See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323243091

Put Aside Procrastination: Positive Emotional Outcomes from Self-Forgiveness

for Delays

Article in North American Journal of Psychology · March 2018

CITATIONS READS

6 2,996

3 authors:

Bilge Uzun Özer Joseph R Ferrari

Bahçeşehir University DePaul University
28 PUBLICATIONS 611 CITATIONS 400 PUBLICATIONS 14,115 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sara LeBlanc

14 PUBLICATIONS 63 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Joseph R Ferrari on 12 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Put Aside Procrastination: Positive Emotional
Outcomes from Self-Forgiveness for Delays
Bilge Uzun
Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, Turkey

Joseph R. Ferrari
DePaul University

Sara LeBlanc
University of New Caledonia, Vancouver, Canada

The influences of self-forgiveness on the relationship between

procrastination and positive affect were assessed. A total of 317 Turkish
students (198 female; 119 male) completed procrastination, self-
forgiveness, and positive-negative affect scales. We tested our
hypothesized model with structural equation modeling, and results
revealed the empirical model was a good fit to the data. Procrastination
and self-forgiveness predicted positive affect, as 16% of the variance in
positive affect was accounted for by the model. The bootstrap values
determined that the mediated paths from self-regulation through self-
esteem to procrastination (β = .29, p < .01) were significant. These
findings indicated that self-forgiveness partially mediated the relationship
between procrastination and positive affect among university students.

Many college students admit to not finishing their educational

assignments within expected time frames (Beswick, Rothblum, & Mann,
1988; Pychyl, Morin, & Salmon, 2001), which results in below average
scores and grade expectations (Ferrari, 2004). Empirical evidence
suggests engaging in academic procrastination may be an underlying
factor resulting in underachievement (Howell & Buro, 2009; Lubbers,
Van der Werf, Kuyper, & Hendriks, 2010). Consequently, some students
may drop out due to sub optimal, academic performance results (Kim &
Seo, 2015). The failure to achieve one’s goal, as is often the case with
procrastination, may be conceptualized as a transgression against the self.
Academic procrastination then may be viewed as a form of self-sabotage,
as procrastinators irrationally avoid intended and often necessary action
(Ferrari, 2010; Uzun Ozer, Demir& Ferrari, 2013; Wohl, Pychyl &

________________________________
Author info: Correspondence should be sent to: Bilge Uzun, Bahcesehir
University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Division of Counseling Psychology,
Istanbul, Turkey. blguzun@gmail.com
North American Journal of Psychology, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 1, 171-186.
 NAJP
172 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

Bennett, 2010) yielding negative feelings such as guilt, stress, or anxiety

(Blunt & Pychyl, 2005; Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
Learning to deal with procrastination may require a motivational
change from avoidance to approach strategies (Ferrari, 2010). When one
considers procrastination as a self-transgression, forgiveness of the self
may be viewed as the first step towards eliciting adaptive motivational
change. Thus, self-forgiveness may reduce negative affect while
increasing positive feelings. Wohl and colleagues (2010) determined a
reduction in negative affect occurred via self-forgiveness; however,
positive affect was not analyzed. Instead, the authors hypothesized that
because self-forgiveness leads to a positive attitudinal shift towards the
self, positive affect may be increased; however, this was merely
speculative, not supported with empirical data. Therefore, in the present
study forgiveness was conceptualized as a mediator between
procrastination and positive affect. By forgiving oneself, a person may
overcome negative feelings, as forgiveness involves the reduction of
negative feelings and the re-establishment of positive affect toward
oneself. We posited that forgiveness may help students regain positive
self-perceptions (which may indirectly help improve their academic
performances).

Procrastination, Self-Forgiveness, Positive Emotions

Procrastination, a tendency to postpone what is necessary to reach
one’s goal (Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995), is commonly
experienced among university students. People commonly engage in
procrastination to make their lives more pleasant; however, such strategic
delays rarely yield positive outcomes and nearly always add stress, dis-
organization, and failure (Clayton, 2000; Essau & Uzun, 2017). Some
researchers conceptualize procrastination as a means to regulate negative
emotions in the short term (Tice & Baumeister, 1997). In support, people
who procrastinate don’t report unhappy feelings since they tend to avoid
undesirable tasks and engage in relatively enjoyable and pleasant
activities (König & Kleinmann, 2004; Pychyl et al., 2000). However, in
the long-term, procrastination is associated with long-term stress and
illness (Tice & Baumeister, 1997). Ferrari and Tice (2000) described
procrastination as a form of self-handicapping behavior employed in
order to protect the threatened self-esteem (Ferrari, 2010). Wohl and
colleagues (2010) extended this work, noting that procrastination was a
form of self-harming behavior, due to the person’s irrationality at
avoiding intended and often necessary tasks. Procrastination appears to
be significantly related to lower levels of life satisfaction (Uzun Ozer &
Sackes, 2011), by eliciting negative feelings (Chu & Choi, 2005) such as
shame and guilt about oneself (Fee & Tangney, 2000). This is evidenced
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 173

