A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.pdf

Running Head: ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION, ACADEMIC SELF-EFFICACY AND GWA 1
A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and
Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students
Jennifer G. Joseph
Chinese General Hospital Colleges
March 14, 2016

ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION, ACADEMIC SELF-EFFICACY AND GWA 2
Table of Contents
Table of Contents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
Abstract -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
Acknowledgement -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
Dedication ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
I. Chapter 1
A. Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
B. Significance of the Study ------------------------------------------------------------------ 11
C. Scope and Limitation ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
II. Chapter 2
A. Review of Related Literature
a. Procrastination ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 13
b. Positive Type of Procrastination --------------------------------------------------- 14
c. Academic Procrastination ----------------------------------------------------------- 16
d. Academic Self-Efficacy ------------------------------------------------------------- 17
e. Academic Performance -------------------------------------------------------------- 19
B. Synthesis ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
C. Theoretical Framework -------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
D. Research Problem -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
E. Hypotheses ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
F. Conceptual Framework --------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
G. Operational Definition --------------------------------------------------------------------- 26

III. Chapter 3
A. Research Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
B. Subject Study and Size --------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
C. Research Instruments ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
D. Data Gathering------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29
E. Data Interpretation and Calculation ------------------------------------------------------ 29
IV. Chapter 4
A. Results
Table 1 Demographic Profile ------------------------------------------------------------ 30
Table 2 Participants’ Frequency of Academic Procrastination --------------------- 31
Table 3 Participants’ Level of Academic Self-Efficacy ----------------------------- 32
Table 4 Participants’ Academic Performance/General Weighted
Average for the First Semester Academic Year 2015-2016 ----------------- 33
Table 5 Relationship of Academic Procrastination and Academic Self-Efficacy-34
Table 6 Relationship of Academic Procrastination and Academic Performance -35
Table 7 Relationship of Academic Self-Efficacy and Academic Performance --- 36
V. Chapter 5
A. Conclusion ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37
B. Recommendation --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 39
VI. References ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42
VII. Appendices --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 51

Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to explore the relationship of academic procrastination
(AP) and academic self-efficacy (ASE); academic procrastination (AP) and academic
performance; and academic self-efficacy (ASE) and academic performance. Participants
included 265 college students from Chinese General Hospital Colleges (CGHC). Students
reported their frequency of academic performance and level of academic self-efficacy, while
their academic performance was measured using their general weighted average (GWA) for
the first semester academic year 2015-2016. Findings revealed that academic procrastination
has a significant relationship with academic self-efficacy, as well as the academic self-efficacy
and academic performance, but academic procrastination and academic performance were
found to have no significant relationship with each other. Consequently, academic self-
efficacy was concluded to have an important role in preventing academic procrastination and
performing better in school. Further research is needed to explore the other factors that
contribute to the academic procrastination and academic performance. Lastly, it was
recommended for the CGHC professors to help the students enhance their academic self-
efficacy.

Acknowledgement
This research paper is made possible through the help and support from everyone
including: parents, cousin, friends, classmates and Chinese General Hospital Colleges
(CGHC) community. Especially, please allow me to dedicate my acknowledgement of
gratitude toward the following significant advisors and contributors:
First and foremost, I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my research
adviser, Mr. Tristan Isagani “TJ” Peralta, for his genuine encouragement, patience, and
guidance and whose expertise and knowledge were generously shared.
To Ms. Rita Aringo, Ms. Analiza Tumbocon and other CGHC professors for the help
during my data gathering and also for providing valuable pieces of advice.
To the students of CGHC who actively and willingly participated in this study despite
their busy schedules.
To my classmates, Francesca and Raiza, for our random sharing of thoughts and ideas
about our research topics and for the fun moments every time we feel the pressure of
completing our individual research.
To my parents and bestfriends for their love, support and prayers, which inspired me to
do my best in this research and made me hopeful that this will be all worth it.
And lastly, my praises and thanks to God, Almighty, for His showers of blessings
throughout my research work to complete this research successfully.
The product of this research paper would not be possible without all of them.

Dedication
This research paper is dedicated to God Almighty, who has been my eternal rock and
source of sanctuary that kept me all through the journey of completing this work. I also
dedicate this paper to my parents and friends whose unconditional love and support
encouraged me to keep going until the end. And lastly, to the Chinese General Hospital
Colleges community, especially to my participants, research adviser, Mr. TJ, and defense
panelists, Ms. Rita and Ms. Liza, who helped and supported me in every possible way they
can to finish this research paper.

Chapter 1
A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and
Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students
Procrastination is extremely prevailing and is a more common phenomenon among
students than ever (Sirin, 2011). Every time we hear procrastination, the first thing that comes
to our mind is probably delaying a task. Several researchers have tried to explain
procrastination but as for Manikandan and Sebin (2013), procrastination is the tendency of
people to do low priority actions first and high priority tasks later, and thus procrastinators
tend to put off important tasks until the time near its deadline. In general, we can say that it is
a negative behavior wherein we irrationally postpone doing a task that often makes us feel
guilty. Another thing about procrastination is that it affects many people and influences overall
values of individuals and organizations especially our psychological well-being (Habelrih &
Hicks, 2015). For some, procrastinators are viewed as pessimistic and they find it hard to
believe in their own skill which is considered to be an element of self-doubt (Chu and Choi,
2005 as cited in Habelrih & Hicks, 2015).
Despite of these negative connotations, ideas, and concepts about procrastination, each
of us may have experience procrastinating at one point or even daily in our life. Maybe because
we are able to realize its benefit since we thought it lessens our anxiety from doing the task.
Also, while procrastinating we are able to do the things we love or like which obviously makes
us forget that we are stressed. And as for the researcher, procrastinating is good but not until
we realize that we only have few time to finish our tasks.

Although procrastinators are considered to have a maladaptive behavior, there are recent
studies that claim that an active form of delay exists. As cited by Lindt, Corkin and Yu (2014),
this type of procrastination may be associated with adaptive results including higher academic
performance, positive emotional outcomes and positive cognitive strategy use than the
traditional way of procrastinating (Schraw, et.al., 2007; Corkin, et. al., 2012; Choi & Moran,
2009; Chu and Choi, 2005). Chu and Choi named this type of procrastination as active
procrastination wherein they claimed that those who procrastinate in an active manner is just
the same as non-procrastinators in terms of self-efficacy belief and academic performance
unlike those passive procrastinators or those who procrastinate in a traditional way (as cited
in Karatas & Bademcioglu, 2015).
According to Wiegartz (2011) in her article for Psychology Today, some people feel that
procrastination often leads them to nothing but anxiety, disappointment and shame. She argued
that people really find it hard to change this behavior and start doing the task immediately and
avoid delaying. One reason may be that, like anything, procrastination also has its good effects.
She believed that some procrastinators purposely delay their tasks because they become more
productive under pressure and they feel challenged by approaching deadlines. They are also
able to feel that they are in control with their time thus making them feel less avoidant, less
stressed and high self-efficacy. To her, this kind of procrastinators are not hindered by worry
and indecision, and that is why they can still get things done on time. Moreover, Wiegartz was
able to identify examples of the benefits of procrastination, and it includes; being able to put
off unpleasant tasks in favor of more enjoyable things; having a thought that problems may
end up getting solved without any effort from you; avoiding the possibility of failure or
success; escaping the discomfort of doing something you fear and also the anxiety you feel

