Procrastination and multidimensional perfectionism: A meta-analysis of main, mediating, and moderating effects
Open accessAbstract
As results of researchers' examination of the relationship between perfectionism and procrastination have often been inconsistent, we conducted a meta-analysis of the relationship between procrastination and multidimensional perfectionism. Results indicated that perfectionistic strivings were negatively linked to procrastination, whereas perfectionistic concerns were positively linked to procrastination. Gender, and the measures of perfectionism and procrastination were found to moderate the relationship between procrastination and multidimensional perfectionism. We found that self-efficacy played a mediating role in the relationship between self-oriented perfectionism and procrastination. Our findings fill a gap in the literature and provide confirmatory evidence that the temporal motivational theory can be applied to gain further understanding of the perfectionism–procrastination relationship.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates.
Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984) · Journal of Counseling Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0167.31.4.503 · Cited by 1,788 · see citing works
Understanding procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective.
Wolters, C. A. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.179 · Cited by 679 · see citing works
Procrastination in college students: the role of self-efficacy and anxiety.
Haycock, L. A., McCarthy, P., & Skay, C. L. (1998) · Journal of Counseling & Development · doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1998.tb02548.x · Cited by 361 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Steinert, C., Heim, N., & Leichsenring, F. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.736776 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Turtle, Task Ninja, or Time Waster? Who Cares? Traditional Task-Completion Strategies Are Overrated
Vangsness, L., & Young, M. E. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797619901267 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Xie, Y., Yang, J., & Chen, F.
- Venue
- Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal
- Publisher
- Scientific Journal Publishers Ltd
- Published
- 2018-03-25
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 395-408
- ISSN
- 0301-2212 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2790773503
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 0.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
- Keywords
- procrastination, multidimensional perfectionism, perfectionistic strivings, perfectionistic concerns, self-oriented perfectionism, self-efficacy, gender differences, moderating effect
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