in student behavior, particularly within the university population, as

students frequently seek help from counselors and may show strong
concern with regard to how badly this habit makes them feel
(Schowuenburg, Lay, Pychyl, & Ferrari, 2004). Thus, replacing
avoidance motivation with approach motivation by forgiving oneself
seems a viable first step in changing procrastination behavior.
Wohl and colleagues (2010) found that self-forgiveness for
procrastination decreased negative affect. For this to be achieved,
consciously one may need to overcome feelings of self-resentment while
dealing with negative feelings, reaching a level of internal acceptance,
and achieving feelings of positive affect (Hall & Fincham, 2005). In this
context, self-forgiveness may be conceptualized as a mediator for
changes in motivation, which may, in turn prompt persons to avoid
stimuli connected with transgression and self-punishment, and increase
the desire to act benevolently towards themselves. Thus, self-forgiveness
should effectively involve replacing an avoidance motivation with an
approach motivation.
Self-forgiveness is defined as a “set of motivational changes whereby
one becomes decreasingly motivated to avoid stimuli associated with the
offence, decreasingly motivated to retaliate against the self (for example:
punish the self, engage in self-destructive behaviors), and increasingly
motivated to act benevolently toward the self” (Hall & Fincham, 2005, p.
116). It is believed to be an individual’s general propensity to forgive the
self for failures (Hall & Fincham, 2005), and necessary to change
negative thoughts about the self. Self-forgiveness allows one to focus on
maladaptive behaviors in a non-judgmental way rather than
transgressing. Hall and Fincham posited three steps toward self-
forgiveness: (1) one must acknowledge that a transgression occurred and
accept responsibility; (2) one needs feelings of regret and guilt; and (3)
one overcomes negative feelings, making a motivational change towards
self-acceptance, leaving behind self-blame and punishment.
Self-forgiveness may play an important role in diminishing guilt and
enhancing self-acceptance (Ingersoll-Dayton & Krause, 2005). Wohl and
colleagues (2010) argued that self-forgiveness for procrastination
behavior may facilitate mood repair, enabling one to overcome the
impact of associated negative affect, thereby fostering positive behavioral
change.
Thus, self-forgiveness for procrastination may be an essential step,
effectively motivating behavioral change. Applied researchers agree that
self-forgiveness is a positive coping strategy that primarily helps the
person through the reorientation of emotion, thoughts and/or actions
(Wade & Worthington, 2005), while being aware of the meaning of faults
and taking responsibility for past mistakes. Apart from reconciliation
174 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

(Freedman, 1998), developing self-forgiveness occurs with self-

reflection, lessons learned from mistakes (Ingerson-Dayton & Krause,
2005), and self-acceptance (Bauer et al., 1992). In relation to
procrastination, Wohl and colleagues (2010) determined that self-
forgiveness reduced guilty feelings associated with task failure. With this
reduction of negative affect, people reduced procrastinating for the next
task. In fact, a recent meta-analysis by Sirois (2014) determined that
procrastination was linked with reduced levels of self-compassion,
suggesting both self-kindness and self-acceptance may be challenging for
chronic procrastinators, impacting positive affect. Although self-
forgiveness may be a crucial first step, it is imperative to note that it is
not enough to change future behavior, and must be reinforced with the
development of adaptive self-regulatory strategies that reduce or
ultimately eliminate the procrastination behavior. At the early stages,
feedback is adaptive, as it provides intrinsic motivation to self-forgive.
Internally, it can come from self-reflection that generates an action plan
for implementing lessons learned. In addition, external feedback from
counselors, parents and peers may play a paramount role, particularly in a
collectivist culture, such as Turkey, which may provide the external
reinforcement needed to self-forgive by providing a positive social
support network that can influence behavioral change.
Procrastination may provide short-term positive affect, but in the
long-term it is predominantly associated with negative affective
outcomes (see Ferrari, 2010). Correlational research has determined that
low scores of self-forgiveness were strongly linked with anger, anxiety,
and guilt (Konstam, Chernoff & Deveney, 2001). Furthermore,
researchers (e.g., McCullough, Pergament &Therosen, 2000) have found
that forgiveness against a transgression (e.g., procrastination) and
positive attributions towards the experience are correlated. Self-
forgiveness, then, maybe seen as a coping strategy used to deal with the
negative affect associated with procrastination, thereby enhancing
performance for future tasks. However, there has been limited research
into the role of self-forgiveness as a mediator; we decided further
investigation on this relationship was warranted.
From an assessment standpoint, advanced statistical techniques (such
as structure equation modeling) examine all components of a proposed
model simultaneously, investigating both direct and indirect effects
among variables within the model (Schumacker & Lomax, 2010). We
used this approach because it is advantageous over the Wohl and
colleagues (2010) study. It creates a more detailed picture, allowing in-
depth inferences to be drawn from the data set on mediator and
moderator effects (Frazer, Tix, & Barron, 2004).
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 175