about the task; getting chances that someone may come to your rescue and do it for you; and
lastly knowing that the demands placed on you get lifted because you dragged your feet.
There are different types of procrastination such as decisional procrastination, neurotic
procrastination, life-routine procrastination, compulsive procrastination and lastly academic
procrastination (Ying and Ly, 2012). In this study, the researcher aims to explore
procrastination in the academic setting specifically at Chinese General Hospital Colleges
(CGHC), as some researchers (e.g. Day et al. 2000, Klassen, Krawchuk, and Rajani, 2008)
believed that it is a commonly occurring phenomenon among undergraduate students (as cited
in Zeenath & Orcullo, 2012). According to Rabin and collegues (2011), 30 to 60 % of the
time, college students engage in academic procrastination (as cited in Glick & Orsillo, 2015).
Academic procrastination includes knowing that we need to do an academic activity
such as writing a term paper, studying for examinations, finishing a school-related project, or
undertaking the weekly reading assignments, but, for some reason, failing to impel ourselves
to do so within the supposed time frame (Ackerman & Gross, 2005 as cited in Jiao et al.,
2011). Because of this, students’ academic performance might be affected. For several
researchers (e.g., Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Ferrari, 1994; Ferrari & Tice, 2000; Solomon &
Rothblum, 1984; Steel, 2007), academic performance tends to be low for those who
procrastinate (as cited in Cao, 2012). But as for active procrastinators, they tend to get higher
academic performance since they prefer to work under pressure because they think they do
better and faster during this instance. Herewith, the relationship of academic procrastination
and academic performance was determined in this study. The academic performance was
measured using the general weighted average (GWA) from first semester of academic year
2015-2016.

Another thing, it is also important to know some factors that affects academic
procrastination. One of the most studied variable in relation to procrastination is self-efficacy.
With this, the correlation between academic self-efficacy and academic procrastination was
also measured in this study. Self-efficacy is defined as “the people’s judgements of their
capability to organize and execute courses of action required in attaining designated types of
performances” (Bandura, 1986 as cited in Taura, et.al., 2015). In the academic setting, it is a
belief about the student’s ability about completing an academic task successfully (Solberg et
al., 1993; Zimmerman, 1995; Chu and Choi, 2005; Tsai and Tsai, 2010 as cited in Sirin, 2011).
Prior researchers have found out that those who have low self-efficacy are likely to have a
high chance of procrastinating (Lowinger, et. al., 2014). On the other hand, active
procrastinators tend to feel they have control over time thus making them more confident that
they can finish tasks on time.
Academic performance cannot be determined by academic procrastination only, because
aside from it, other factors should also be considered like the academic self-efficacy (Adebayo,
2015). And according to Aremu and colleagues (2011), self-efficacy is said to be a very strong
predictor of academic performance. Goulao (2014) have stated that the beliefs about self-
efficacy have a significant influence in determining the goals, and compliance through the
influence they exert on individually choice, resilience, motivation, and on emotional reactions.
In addition, Goulao have concluded that self-efficacy affects our cognitive and affective aspect
of the process of learning since it also influences the effort and persistence in performing a
given tasks. . Findings about the relationship of self-efficacy and academic performance were
obtained outside this country, so with the present study, the researcher was able to determine
if the academic self-efficacy of students from CGHC affects their academic performance.

Overall, the present researcher was able to know the relationship of students’ academic
procrastination, academic self-efficacy and academic performance with each other. However,
the researcher’s idea that procrastination might be seen in different perspective specifically
the possibility that not all procrastinators have poor academic performance and low self-
efficacy are not supported. That idea about procrastination which it may not always result to
negative consequences is supposed to be shared with others especially to students and faculty
of Chinese General Hospital Colleges.
Significance of the Study
This study will be a significant endeavor in promoting the importance of academic self-
efficacy in avoiding procrastination and performing better in school. It will be beneficial for
the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges (CGHC), especially if avoiding
procrastination and having a low general weighted average are some of their problems. By
understanding the importance of academic self-efficacy, students and professors will be able
to address problems like these, thus making their academic environment easier. Moreover, this
research paper provided some recommendations on how to enhance the students’ level of
academic self-efficacy for the CGHC professors and students to practice.
Scope and Limitation
The present study was able to measure the academic procrastination, academic self-
efficacy and academic performance of the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges.
These three were the main focus of this study. Academic procrastination and academic self-
efficacy were obtained quantitatively using self-report measurements while the general
weighted average were requested in the school registrar. It is important to note that there are
many other relating factors that contribute to the tendency of academic procrastination and of

course to general average. But in this study, the researcher only used only these three variables
for they are believed to be a consistent predictor of each other as stated in the related literature.
Active procrastinators were not determined since this study is focused on those who
traditionally procrastinate that might or might not have the possibility of having positive
consequences. Moreover, demographic profile such as gender, year level and course was also
identified.

Chapter 2
Review of Related Literature
Procrastination
Procrastination is defined in many different ways. It is often viewed as intentionally
delaying a task (Milgram, et al., 1998; Haycock, et al., 1998; Kachgal, et al., 2000 as cited in
Sirin, 2011). “Procrastination has long been considered as a self-handicapping behavior that
leads to wasted time, increased stress, and poor academic performance” (Ozer, 2011; Solomon
& Rothblum, 1984; Tice & Baumeister, 1997; Wang & Englander, 2010, as cited in Cao,
2012). In addition, procrastination is also explained as a “prevalent and pernicious form of
self-regulatory failure that is not entirely understood” (Steel, 2007 as cited in Wilson, 2012).
With these definitions, it is evident that procrastination can be considered as a troublesome
behavior (Rabin, Fogel, & Nutter-Upham, 2011). Other negative effects of procrastination can
be seen in different circumstances, along with not being able to accomplish goals on time,
procrastination can also cause person disappointment and worst lead to interpersonal problems
such as relying on others, falling short of family expectations and letting people down
especially if social responsibilities are not fulfilled (Andreou, 2007 as cited in Cerino, 2014).
According to Ying and Lv (2012), there are five different forms of procrastination: (1)
decisional procrastination, defined as inability to make timely decisions; (2) neurotic
procrastination, defined as a tendency to postpone decisions about important matters in
individual life; (3) life routine procrastination, described as having problems in scheduling and
accomplishing routine life tasks on time; (4) compulsive procrastination, defined as decisional
and life routine procrastination occurring in the same person; and lastly (5) academic
procrastination, referred to delaying academic tasks such as doing homework, handing in term

paper or preparing for examinations at the last minute. Among these forms, academic
procrastination is the most widespread phenomenon (Rabin, et.al, 2011). A study by Ferrari
(2001) revealed that almost 20% of adult experience chronic procrastination, while the
estimated rate of problematic academic procrastination among undergraduate students is at
least 70-95% (as cited in Gargari, Sabouri & Norzad, 2011).
According to different studies (e.g. Alexander, et.al., 2007; Kagan, et.al., 2010; Balkis
& Duru, 2009; Ferrari, et.al., 2007; Howell & Watson, 2007) regarding the reasons of
procrastination, people have the tendency to procrastinate because of “poor time management
skills, self-efficacy beliefs, self-esteem, discomfort regarding tasks, personal characteristics
(responsibility, perfectionism, neurotic tendency and etc), irrational thoughts, inability to
concentrate, fear of failure, inability to orient objectives of success, lowered self-respect,
anxiety, problem solving skills, unrealistic expectations and working habits” (as cited in
Hajloo, 2014)
Positive Type of Procrastination
Despite the negative connotations about procrastination, some researchers still
acknowledged that short term benefits are also associated with procrastination (Tice &
Baumeister, 1997 as cited in Cao, 2012). As cited by Cao (2012), Chu and Choi (2005) have
classified two different types of procrastinators: passive versus active procrastinators. These
two differs on cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions. Passive procrastinators are the
traditional procrastinators. Cognitively, they do not intend to procrastinate but they often end
up delaying tasks because they can’t make decisions quickly and to act on them quickly. On
the other hand, active procrastinators have the ability to act on their decisions in a timely
manner. Affectively, passive procrastinators feel pressure and become pessimistic about their

