a means of mood repair, research documenting its links to coping is scarce and inconsistent. There is also little if any research to date examining whether coping strategies might explain the procrastination–stress relationship. The current research aimed to address these issues by integrating current research on procrastination and coping with our own data into a first meta–analysis of the associations of procrastination with adaptive and maladaptive coping and then testing the potential role of coping for understanding the procrastination–stress relationship. In Study 1, a literature search yielded five published papers and three theses, which were supplemented by seven unpublished data sets comprising 15 samples ( N = 4357). Meta–analyses revealed that procrastination was positively associated with maladaptive coping (average r = .31) and negatively associated with adaptive coping (average r = −.24). In Study 2, a meta–analysis of the indirect effects through coping across four samples revealed that the average indirect effects for maladaptive but not adaptive coping explained the link between procrastination and stress. These findings expand the nomological network of procrastination and highlight the role of maladaptive coping for understanding procrastinators‘ stress. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/per.1985

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sirois, F. M., & Kitner, R.
Affiliations
Bishop's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Sirois, Fuschia M.
Venue
European Journal of Personality
Published
2015-07
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
433-444
ISSN
  • 0890-2070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0984
OpenAlex
W2148859270
Cited by
143
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 3
FWCI
13.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Personality (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (410-2005-0094, 950-224085)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
trait procrastination, coping strategies, adaptive coping, maladaptive coping, stress, indirect effects, mood repair

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review