An advanced statistical model delineating the underlying mechanisms

through which a procrastinator needs to forgive oneself to increase
positive affect is lacking. The current study is novel as it extends the
research by Wohl and colleagues (2010) looking at positive affect, using
structural equation modeling, and a non-English speaking population of
students. Currently, the majority of procrastination research has been
conducted in Western cultural settings. It is imperative to investigate
procrastination behavior in varying cultural contexts, as research shows
that the motivation, underlying dynamics and affect behavior may
manifest differently in individualistic and collectivistic cultures (Lay,
1995). Thus, cultural beliefs and values may lead to varying
procrastination beliefs relating to conceptualization of the self,
responsibility to others and models of ability (Klassen et al., 2010).
Structure equation modeling was used to understand the mediation
role of self-forgiveness on the relationship between procrastination and
positive affect. Procrastination was expected to be related to self-
forgiveness and positive affect. Also, self-forgiveness, as a mediator, was
expected to be positively associated with positive affect. A hypothesized
model investigated the structural relationships among variables.

METHOD
Participants
Data were obtained from Turkish students enrolled in university
psychology classes at a major state-funded urban institution. A total of
317 students (198 women, 119 men: M age = 21.95 years old; SD = 1.63)
participated in this study. Participants were at different grade levels,
namely: 34 first year students (27 female, 13 male), 90 sophomores (67
female, 23 male), 92 juniors (55 female, 37 male), and 97 seniors (50
female, 47 male).

Psychometric Instruments
All participants completed a questionnaire package which included a
demographic form, the Tuckman Procrastination Scale, the Heartland
Forgiveness Scale and the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Scale.
The Tuckman Procrastination Scale (TPS; Tuckman, 1991) was used
to assess students’ procrastination tendencies. TPS is a unidimensional
scale consisting of 16 items on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = that’s me for
sure, 4 = that’s not me for sure). Sample items include “I needlessly
delay finishing jobs, even when they are important” and “I manage to
find an excuse for not doing something.” Scores range from 16 to 64 with
higher scores reflecting a higher level of procrastination. Numerous
studies have demonstrated its reliability (α = 0.89; Tuckman, 2007) and
validity (r = -0.47 with general self-efficacy; and r = -0.54 with a
176 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

behavioral measure of homework completion: Tuckman, 1991). In a

Turkish adaptation of the scale, Uzun Özer, Sackes and Tuckman (2013)
reported an internal consistency score of .90 on the TPS; and scores were
correlated with self-efficacy (r = .22) and self-esteem (r = .23). With the
present sample, coefficient alpha was .86.
The Heartland Forgiveness Scale (HFS, Thompson et al., 2005) is
used as an 18-item self-report measure of dispositional forgiveness,
consisting of three subscales: forgiveness of self, forgiveness of others,
and forgiveness of the situation. In the current study only the forgiveness
of self subscale (6 items) was used. Participants were asked how they
typically respond to a transgression along a 7-point rating scale, (1 =
almost always false for me; 7 = almost always true for me). A sample
item is “Although I feel bad at first when I mess up, over time I can give
myself some slack.” Higher scores indicated a higher level of forgiveness
of self. Thomson et al. (2005) reported internal consistency to be .75 and
test-retest reliability to be .72 of the forgiveness of self-subscale.
Evidence for the convergent validity of this scale was obtained from the
relationship with the Enright Forgiveness Inventory (Subkoviak et al.,
1995). In a Turkish adaptation study, Bugay, Demir, and Delevi (2012)
found evidence regarding the scale’s reliability and validity (α = .81; r =
.21 with satisfaction with life and r = -.35 with ruminative response). The
internal consistency of this scale for the present sample was .76.
Positive Affect and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS; Watson, Clark &
Tellegen, 1988) is a 5-point (1 = never; 5 = always) self-report Likert
scale, including 10 positive and 10 negative emotive items. They
reported a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .88. For the present study,
only the10-item, positive affect subscale was utilized. In a Turkish
adaptation study of PANAS, Gençöz (2000) reported an internal
consistency of the positive affect subscale of .83. With the present
sample, coefficient alpha was .84.