ability to achieve satisfactory results (self-efficacy). Active procrastinators, in contrast, like to
work under pressure because they feel challenged and motivated, and so they do not feel what
passive procrastinators are feeling such as guilt and depression. Lastly in terms of behavioral
dimensions, passive procrastinators are more likely to give up and fail to complete a task while
active procrastinators are persistent and able to complete tasks at the last minute.
In addition, active procrastination is also related with the term strategic delay. Klingsiek
(2013) suggested that the term procrastination and strategic delay should have a clear
distinction and so she made a definition for the two (as cited in Lindblom-Ylanne, et. al.,
2015). These two terms can be also expressed as dysfunctional and functional forms of delay.
She defined procrastination as “the voluntary delay of an intended and necessary and/or
(personally) important activity, despite expecting potential negative consequences that
outweigh the positive consequences of the delay”. On the other hand, strategic delay may be
defined here as “the voluntary delay of an intended and necessary and/or (personally)
important activity in which positive consequences are believed to outweigh negative
consequences in the long run”.
Furthermore, aside from “active procrastination” and “strategic delay”, this positive type
of procrastination has also been called as “functional procrastination”. According to Ferrari
(1994 as cited in Kandemir & Palanci, 2014), some people intentionally procrastinate because
they use it as a strategy to motivate themselves and to act more controlled, thus enabling them
to do satisfactory outcomes under the influence of procrastination in a restricted time.
Consequently, Ferrari was able to define “functional procrastination” as frequent acceptable
procrastination wherein it helps to make the person attain success at work, enables the person
to be more advantageous and lastly it became their strategy to achieve the goal.

Academic Procrastination
Academic procrastination has been the most studied field of procrastination, it is so
because many of the available resources is within the academic setting. Procrastination in this
field is well researched and in fact most of it have evidence-based findings (Zeenath &
Orcullo, 2012). But still, other researchers (e.g. Fee & Tangney 2000, Ferrari, Keane, Wolfe,
& Beck 1998) stresses that further studies are needed to examine the affective implications of
academic procrastination and its outcomes (as cited in Zeenath & Orcullo, 2012). Several
researchers have tried to define academic procrastination, Schouwenburg (2004, as cited in
Rabin, et. al., 2011) regarded it as the intentional delay in the beginning or completion of
important and timely academic activities. For Ozer, Demir and Ferrari (2009), they viewed it
as an irrational delay in performing academic tasks required of students such as reviewing for
the exam, doing assignments, performing academic administrative and attendance tasks (as
cited in Lowinger, He, Lin & Chang, 2014). Finally, academic procrastination has also been
attributed to a deep-rooted fear response (Burka & Yuen, 2008); a result of perfection seeking
(Flett, Blankstein, Hewitt, & Koledin, 1992); as well as avoidance of an unpleasant task
(Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), (as all cited in Demeter & Davis, 2013).
According to Jackson and colleagues (2003), academic procrastination may interrupt
academic performance in different ways, first is procrastinators avoid to finish work at hand
until having not enough time to perform to cope with anxiety; second, procrastinators do not
spend time and effort required to perform well because of underestimating the amount of time
required for specific tasks; third, procrastinators do the task less well due to unforeseen delays
or challenges; fourth, procrastinators often believed that they work best when under pressure

but the stress coming from attempting to finish a fast-approach deadline can hinder optimal
performance (as cited in Balkis, 2013)
It was found out that one of the strongest and consistent predictor of academic
procrastination is self-efficacy (Park & Sperling, 2012). The result of their study indicated that
“high procrastinators demonstrated a lack of self-regulation across the three areas of
regulation, cognition, motivation and behavior”. They also reported that the result obtained
was consistent with Klassen’s, et al., 2010 findings that the strongest predictor of a
procrastination tendency is the low self-efficacy for self-regulation of one individual.
Contradicting with other results, a study by Chu and Choi (2005) have found that there is a
type of procrastinator that tends to have higher levels of self-efficacy than passive
procrastinators (traditional procrastinators), thus they are the one who postpone tasks and
direct their attention toward more urgent issues because they feel confident in their ability to
finish tasks on time (as cited in Hen & Goroshit, 2012).
Furthermore, a study by Ozer & Ferrari (2011) examined the possible gender differences
and reasons of academic procrastination among Turkish students. The results have shown that
52% of students self-reported frequent academic procrastination, with male students reporting
more frequent procrastination on academic tasks than female students. There were also
significantly more female students than male students reported greater academic
procrastination because of fear of failure and laziness; while male students reported more
academic procrastination as a result of risk taking and rebellion against control than did female
students.

Academic Self-Efficacy
According to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy refers to “people’s judgments of their own
capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of
performances” (as cited in Hen & Goroshit, 2012). To further understand, Bandura (1997, as
cited in Taura, Abdullah, Roslan & Omar, 2015) came up with the self-efficacy theory which
suggests that “what one believe about their ability to learn and achieve success strongly
influences one’s task choice, level of effort, persistence, resilience, and subsequent
performance”. In the academic setting, self-efficacy is a belief regarding the student’s ability
about completing an academic task successfully (Solberg et al., 1993; Zimmerman, 1995; Chu
& Choi, 2005; Tsai & Tsai, 2010 as cited in Sirin, 2011). In relation with Bandura’s theory, it
may be viewed that people who have a high self-efficacy are more eager to learn activities,
redouble their efforts toward activities and may develop more effective strategies against
difficulties they encounter (Eggen and Kauchak, 1999 as cited in Sirin, 2011). Similarly, Abd-
Elmotaleb and Saha (2013) have defined academic self-efficacy as "personal judgments of
one's capabilities to organize and execute courses of action to attain designated types of
educational performances". Lastly, it can also be defined as “an individual’s confidence in
their ability to successfully perform academic tasks at an appropriate level (Schunk, 1991 as
cited in Drysdale & McBeath, 2014).
Self-efficacy is also considered as potentially important variable that may influence
student academic performance. As reported by Lowinger, He, Lin and Chang (2014), several
studies have pointed out that academic self-efficacy predicts students’ grades or GPA (e.g.
Bembenutty, 2009; Elias & Mac-Donald, 2007; Ferla, Valcke, & Cai, 2009; Kitsantas &
Zhnmerman, 2009; Silver, Smith & Greene, 2001; Tumer, Chandler, & Heffer, 2009). A large

meta-analysis of studies of self-efficacy in academic setting by Zajacova, Lynch and
Espenshade (2005) also concluded that academic self-efficacy had the greatest effect on
academic outcomes (as cited in Abd-Elmotaleb and Saha, 2013). In the same study by Abd-
Elmotaleb and Saha (2013), they found that academic self-efficacy differs in their impacts on
students’ academic performance depending on faculties’ nature (practical or theoretical) and
concluded that students who have a high self-efficacy have “capacity to accept more
challenging tasks, high ability to organize their time, increased persistence in the face of
obstacles, show lower anxiety levels, show flexibility in the use of learning strategies and have
a high ability to adapt with different educational environments”. Furthermore, Khan’s (2014)
study about these two variables have shown that GPA was positively correlated with academic
self-efficacy and it supported the conclusion of Chemers, Hu and Garcia (2001) that students
who have high academic self-efficacy have shown to perform better academically (as cited in
Khan, 2014).
Academic Performance
Academic performance is the outcome of education, that is, the extent to which a student,
teacher or institution has achieved their educational goals (Adebayo, 2015). Adebayo also
explained that academic performance is commonly measured by examinations or continuous
assessment but there is no general agreement on how it is best tested or which aspects are more
important. For Abd-Elmotaleb and Saha (2013), they used the cumulative grade point average
(GPA) as an indicator of overall academic performance. There are studies that consider GPA
as a strong predictor of college students’ academic performance (Feldman, 1993; Garton, Ball
& Dyer, 2002 as cited in Abd-Elmotaleb & Saha, 2013). As reported by Azar (2013), some of
the predictors that promote or decline academic performance are individual differences such