Procedure
A survey package containing a demographic questionnaire, a brief
explanation of the study, and the psychometric scales (in counterbalanced
order) were administered to participants prior to the completion of their
final exams in their psychology classes. After obtaining permission from
the Ethical Committee and the instructor of each class, volunteer students
were asked to respond to the scales. The data were collected in the
classroom settings from approximately 40 students per class. It took
participants approximately 20 minutes to complete the questionnaire
package.
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 177

RESULTS
Latent Variables
To test the models, observed indicators of the latent variables were
used. The correlations, means and the standard deviations of the observed
indicators are presented in Tables 1 and 2. The observed indicators of the

TABLE 1 Means, & SDs of Observed Variables

Variable Mean Standard Deviation
A. Procrastination 46.1 10.0
Parcel 1 3.2 .9
Parcel 2 3.3 .7
Parcel 3 3.4 .9
B. Self-forgiveness 26.7 5.1
Parcel 1 4.7 1.2
Parcel 2 4.6 1.1
Parcel 3 3.9 1.0
C. Positive Affect 32.9 7.3
Parcel 1 3.3 .8
Parcel 2 3.2 .8
Parcel 3 3.3 .9

TABLE 2 Intercorrelations of Observed Variables

Variable A A1 A2 A3 B B1
A. Procrastination -
Parcel 1 .88** -
Parcel 2 .86** .60** -
Parcel 3 .87** .62** .71** -
B. Self-forgiveness .10 .08 .04 .13** -
Parcel 1 .09 .06 .07 .11 .82** -
Parcel 2 .15** .12* .07 .22** .74** .44**
Parcel 3 .03 .01 .05 .05 .69** .38**
C. Positive Affect .29** .25** .26** .25** .20** .17**
Parcel 1 .20** .18** .19** .15** .13* .11*
Parcel 2 .24** .19** .20** .24** .15** .14*
Parcel 3 .29** .25** .26** .23** .22** .16**

TABLE 2 (Continued)
Variable B2 B3 C C1 C2
Parcel 3 .23** -
C. Positive Affect .18** .09 -
Parcel 1 .12* .04 .83** -
Parcel 2 .14* .04 .84** .59** -
Parcel 3 .19** .15** .89** .61** .59**

latent variables were obtained from the Tuckman Procrastination Scale,

Heartland Forgiveness Scale, and Positive and Negative Affect Scale.
178 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

The observed indicators for the latent variables of procrastination,

forgiveness, and positive affect were parceled as recommended by
Russell, Kahn, Spoth, and Altmaier (1998). Three parcels derived from
exploratory factor analyses (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman,
2002) were created for each of the latent variables separately.

Measurement Model
The measurement model examined the fit of the 9 observed variables
to the three latent constructs; namely, procrastination, self-forgiveness,
and positive affect. Results revealed the model was a good fit to the data,
scaled (24, N = 317) = 40.1, p< .001. /df = 40.1/24 = 1.66; CFI =
.96, SRMR = .042, RMSEA = .046 (90 % confidence interval [CI] =
0.018 to 0.070). All of the observed variables significantly loaded on
their respective latent variables. Therefore, the latent variables appear to
have been adequately measured by their respective indicators.

FIGURE 1 Mediated Model. Numbers in Boxes Indicate the

Relationship between the Measured Variables & the Latent
Variables. Numbers Next to Arrows Indicate Relationships Between
Latent Variables
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 179

Structural Model
The structural model used to test the hypothesis (Figure1) showed a
good fit to the data, scaled (25, N = 317) = 40.22, p < .00, /df =
40.22/25 = 1.61, CFI = .98, IFI = 98, SRMR = .042, RMSEA = .44, (90
% confidence interval [CI] = 0.015 to 0.068).Accordingly, self-
forgiveness mediated the relationship between procrastination and
positive affect. Procrastination and self-forgiveness predicted positive
affect, where 16 % of the variance in positive affect was accounted for
by the model.
Significant levels of indirect effects for the meditational model were
tested by following the bootstraps procedure recommended by Shrout
and Bolger (2002). Analysis showed that indirect effects were normally
distributed. The indirect effects specified in the hypotheses were
estimated via bootstrapping (set at 2000), and bias corrected bootstrap
(BC); thus, 95% confidence intervals were requested. The bootstrap
values provided mediated paths from self-regulation through self-esteem
to procrastination (β = .29, p < .01) at a significant level. Results revealed
that self-forgiveness partially mediated the relationship between
procrastination and positive affect.

DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to provide a better understanding of the
link between procrastination and positive affect by examining the role of
self-forgiveness as a mediator of this relationship. Findings provided
statistical support to the view proposed by Wohl and colleagues (2010)
that self-forgiveness is associated with a reduction of avoidance,
suggesting that self-forgiveness in relation to procrastination, was
associated with less procrastination and more positive emotions. In a
related vein, the findings of the current study demonstrated that self-
forgiveness partially mediates the relationship between procrastination
and positive affect. Enright and the Human Development Study Group
(1996) defined forgiveness as the absence of negative affect towards the
offender and the presence of positive effect towards the same offender.
According to this definition, the process of recovery from an
intrapersonal transgression involves a change in the emotions from
negative to positive (McCullough, Pergament, & Therosen, 2000). In this
respect, self-forgiveness involves facing the fact that one is wrong, while
leaving negative thoughts and feelings directed at the self and replacing
them with positive thoughts, concerns and love (Wohl, Deshea, &
Wahkinney, 2008) which may be essential to psychological wellbeing
(Woodyatt & Wetzel, 2013).
In the context of this study, procrastination was considered to be a
transgression, harmful to the self. Self-forgiveness may be an attempt to
180 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

change negative thoughts about the self to more positive cognitions. In

other words, forgiving oneself provides a positive attitudinal shift
towards the self when an individual feels guilt or shame after
procrastinating (Wohl & Thomson, 2011). In this manner, individuals
may decrease negative affect whilst concurrently increasing positive
affect. This is a process that allows one to begin the forgiveness process,
leading to a reduction in bitterness, shame or anger and the production of
positive regard (Wade & Worthington, 2005).
The present data were derived from a group of Turkish students.
Hence, cultural issues may also account for these findings. Using
structure equation modeling Hofstede (1980) developed a cross-cultural
paradigm describing the impact a societies’ culture has on the belief
systems and values of its members, and how this in turn impacts their
behavior. Oyserman, Coon and Kemmelmeier (2002) describe the basic
tenet of individualism as an ‘individual’s independency from one
another’; whereas, the basic tenet of collectivism is that groups bind and
mutually obligate their members. According to the Hofstede (2010)
framework, Turkey is a collectivistic culture (with an individualism score
of 37) which means individuals define their self-image in terms of ‘we’
rather than ‘I’. As such, individuals from collectivistic cultures like
Turkey (Göregenli, 1997; Mocan-Aydın, 2000) may emphasize values
that serve collectivistic concerns (Karakitapoğlu & İmamoğlu, 2002).In
Turkey, according to the Hofsted (2010) model, power distance is
unequal (score of 66) which means it is a culture that is dependent and
hierarchical, which can be seen in both the institutional, organizational
and family setting. Also, perceptions of external control have been shown
to be strongly related to academic performance and failure (Hortaçsu &
Üner, 1993). This may be viewed through the lens of Triandis’ (1994)
model, which links culture norms to observed social behavior.
According to this model behavior is influenced by 3 factors, which
include the subjective experience of one’s culture in addition to past
experiences, and the current situation. Accordingly, negative feeling such
as shame and guilt emerging from procrastination may be a reflection of
the subjective experience of Turkish cultural values and norms that affect
the way people experience moral emotions. Hence, for individuals who
are under the effect of external control, it is more likely to feel negative
after performing unwanted actions, such as procrastination. In this case,
forgiveness may be a healing process since ‘collectivists are closely
linked and emphasize their connectedness with other members of their
group’ (Hook, Wothington, & Utsey, 2009).
Yet, cultures are not completely homogenous and can support both
autonomy and harmony simultaneously; thus, within-culture differences
should be examined more closely via direct measurement in future
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 181