as intelligence and personality (von Stumm, Hell, & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2011); achievement
motivation; and gender.
A correlational study by Savithri (2014) found that academic procrastination has a
negative correlation with academic performance and that they have a significant relationship
thus supporting their hypothesis. With this, they concluded that when academic
procrastination increases academic performance decreases. For Steel (2007) who conducted a
meta-analysis of academic procrastination, he found a weak, but consistently negative
correlation between academic procrastination and academic performance measures such as
overall GPA, course grades, final exam scores and assignment grades (as cited in Englander,
Wang & Betz, 2015). Furthermore, for Howell and Watson (2007), procrastination has been
understood that it impedes students’ academic success because it decreases the quality and
quantity of learning while increasing the severity of stress and negative outcomes in students’
lives (as cited in Hen & Goroshit, 2012). Several other researchers have consistently
demonstrated that procrastination is highly a threat to academic performance of the students
at each academic level like Popoola (2005), who studied procrastination and academic
performance of undergraduates in South Western Nigeria and found out that they have an
inverse relationship thus leads to lower grade in performances with deadlines (as cited in Vij
& Lomash, 2014).
On the other hand, there are still researchers who believed that academic procrastination
does not adversely affect academic performance (e.g. Burka & Yuen, 1893; Ferrari, Johnson
& McCown, 1995; and Tice & Baumeister, 1997) yet they argued that it brings along non
adaptive lifestyle and health issues (as cited in Kandemir, 2014). Another study conducted by
Chu and Choi (2005), believed that there is a certain kind of procrastination that may lead to

positive outcomes especially in the academic performance and it is called the active
procrastination, they found that “some people purposefully choose to put off tasks because
they believe procrastination contributes to the best performance” (as cited in Park & Sperling,
2012). As reported by Kim and Seo (2013), procrastinating can sometimes be adaptive
(Schraw, Wadkins & Olafson, 2007) and it also may serve as a self-motivating strategy or an
effective study strategy in the academic domain (Brinthaupt & Shin, 2001; Ferrari, Johnson,
& McCown, 1995). However, Kim and Seo’s study shows that the relationship between active
procrastination and academic achievement was significant but weaker than what they
expected. The implication of this result is that active procrastinator might get better results
because of the flow (“the state of total involvement in an activity that consumes one’s complete
attention”) and self-regulated learning and not from merely active procrastinating.
Synthesis
The literature reviewed so far indicates that there are relationships between academic
procrastination, academic self-efficacy and academic performance. The previous studies have
examined the relationships between these variables together with other variables that may
affect the variable being studied, thus making it broader in a sense that other variables are
affecting the three main variables. With the present study, it aims to separately examine the
relationships between these three variables and utilize correlational analyses to reveal relations
between these variables. In addition, it was also shown that positive kind of procrastination is
really possible.
Academic procrastination and academic performance are also believed by several
researchers to have a negative correlation with each other which implicates that as the
academic procrastination increases, academic performance is badly affected. Despite this

consistent finding, some still emphasized that even though it is consistent still it has a weak
correlation. Although the idea is supported by number of studies, some researchers continue
to argue that not all procrastination leads to negative outcome. Some believed that a good
academic performance may still be achieved even if procrastinating, for these people believed
that they are more effective when they are under pressure. These findings allow the present
researcher to further analyze the relationship between these two variables. Furthermore, to
measure one’s academic performance, General Point Average (GPA) have been commonly
used by several researchers. Findings about academic performance have also found out that
aside from academic procrastination, it is also affected by academic self-efficacy. With this, it
is implicated that higher self-efficacy will lead to students better academic performance. In
the present study, the researcher will continue to use GPA as the measure for academic
performance and will still analyze the link between the two for considering the fact that
academic performance cannot be determined by only one variable.
Theoretical Framework
Temporal Motivation Theory
Temporal motivation theory is considered to be the best theory to explain
procrastination since it tried to explain selection processes of someone’s decision making or
behavior (Siaputra, 2010). According to Siaputra, it suggests that people will always prioritize
the activities that for them seems to have the highest value in that certain time. In other words,
procrastination happens if the person thinks that the value of doing the task is low.
Furthermore, it is a motivational theory that indicates the drive or preference for a course of
action (Manikandan & Sebin, 2013). With this, Steel (2007) suggested that the reason why
people make any decision can be largely represented as the product of expectancy (odds or

chance of an outcome occurring) and value (how rewarding the outcome is) divided by the
product of impulsiveness (sensitivity to delay) and delay (how long you must wait to receive
the payout that is the expected reward) (as cited in Manikandan and Sebin, 2013).
Social Cognitive Theory
As defined by Bandura (1997), self-efficacy refers to the “beliefs about one’s
capabilities to learn or perform behaviors at designated level” and is said to have a control
over an individual’s thoughts, feelings and actions (as cited in Aremu, Williams & Adesina,
2011). In line with this definition, the people’s belief about their abilities and outcome of their
efforts may influence the way they behave (Aremu, et al., 2011). In social cognitive theory
proposed by Bandura (1986, 1997) it is stated that human achievement depends on interactions
between one’s behaviors, personal factors and environmental conditions. Environmental
factors that stimulate curiosity can enhance the individual’s ability to engage in self-reflection
(self-efficacy), as well as their ability to sympathize, learn from others, plan alternative
strategies and regulate his own behavior Mahyuddin, Elias, Muhamad, Noordin &Abdullah,
2006 as cited in Aremu et al., 2011). In addition, social cognitive theory also stated that self-
efficacy belief influences ones’ behavior, even more than knowledge, skill and previous
achievements, as well as the procrastination tendency of an individual (Bandura, 1986 as cited
Lowinger, et al., 2014). Therefore, this is perhaps the reason why several studies have shown
that academic self-efficacy influenced the academic performance and academic
procrastination.
This theory stated that self-efficacy beliefs function with the four major psychological
processes to produce actual performance just like academic performance (Tsang, Hui & Law,
2012). First, cognitive processes that include “self-appraisal of skills, capabilities and

resources as well as goal selection”. Second, motivational processes wherein “self-efficacy
beliefs affect one’s self-regulation of motivation”. Third, affective processes which the
“person’s self-perception of abilities in coping affects the person’s arousal threshold and their
tolerance of emotional threats like anxiety and depression”. And lastly, selection processes
wherein “decisions on choice of residence, career, family set up, and even use of time can
directly influence a person’s functioning”.
Research Problem
The present study aims to answer the following research problems:
1. What is the demographic profile of the participants? According to:
i. Year level ii. Gender iii. Course
2. What is the frequency of academic procrastination of the participants?
3. What is the level of academic self-efficacy of the participants?
4. What is the general weighted average (academic performance) of the participants during the
first semester A.Y. 2015-2016?
5. What is the relationship of academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy?
6. What is the relationship of academic procrastination and academic performance?
7. What is the relationship of academic self-efficacy and academic performance?
Hypotheses
The current study analyzed the following hypotheses at 0.1 level of significance.
Hypothesis 1: There is a significant correlation between academic procrastination and
academic self-efficacy.
Hypothesis 2: There is a significant correlation between academic procrastination and
academic performance.
Hypothesis 3: There is a significant correlation between academic self-efficacy and academic
performance.

Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between the three variables; academic
procrastination, academic self- efficacy and academic performance. It is believed that
academic procrastination and academic performance will have a significant relationship with
each other. Also, the relationship between academic self-efficacy and academic performance
is expected to be significant, in which the students’ belief that they will be able to complete
school tasks really affects their general weighted average. Furthermore, to support several
studies about the link between academic self-efficacy and academic procrastination, the
present study assumed that these two variables have a significant relationship with each other.
Figure 1

Operational Definition
The following are terms which operationally and conceptually defined for better
understanding.
Academic procrastination
A behavior in which students delay or procrastinate in terms of writing a term paper,
studying for exams, keeping up with weekly reading assignments, doing other academic
administrative tasks, attending meeting with professor or advisor and participating in school
activities in general.
Academic Performance
It is the students’ general weighted average (GWA) for the first semester academic year
2015-2016.
Academic Self-efficacy
It is the student’s confidence in their ability to successfully accomplish academic tasks.

Chapter 3
Research Design
The present study used a descriptive correlation design to explore the relationship
between academic procrastination, academic self-efficacy, and academic performance. These
three variables were measured to identify any pattern of relationship between them and also
its strength. Specifically, this study investigated the degree to which academic procrastination
correlates to academic self-efficacy, academic performance to academic procrastination and
academic self-efficacy to academic performance.
Subject Study and Size
Subjects were the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges (CGHC) from first up
to fourth year level taking up courses of BS Medical Technology (BSMT), BS Nursing (BSN),
BS Radiological Technology (BSRT), BS Psychology (BSP) and Diploma in Midwifery
(DMW). Two hundred seventy one students participated in this study but only 265 were
included for the other 6 students were not able to follow the instructions in the questionnaire.
Subjects were supposed to be all the CGHC students but since some students were hardly
available due to their internships, subjects were chosen through convenience sampling.
Research Instruments
Academic Procrastination. The Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students (PASS)
is a 44-item scale that has two parts by Solomon and Rothblum (1984). The first part of the
scale evaluates the prevalence of procrastination in six academic areas: a) writing a term paper;
(b) studying for an exam, (c) keeping up with weekly reading assignments; (d) performing
administrative tasks; (e) attending meeting and lastly (f) performing academic tasks in general.
Subjects will be asked to rate the degree to which they procrastinate in that area (1 = never

procrastinate to 5 = always procrastinate), the degree to which procrastination in that area is a
problem for them (1 = not at all a problem to 5 = always a problem) and lastly the degree to
which they want to decrease their procrastination in that area (1 = do not want to decrease to
5 = definitely want to decrease). For the second part, the subjects will be asked to indicate the
extent to which it reflects why they procrastinated on a five-point scale (1 = Not at all reflects
why I procrastinated to 5 = Definitely reflects why I procrastinated). PASS has a coefficient
alpha reliability (Jiao, et al., 2011) of 0.85 for the overall scale; 0.76 for writing a term paper,
0.74 for studying examinations, 0.82 for keeping up with weekly reading assignment, 0.92 for
performing administrative tasks, 0.88 for attending meetings and 0.81 for performing
academic tasks in general.
Academic Self-Efficacy. The Academic Self-Efficacy Scale was developed by
Chemers, Hu and Garcia (1991). The scale consists of 8 items on a 7 point Likert-type scale
from 1 (Very Untrue) to 7 (Very True). Points 2 thru 6 were not labeled. Subjects will be asked
to rate on a 1 to 7 scale how well they believe they perform certain academic tasks. It has a
Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of .86 (Khan, 2014).
These two questionnaires were combined and printed together in a three-paged
questionnaire for the participants not to perceive it long and tiring to answer. Also, for the
Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students (PASS), the term “term paper” was replaced
by the term “essay”. It was done so that participants will be able to relate with the term “term
paper”. But for future research, researchers can make an academic procrastination scale that
suits the environment of the participants.

Data Gathering
The schedule of all the students in Chinese General Hospital Colleges was requested to
the Guidance, Counseling and Testing office. In each class available, the researcher asked
permission to the professors through letter to allow her to collect data before their dismissal.
Upon agreeing, the researcher introduced herself and informed the students that they will be
answering some questionnaires about procrastination and self-efficacy. Before answering the
questionnaire, a consent form was given first wherein it was stated there that their participation
is voluntary and they may withdraw from the study at any time for any reason. Also, the
researcher instructed them to answer it truthfully since it was assured that the data collected
will be kept confidential. Subjects were given 20 minutes to completely answer the following
questionnaires. And after completion, a little token was given to them as well as to their
professors. Lastly, for the academic performance of the subjects, the researcher asked
permission through letter to the school registrar to have a copy of the subjects’ general
weighted average for the whole first semester A.Y. 2015-2016 which were also kept
confidential.
Data Interpretation and Calculation
Data collected such as academic procrastination, academic self-efficacy, academic
performance and demographic data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential
statistics. The descriptive statistics were the means, medians, modes and standard deviations,
whereas, the inferential statistics was the Pearson product moment correlation to know the
relationship between these variables.

Chapter 4
Results
Table 1
Demographic Profile
Demographic data Frequency Percentage
COURSE
BS Medical Technology 127 48%
BS Nursing 94 36%
BS Radiological Technology 22 8%
BS Psychology 19 7%
Diploma in Midwifery 3 1%
TOTAL 265 100%
YEAR
First Year 137 52%
Third Year 61 23%
Second Year 40 15%
Fourth Year 27 10%
TOTAL 265 100%
SEX
Female 215 81%
Male 50 19%
TOTAL 265 100%
Most of the participants were comprised of BS Medical Technology (BSMT) students
for which it shows that the students in CGHC are mostly BSMT, followed by BS Nursing, BS
Radiological Technology, BS Psychology and Diploma in Midwifery students since there are
only a few of them. It was also shown that first year students outnumbered other year levels.
Furthermore, more female students participated in this study compared to male participants.

Table 2
Participants’ Frequency of Academic Procrastination (AP)
0-12 = Never (N)
13-24 = Almost Never (AN)
25-36 = Sometimes (S)
37-48 = Nearly Always (NA)
49-60 = Always (A)
It was shown that most of the participants from different courses specifically BS
Nursing, BS Medical Technology, BS Psychology and Diploma in Midwifery (34.67)
procrastinate sometimes. While BS Radiological Technology participants were reported to
procrastinate nearly always. Among the year levels, only fourth year participants were
reported to procrastinate nearly always and the remaining year levels specifically second year,
third year and first year procrastinate sometimes. According to Chow (2011), reasons such as
lack of task or domain confidence, low emotional intelligence and dissatisfaction with school
life results to the delay initiation or completion of tasks or simply procrastination. These are
only few factors, and participants may have other reasons for procrastinating. In this study,
only their academic self-efficacy was measured to correlate to their frequency of
procrastination.
COURSE Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
BS Radiological Technology 37.86 7.65 NA
BS Nursing 35.56 7.11 S
BS Medical Technology 34.97 6.11 S
BS Psychology 34.70 6.97 S
Diploma in Midwifery 34.67 2.31 S
YEAR Mean SD Verbal Interpretation
Fourth Year 37.18 8.94 NA
Second Year 35.72 5.91 S
Third Year 35.11 6.23 S
First Year 34.92 6.68 S

Table 3
Participants’ Level of Academic Self-Efficacy (ASE)
Overall Mean = 36.69
Below 36.69 =Low Self-Efficacy
Above 36.69 =High Self-Efficacy
Students who participated from BS Nursing, BS Psychology and BS Radiological
Technology were all reported to have a low academic self-efficacy. On the other hand, BS
Medical Technology and Diploma in Midwifery participants were reported to have a high self-
efficacy. Also, among different year levels, only the first year participants were reported to
have a low academic self-efficacy, while the second, third and fourth year were reported to
have high academic self-efficacy. Bandura (1997) explained that a self-efficacy of a person
can be gotten through four primary sources: (a) enactive mastery performance, (b) observation
of others, (c) forms of persuasion, and (d) physiological and affective states from which people
partly judge their capableness, strength, and vulnerability to dysfunction (as cited in Artino,
2012). With these, it might indicate that those who scored low still have some adjustments to
do in terms of developing their academic self-efficacy. First year students, which are obviously
in the transition stage, have not really comprehended totally the journey that they are going to
experience and also they might not be fully aware of the expectations and demands that come
along with becoming a first year college student. Consequently, freshmen would really have
Diploma in Midwifery 39.00 3.60 High
BS Medical Technology 37.15 8.48 High
BS Psychology 36.55 10.78 Low
BS Nursing 36.25 7.67 Low
BS Radiological Technology 34.14 8.12 Low
Fourth Year 39.33 7.14 High
Second Year 38.50 6.72 High
Third Year 37.15 8.46 High
First Year 35.44 8.90 Low

a low academic self-efficacy because of this lack of experience and knowledge (Nelson &
Cooper, 2014). Contradicting with Nelson and Cooper (2014) , Ouano (2011) found out that
adolescent students have lower self-efficacy when they are in the higher academic level since
as they enter college, students generally bring with them some high energy and excitement to
begin doing college work and tend to engage in tasks with high self-efficacy for learning.
Table 4
Participants’ Academic Performance/General Weighted Average (GWA) for the First
Semester Academic Year 2015-2016
Below 75 = Poor
75 – 79 = Passing
80 – 84 = Fair
85 – 90 = Good
91 – 96 = Very Good
97 – 100 = Excellent
Fair academic performance were from the courses of BS Nursing, BS Medical
Technology and BS Psychology. For the other courses, BS Radiological Technology got a
passing academic performance while Diploma in Midwifery has a poor academic
performance. In terms of their year level, they all got a fair academic performance; As reported
by Azar (2013), some of the predictors that promote or decline academic performance are
individual differences such as intelligence and personality (von Stumm, Hell, & Chamorro-
Premuzic, 2011); achievement motivation; and gender. Also, the academic success of students
BS Nursing 82.80 4.03 Fair
BS Medical Technology 82.28 5.79 Fair
BS Psychology 81.26 7.80 Fair
BS Radiological Technology 75.90 7.23 Passing
Diploma in Midwifery 73.78 2.12 Poor
4th
year 83.94 3.97 Fair
2nd
1st
3rd

could also be attributed to their skills like time organization with completing of duties on
schedule, prioritization of tasks, determination of aims and creating a pattern of studying
systematically (Lakshminarayan, Potdar & Reddy, 2013). However, in this study only the
frequency of academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy was measured to correlate
with GWA.
Table 5
Relationship of Academic Procrastination (AP) and Academic Self-Efficacy (ASE)
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Table 5 shows that there is an inverse statistically significant correlation coefficient
between the levels of academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy. Even though it is
a weak correlation, it shows that as the level of students’ academic procrastination increase,
the level of self-efficacy decrease and vice-versa. This finding is in accord with what was
confirmed by Noran (2000) that academic procrastination is resulted by lack of academic self-
efficacy as cited in AlQudah, Alsubhien and Heilat (2014). It may indicate that people who
lack in confidence and do not believe that they will be able to manage academic activities to
perform better in school might increase the tendency that they will engage in academic
procrastination. Because of lack of self-efficacy, they tend to delay the initiation and start of
the task, thus supporting the research result of Elias (2008) that students with low academic
self-efficacy have more chance of getting involved in the problem of academic procrastination
AP ASE
AP
Pearson Correlation 1 -.336**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
ASE
Pearson Correlation -.336**
1

such as being absent from lectures and failure in studying (AlQudah, Alsubhien & Heilat,
2014). The present result also supported the hypothesis 1 wherein it was stated that there is a
significant correlation between academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy.
Table 6
Relationship of Academic Procrastination (AP) and Academic Performance (GWA)
Table 6 shows that there is no significant relationship between academic procrastination
and academic performance. The present finding was in line with the result of the study
conducted by Olorunda and Adesokan (2015), in which they concluded that there is no
significant difference in academic achievement of participants based on the level (high/low)
of academic procrastination. Also, the result shown in the study of Brinthaupt and Shin (2001)
and Schraw and Wadkins (2007) did not find statistical significance in this relationship (as
cited in Kim and Seo, 2015). With these, it is implied that the level of academic procrastination
does not have any influence on the academic performance of participants. Moreover, the idea
of active procrastination by Chu and Choi (2005) which is considered to be a positive kind of
procrastination (as cited in Cao, 2012), is not also supported.
AP GWA
AP
Pearson Correlation 1 -.118
GWA
Pearson Correlation -.118 1

Table 7
Relationship of Academic Self-Efficacy (ASE) and Academic Performance (GWA)
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
It was shown in Table 7 that the correlation coefficient is statistically significant between
the levels of academic self-efficacy and academic performance. It has a weak yet positive
correlation wherein it points that if the students’ academic self-efficacy is high, their academic
performance also gets better. This supports the conclusion of Abd-Elmotaleb and Saha (2013)
that having a high self-efficacy makes the students have the capacity to accept more
challenging tasks, have the high ability to organize their time and etc., hence, these might be
the reasons why they are able to perform better in school. It also implies that students who
are confident in what they are doing in terms of academics just like scheduling time to
accomplish tasks, taking notes, studying to perform well on tests and etc. can have a good
performance. Moreover, Lowinger and colleagues (2014) have found out that there also are
several studies which pointed out that academic self-efficacy has a positive correlation with
the students’ academic performance such as Bembenutty (2009), Ellas and Mac-Donald
(2007), Ferla, Valcke and Cai (2009), and Tumer, Chandler and Heffer (2009).
ASE GWA
ASE
Pearson Correlation 1 .199**
GWA
Pearson Correlation .199**
1

Chapter 5
Conclusion
The results obtained were from the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges. The
highest number of participants came from the first year level and also the majority were BS
Medical Technology students. It was shown that most of the participants only procrastinate
sometimes, and also most of them have a high academic self-efficacy. With their academic
performance, it was indicated that most of them have a fair general weighted average (GWA).
Through these data, the researcher wanted to know the correlation of the three variables
specifically their academic self-efficacy to academic procrastination, academic procrastination
to academic performance and academic self-efficacy to academic performance.
First of all, the academic self-efficacy of CGHC students was significantly correlated
with academic procrastination, therefore supporting the hypothesis 1. It was shown that the
higher the students believe with themselves, the lower they tend to procrastinate and vice-
versa. Since most of the participants have a high academic self-efficacy, it was not surprising
that they only procrastinate sometimes. This supported the theory of Bandura (1986) called as
the Social Cognitive Theory wherein it was stated that self-efficacy belief influences more
one’s behavior like academic procrastination, compared to knowledge, skills and previous
achievements, as cited in Lowinger, et al. (2014). These finding leads the researcher to
conclude the importance of academic self-efficacy in preventing the tendency of academic
procrastination especially to the students whose number one problem is to avoid
procrastination. Further, according to Park and Sperling (2012), high procrastinators
demonstrated lack of self-efficacy for self-regulation across the three areas of regulation,
cognition, motivation and behavior. Thus, it can be suggested that believing in their