research moving away from a discrete dichotomy of individualism vs

collectivism (Bond & Van de Vijver, 2011); thus, capturing the more
detailed nuances of the cultural microcosm under investigation in which
the study sample resides. When behavior such as procrastination is being
elucidated via cultural paradigms one must recognize it can be best
explained at a variety of different levels accounting for both micro- and
macro- level differences.
In an earlier study Wohl and colleagues (2010) used three items to
measure procrastination (“I put off studying until the last minute”, “I
delayed preparing for the exam by doing other, less important things
instead”, and “I began studying much later than I intended to”). In the
study, they focused on the relationship between procrastination and
negative affect with the mediating role of self-forgiveness. The current
study can be seen as an extension of their study. However, in the current
research, the authors used a procrastination scale since it was believed
that three items may be too limited in determining the underlying
mechanism of procrastination. Although this was a strength, further
research should expand on this further; rather than investigating time
spent studying as a measure of success, the emphasis should be placed on
effective use of time studying measuring when students employ proven
methods such as, chunking, spaced distribution and method of loci to
enhance the storage of material into long term memory, as procrastinators
often employ strategies such as cramming, due to time constraints.
In Wohl and colleagues’ (2010) study, the interaction analysis
showed that as self-forgiveness increased, negative affect decreased (β =
.58), it was hypothesized that this may be accompanied by a concurrent
increase in positive affect. In support, the current model, which tested the
relationship between procrastination and positive affect with the
mediation effect of self-forgiveness, was a good fit for the empirical data.
Thus, this study may be seen to provide substantial evidence for the role
of self-forgiveness in eliciting a mediating influence by inhibiting the
negative affect of procrastination. Whilst the present study has provided a
solid start towards understanding the procrastination-self forgiveness
association, future research investigating the model proposed here are
essential to confirm the theoretical importance of the model. These
findings suggest that self-forgiveness may foster a shift from avoidance
to approach due to enhanced mood repair. This research could be
expanded upon further by investigating motivation and determining
whether a concurrent change (from avoidance to approach) occurs as
self-forgiveness increases, as this was not addressed directly in the
current research or the Wohl and colleagues’ (2010) study. Recent
experimental research supports this notion, as participants in a self-
compassion intervention were shown to report greater motivation for
182 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

positive behavior change to avoid repeating a transgression and were also

shown to spend more time studying following initial task failure (Breines
& Chen, 2012).
Although the current study had auspicious, preliminary findings, its
limitations warrant examination. Firstly, a methodological limitation was
that a convenient sample was utilized within this study. This sample was
recruited from a student population enrolled in a city university.
Therefore, further studies with larger and more demographically diverse
populations would no doubt strengthen the findings of the present study.
Secondly, research should investigate other factors that may be mediating
the procrastination self-forgiveness relationship, such as trait personality
characteristics (for ex. neuroticism, perfectionism), students’ satisfaction
with their grades and their attitude towards the procrastination behavior
itself. If, for example, students are satisfied with the grades they receive
and feel that the time pressure was advantageous in achieving those
results, the procrastination behavior may be less amenable to change.
In conclusion, self-forgiveness is a relatively new topic of academic
inquiry; results of the current study demonstrate it may be valuable in
illuminating the influencing factors impacting procrastination, and may
be a constructive target for intervention by functioning on mood repair
and re-orienting motivation from avoidance to approach for future tasks.
From a broader perspective, the capability to accept responsibility, learn
from mistakes and ultimately forgive the self for transgressions may be a
valuable regulatory strategy that promotes adaptive behavioral change
while positively impacting emotion regulation, general mental health and
one’s overall self-concept.

REFERENCES
Bauer, L., Duffy, J., Fountain, E., Halling, S., Holzer, M., Jones, E., ... & Rowe,
J. O (1992). Exploring self-forgiveness. Journal of Religion and Health,
31(2), 149-160.
Beswick, G., Rothblum, E. D., & Mann, L. (1988). Psychological antecedents of
student procrastination. Australian Psychologist, 23(2), 207-217.
Blunt, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2005). Project systems of procrastinators: A personal
project-analytic and action control perspective. Personality and Individual
Differences, 38(8), 1771-1780.
Bond, M. H., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Matsumoto, D. (2011). Making scientific
sense of cultural differences in psychological outcomes: Unpackaging the
magnum mysterium. Cross-cultural Research Methods in Psychology, 42(8),
75-100.
Breines, J. G., & Chen, S. (2012). Self-compassion increases self-improvement
motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1133-1143.
Bugay, A., Demir, A., & Delevi, R. (2012). Assessment of reliability and validity
of the Turkish version of Hearthland Forgiveness Scale. Psychological
Reports: Measures & Statistics, 111(2), 575-584.
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 183