capabilities to successfully perform academic tasks can actually prevent or, at least, lessen
them from procrastinating in academic aspect.
Second, the results shown between academic procrastination and academic performance
is not significantly correlated with each other, hence, it didn’t support the hypothesis 2. For it
to have a significant correlation, it was assumed that if the academic procrastination is low,
then GWA must be high or vice versa. But in the present study, most of participants were
reported to procrastinate sometimes, and their academic performance (GWA) were reported
to be only fair. Consequently, it implies that aside from academic procrastination, there can be
many factors that contributes to the GWA of the participants such as their intelligence,
personality, achievement, motivation and gender (Azar, 2013). In addition, some research
studies also agreed that the academic performance of participants are not influenced by the
level of their academic procrastination (Olorunda and Adesokan, 2015). The results shown
also did not support the idea of Ferrari (1994 as cited in Kandemir & Palanci, 2014) that there
is an acceptable procrastination wherein it helps to make the person attain success at work,
and enables the person to be more advantageous.
Lastly, academic self-efficacy and academic performance were shown to have a weak
correlation yet statistically significant with each other, therefore supporting the hypothesis 3.
Positive relationship was also shown wherein it implies that a high academic self-efficacy
might really improve one’s academic performance. In this study, majority of participants have
a high self-efficacy, but their academic performance was only fair. With these, the conclusion
of Lynch and Espenshade (2005) that academic self-efficacy had the greatest effect on
academic outcomes (as cited in Abd-Elmotaleb and Saha, 2013) was not highly supported. For
Bandura (1977), the level of self-efficacy can determine whether a task will be initiated, the

amount of effort that will be expended and the level of persistence to complete the task when
face with obstacles and aversive experiences (Loo & Choy, 2013). Accordingly, if a student’s
academic self-efficacy gets higher, his initiative to start, amount of effort and level of
persistence also gets higher, thus, making that student perform better in school.
Overall, the present study concluded that there is a significant correlation between
academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy, as well as with academic self-efficacy
and academic performance. Yet, for the academic procrastination and academic performance,
no significant correlation was found. With these present results, it is concluded that academic
self-efficacy is important in making decisions and handling our actions especially in terms of
preventing tendencies of academic procrastination and of achieving a better academic
performance. To end, the present researcher agreed to Sharma and Nasa (2014), in which they
believed that the students with high level of academic self-efficacy are more self-confident
and have more positive attitudes towards future profession.
Recommendation
A further study should be conducted to explore more the engagement in academic
procrastination of college students. Future researchers could use a qualitative method for them
to investigate the deeper reasons why students engage in academic procrastination. A larger
sample from different colleges and universities is also recommended and not only inside
CGHC. Since there are many contributing factors to procrastination, such as “poor time
management skills, self-esteem, discomfort regarding tasks, and personal characteristics like
responsibility, perfectionism, and neurotic tendency, as well as the irrational thoughts,
inability to concentrate, and fear of failure” (Hajloo, 2014), to name a few; it is important to
study and discover those predictors for us to end or at least lessen our tendency to procrastinate

especially for those chronic procrastinators whose lives are badly affected. Understanding
academic procrastination among the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges might help
them get a better general weighted average (GWA). In addition, a study about a positive kind
of procrastination may be conducted to further know both sides of procrastination and how do
some people benefit when they procrastinate. Future researchers may use an active and passive
procrastination scale to compare the two and understand its effect to the procrastinator.
On the other hand, it is also recommended for the Chinese General Hospital Colleges
professors to attend a program seminar, organized by Psychology Society members with the
help of Guidance and Counseling office that would help them enhance their students’
academic self-efficacy. In education, self-efficacy is a key contributing factor to learners’
success, because self-efficacy “influences the choices learners make and the courses of action
they pursue” (Pajares, 2002; as cited in Sharma and Nasa, 2014). With these, teachers and
professors play a crucial role in developing and instilling the academic self-efficacy of their
students. According to Schunk (1995), teachers should train the students to make use of
learning strategies such as (a) Goal-setting, wherein teachers should “make students aware
about the goals that need to be attained in their courses and provide them with feedback on
goal progress”; (b) Strategy training, in which they should “develop instructional programs
that train students on the use of certain strategies to improve their performance”, thus helping
their students to be more systematic in their work and more in control of their learning; (c)
Modeling, wherein they must “provide remedy to the learning and motivational deficiencies
that their students might have by modeling cognitive strategies and self-regulatory techniques”
and thus having a positive effect on students motivation and learning; and lastly (d) Feedback,
in which a “regular and immediate feedback should be given to the students as it provides

them an opportunity to assess their progress in learning” and therefore enhancing ultimately
their academic achievement (as cited in Sharma & Nasa, 2014).
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
An increase in academic
self-efficacy is needed
among students.
Students should believe
in themselves that they
can successfully achieve
a designated level on an
academic task or goal.
Students should have
this confidence in their
ability to achieve their
academic goals.
Within the student,
Academic Self-Efficacy
can be achieved through
getting successful
experience; by
observing someone else
perform a task thus
helping them perform
the same task; by
getting encouragement
from others and
sometimes, it depends
on the current mood,
emotions, physical
reactions and stress
levels of the students.
For the part of the
people surrounding the
student (especially
teachers) they may give
a learning strategy like
goal setting, strategy
training, modeling and
feedback
Better school
performance can be
achieved and academic
goals becomes more
attainable. Academic
procrastination can also
be limited. Students
with high academic self-
efficacy beliefs saw the
difficult tasks as
challenges to be
mastered, they sustain
their efforts in the face
of failure and they
quickly recover their
sense of self-efficacy
after failures or set -
backs.

References
Research Journals:
Abd-Elmotaleb, M., & Saha, S. (2013). The role of academic self-efficacy as a mediator
variable between perceived academic climate and academic performance. Journal of
Education and Learning, 2(3), 117-129. DOI:10.5539/jel.v2n3p117
Adebayo, F.A. (2015). Time management and students academic performance in higher
institutions, Nigeria – A case study of Ekiti State. International Research in Education,
3(2), 1-12. DOI:10.5296/ire.v3i2.7126
AlQudah, M., Alsubhien, A., & Al Heilat, M. (2014). The relationship between the academic
procrastination and self-efficacy among sample of King Saud University students.
Journal of Education and Practice, 5 (16), 101-111. Retrieved from
http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/13076/13647
Aremu, A.O., Williams, T.M., & Adesina, F.T. (2011). Influence of academic
procrastination and personality types on academic achievement and efficacy of in-
school adolescents in Ibadan. IFE PsychologIA, 19(1), 93-113. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ifep.v19i1.64591
Artino, A. (2012). Academic self-efficacy: From educational theory to instructional practice.
Perspect Med Educ (2012), 76-85. DOI: 10.1007/s40037-012-0012-5
Azar, F. (2013). Self- efficacy, achievement motivation and academic procrastination as
predictors of academic achievement in pre-college students. Proceeding of the Global
Summit on Education 2013. Retrieved from
http://worldconferences.net/proceedings/gse2013/papers_gse2013/071%20Firouzeh%
20Sepehrianazar.pdf