Clayton, E., T. (2000). Psychological self-help (chap. 4) Retrieved April 18,

2003, from http://www.mentalhelp.net/psyhelp/chap4/chap4r.htm
Chu, A. H. C., & Choi, J. N. (2005). Rethinking procrastination: Positive effects
of "Active" procrastination behavior on attitudes and performance. Journal of
Social Psychology, 145(3), 245-264.
Enright, R. D. (1996). Counseling within the forgiveness triad: On forgiving,
receiving forgiveness, and self‐forgiveness. Counseling and Values, 40(2),
107-126.
Essau, C. & Uzun, B. (2017). Procrastination, In Encyclopedia of Abnormal and
Clinical Psychology, (pp. 2662-2663). Thousands Oak: Sage Publication, Inc.
Doi: 10.4135/9781483365817.n1067
Fee, R. L., & Tangney, J. P. (2000). Procrastination: A means of avoiding shame
or guilt? Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 15(5), 167-184.
Ferrari, J.R. (2004). Trait procrastination in academic settings: An overview of
students who engage in task delays. In. H.C. Schowuenburg, C. Lay, T.A.
Pychyl, & J.R. Ferrari (Eds.) Counseling the procrastinator in academic
settings, pp. 19-28.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ferrari, J.R.(2010). Still procrastinating? The no regrets guide to getting it done.
NewYork: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Ferrari, J.R., Johnson, J.L., & McCown, W.G. (Eds.) (1995). Procrastination and
task avoidance: Theory, research, and treatment. New York: Plenum Press.
Ferrari, J. R., & Tice, D. M. (2000). Procrastination as a self-handicap for men
and women: A task-avoidance strategy in a laboratory setting. Journal of
Research in Personality, 34(1), 73-83.
Frazer, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator
effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
51(1), 115-134.
Freedman, S. (1998). Forgiveness and reconciliation: The importance of
understanding how they differ. Counselling and Values, 42(3), 200-216.
Gençöz, T. (2000). Positive and Negative Affect Scale: Reliability and validity
study. [Pozitif ve negatif duygu ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması].
Turkish Journal of Psychology, 15(46), 19-26.
Göregenli, M. (1997). The Individualistic-collectivist tendencies in a Turkish
sample. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 787-794.
Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2005). Self-forgiveness: The stepchild of
forgiveness research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(5), 621-
637.
Hook, J. N., Worthington, E. L., & Utsey, S. E. (2009). Collectivism,
forgiveness, and social harmony. The Counseling Psychologist, 37(6), 821-
847.
Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: do American
theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42-63.
Hofstede, G. H. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind.
London, UK, McGraw-Hill.
Hortaçsu, N. & Üner, H. (1993). Family background, sociometric peer
nominations, and perceived control as predictors of academic achievement.
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 154(4), 425-431.
184 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

Howell, A. J., & Buro, K. (2009). Implicit beliefs, achievement goals, and
procrastination: A mediational analysis. Learning and Individual Differences,
19(1), 151-154.
Ingersoll-Dayton, B. & Krause, N. (2005). Self-forgiveness: A component of
mental health in later life. Research on Aging, 27(3), 267-289.
Karakitapoğlu, A. Z. & İmamoğlu, E. O. (2002). Value domains of Turkish adults
and university students. Journal of Social Psychology, 142(3), 333-352.
Kim, K. R., & Seo, E. H. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and
academic performance: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual
Differences, 82, 26-33.
Klassen, R. M., Ang, R. P., Chong, W. H., Krawchuk, L. L., Huan, V. S., Wong,
I. Y., & Yeo, L. S. (2010). Academic procrastination in two settings:
Motivation correlates, behavioral patterns, and negative impact of
procrastination in Canada and Singapore. Applied Psychology, 59(3), 361-
379.
Konstam, V., Chernoff, M., & Deveney, S. (2001). Toward forgiveness: The role
of shame, guilt, anger, and empathy. Counseling and Values, 46(1), 26.
König, C. J., & Kleninmann, M. (2004). Business before pleasure: No strategy
for procrastinators? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1045-1057.
Lay, C. H. (1995). Trait procrastination, agitation, dejection, and self-
discrepancy. In Procrastination and Task Avoidance (pp. 97-112). USA:
Springer.
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To
parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits.
Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151-173. Doi: 10.1207/s15328007
sem0902_1
Lubbers, M. J., Van der Werf, M. P. C., Kuyper, H., & Hendriks, A. A. J. (2010).
Does homework behavior mediate the relation between personality and
academic performance? Learning and Individual Differences, 20(3), 203-208.
McCullough, M. E., Pergament, K. I., & Thoresen, C. T. (2000). Forgiveness:
Theory, research, and practice. New York: Guilford.
Mocan-Aydın, G. (2000). Western models of counselling and psychotherapy in
Turkey: Crossing cultural boundaries. The Counselling Psychologist, 28, 281-
298.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Academic procrastination and statistics anxiety.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(1), 3-19.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking
individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and
meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3-72.
Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., & Blunt, A. (2000). Five days of
emotion: An experience sampling study of undergraduate student
procrastination. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 15(5), 239-254.
Pychyl, T. A., Morin, R. W., & Salmon, B. R. (2001). Procrastination and the
planning fallacy: An examination of the study habits of university students.
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15(5), 135-150.
Russell, D. W., Kahn, J. H., Spoth, R., & Altmaier, E. M. (1998). Analyzing data
from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equation modeling
approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 18–29.
 Uzun, Ferrari, & LeBlanc PUT ASIDE PROCRASTINATION 185

Schowuenburg, H. C., Lay, C. H., Pychyl, T. A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2004).

Counseling the procrastinator in academic settings. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Schumacher, R. E., &. Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner's guide to Structural
Equation Modeling, 3rd ed. New York, USA: Routledge.
Shrout, P., E. & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and
nonexperimental studies: New procedure and recommendation. Psychological
Methods, 7(4), 422-445.
Sirois, F. M. (2014). Procrastination and stress: Exploring the role of self-
compassion. Self and Identity, 13(2), 128-145.
Subkoviak, M. J., Enright, R. D., Wu, C. R., Gassin, E. A., Freedman, S., & Fee,
R. L., & Tangney, J. P. (2000). Procrastination: A means of avoiding shame
or guilt? Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 15(5), 167-184.
Thompson, L. Y., Snyder, C. R., Hoffman, L., Michael, S. T., Rasmussen, H. N.,
Billings, L. S., ... & Roberts, D. E. (2005). Dispositional forgiveness of self,
others, and situations. Journal of Personality, 73(2), 313-360.
Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination,
performance, stress, and health: The cost and benefits of dawdling.
Psychological Science, 8(6), 454-458.
Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. McGraw-Hill New York.
Tuckman, B. W. (1991). The development and concurrent validity of the
procrastination scale. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 51(2), 473.
Tuckman, B. W. (2007). The effect of motivational scaffolding on
procrastinators' distance learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 49(2),
414-422.
Uzun Özer, B., Demir, A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2013). Reducing of academic
procrastination through a group treatment program: A pilot study. Journal of
Rational Emotive-Cognitive Behavioral, 31(3), 127-135. Doi: 10.1007/
s10942-013-0165-0
Uzun Özer, B., & Saçkes, M. (2011). Effects of academic procrastination on
college students’ life satisfaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,
12, 512-519.
Uzun Özer, B., Saçkes, M., & Tuckman, W. B. (2013). Psychometric Properties
of the Tuckman Procrastination Scale in a Turkish Sample. Psychological
Reports: Measures & Statistics. 113(3), 874-884, Doi: 10.2466/03.20.
PR0.113x28z7
Wade, N. G., & Worthington, E. L. (2005). In search of a common core: A
content analysis of interventions to promote forgiveness. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 42(2), 160-177.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of
brief measure of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scale. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
Wohl, M. J. A., DeShea, L., Wahkinney, R. L. (2008). Looking within:
Measuring state self-forgiveness and its relationship to psychological well-
being. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 40(1), 1-10.
Wohl, M. J. A., Pychyl, T. A., & Bennet, S. H. (2010). I forgive myself, now I
can study: How self-forgiveness for procrastinating can reduce future
procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 803-808.
 186 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

Wohl, M. J. A. & Thompson, A. (2011). A dark side to self-forgiveness:

Forgiving the self and its association with chronic unhealthy behaviour.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(2), 354-364.
Woodyatt, L. & Wetzel, M. (2013). Self-forgiveness and restoration of an
offender following an interpersonal transgression. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 32(2), 225-259.

View publication stats