Balkis, M. (2013). Academic procrastination, academic life satisfaction and academic
achievement: The mediation role of rational beliefs about studying. Journal of
Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 13 (1), 57-74. Retrieved from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/236173872_ACADEMIC_PROCRASTINAT
ION_ACADEMIC_LIFE_SATISFACTION_AND_ACADEMIC_ACHIEVEMENT_
THE_MEDIATION_ROLE_OF_RATIONAL_BELIEFS_ABOUT_STUDYING
Cao, L. (2012) Examining ‘active’ procrastination from a self-regulated learning perspective,
Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational
Psychology, DOI:10.1080/01443410.2012.663722
Cao, L. (2012). Differences in procrastination and motivation between undergraduate and
graduate students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12 (2), 39-64.
Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ978906.pdf
Cerino, E. (2014). Relationships between academic motivation, self-efficacy, and academic
procrastination. Psi Chi, Journal of Psychological Research, 19 (4), 156-163. Retrieved
from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/273736858_Relationships_between_academic
_motivation_self-efficacy_and_academic_procrastination
Chow, H. (2011). Procrastination among undergraduate students: Effects of emotional
intelligence, school life, self-evaluation, and self-efficacy. Alberta Journal of
Educational Research, 57 (2), 234-240. Retrieved from
http://ajer.synergiesprairies.ca/ajer/index.php/ajer/article/download/894/828

Demeter, D., & Davis, S. (2013). Procrastination as a tool: Exploring unconventional
components of academic success. Creative Education, 4 (7A2), 144-149.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.47A2018
Drysdale, M., & McBeath, M. (2014). Exploring hope, self-efficacy, procrastination, and
study skills between cooperative and non-cooperative education students. Asia-Pacific
Journal of Cooperative Education, 15(1), 69-79. Retrieved from
http://www.apjce.org/files/APJCE_15_1_69_79.pdf
Englander, F., Wang, Z., & Betz, K.(2015). Predictors of performance in introductory
finance: Variables within and beyond the student’s control. Higher Education Studies,
5(4), 119-130. DOI:10.5539/hes.v5n4p119
Gargari, R., Sabouri, H., & Norzad, F. (2011). Academic procrastination: The relationship
between causal attribution styles and behavioral postponement. Iran J Psychiatry
Behav Sci, 5 (2), 76-82. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3939975/
Glick, D., & Orsillo, S. (2015). An investigation of the efficacy of acceptance-based
behavioral therapy for academic procrastination. Journal of Experimental Psychology,
144 (2), 400-409. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000050
Goulao, M. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement in
adults’ learners. Athens Journal of Education, 1 (3), 237-246. Retrieved from
http://www.atiner.gr/journals/education/2014-1-3-4-Goulao.pdf
Habelrih, E., & Hicks, R. (2015). Psychological well-being and its relationships with active
and passive procrastination. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 7 (3), 25-
34. DOI:10.5539/ijps.v7n3p25

Hajloo, N. (2014). Relationships between self-efficacy, self-esteem and procrastination in
undergraduate Psychology students. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci, 8 (3), 42-49.
Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4359724/
Hen, M., & Goroshit, M. (2012). Academic procrastination, emotional intelligence,
academic self-efficacy, and GPA: A comparison between students with and without
learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(10), 1-9. DOI:
10.1177/0022219412439325
Jiao, Q.G., DaRos-Voseles, D.A., Collins, K.M.T., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2011). Academic
procrastination and the performance of graduate-level cooperative groups in research
methods courses. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 119–
138. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ915928.pdf
Kandemir, M., & Palanci, M. (2014). Academic functional procrastination: Validity and
reliability study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 194-198.
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.180
Kandemir, M. (2014). Predictors of academic procrastination: coping with stress, internet
addiction and academic motivation. World Applied Sciences Journal 32 (5): 930-938.
DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2014.32.05.60
Karatas, H., & Bademcioglu, M. (2015). The explanation of the academic procrastination
behavior of pre-service teachers with five factor personality traits. The International
Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 6(2), 11-25. Retrieved from
http://ijrte.eab.org.tr/(ISSN) 1308-951X

Khan, M. (2013). Academic self-Efficacy, coping, and academic performance in college.
International Journal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities: 5(4), 1-11.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2168-0620.1006
Kim, E., & Seo, E. (2013). The relationship of flow and self-regulated learning to active
procrastination. Social Behavior And Personality, 41(7), 1099-1114. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.7.1099
Kim, K. R., & Seo, E. H. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and academic
performance: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 28-33.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038
Klassen, R., Ang, R., Chong, W.H., Krawchuk, L., Huan, V., Wong, I., & Yeo, L.S. (2010).
Academic procrastination in two settings: Motivation correlates, behavioral patterns,
and negative impact of procrastination in Canada and Singapore. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 59(3), 361-379. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00394.x
Lakshminarayan, N., Potdar, S., & Reddy, S. (2013). Relationship between procrastination
and academic performance among a group of undergraduate dental students in India.
Journal of Dental Education, 77 (4), 524-528. Retrieved from
http://www.jdentaled.org/content/77/4/524.full.pdf
Lindblom-Ylanne, S., Saariaho, E., Inkinen, M., Haarala-Muhonen, A., & Hailikari, T.
(2015). Academic procrastinators, strategic delayers and something betwixt and
between: An interview study. Frontline Learning Research, 3 (2), 47-62. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v3i2.154

Lindt, S., Corkin, D., & Yu, S. (2014). Using multiple method to distinguish active delay
and procrastination in college students. American International Journal of
Contemporary Research, 4 (2), 28-32. Retrieved from
http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_2_February_2014/5.pdf
Loo, C.W., & Choy, J.L.F. (2013). Sources of self-efficacy influencing academic
performance of engineering students. American Journal of Educational Research, 1
(3), 86-92.
DOI: 10.12691/education-1-3-4
Lowinger, R.J., He, Z., Lin, M., & Chang, M. (2014). The impact of academic self-efficacy,
acculturation difficulties, and language abilities on procrastination behavior in Chinese
international students. College Student Journal, 48(1), 141–152. Retrieved from
https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-372252077/the-impact-of-academic-self-
efficacy-acculturation
Manikandan, K., & Sebin, P. (2013). Procrastination behavior and life routines among
students in Kerala. ACADEMICIA, An International Multidisciplinary Research
Journal, 3(1), 43-52. Retrieved from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/262201655_
Procrastination_Behavior_and_Life_Routines_among_Students_in_Kerala
Nelson, D.B. and Cooper N.C. (2014). Academic self-efficacy: The cornerstone of freshmen
success. Retrieved from the NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising
Resources Web Site: http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-
Articles/Academic-self-efficacy-

Olorunda, T.E., & Adesokan, A. (2015). Emotional intelligence, academic procrastination
and academic achievement in two tertiary institutions in south-western Nigeria.
Gender and Behavior, 13 (1), 6482-6487. Retrieved from
http://www.ajol.info/index.php/gab/article/view/119090
Ouano, J. (2011). Changes in self-efficacy among Filipino adolescents as moderated by
performance goal orientation. Philippine Journal of Counseling Psychology, 13 (1),
65-75. Retrieved from
http://ejournals.ph/index.php?journal=PJCP&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=
1962&path%5B%5D=2058
Ozer, B., & Ferrari, J. (2011). Gender orientation and academic procrastination: Exploring
Turkish high school students. Individual Differences Research, 9, 33–40.
Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/4282887/Gender_Orientation_and_
Academic_Procrastination_Exploring_Turkish_High_School_Students
Park, S., & Sperling, A. (2012). Academic procrastinators and their self-regulation.
Psychology, 3(1), 12-23. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.31003
Rabin, L., Fogel, J., & Nutter-Upham, K. (2011). Academic procrastination in college
students: The role of self-reported executive function. Journal of Clinical and
Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 344-357. DOI:
10.1080/13803395.2010.518597
Savithri, J.J. (2014). Interactive effect of academic procrastination and academic
performance on life satisfaction. International Journal of Science and Research, 3 (3),
377-381. Retrieved from http://www.ijsr.net/archive/v3i3/MDIwMTMxMTUz.pdf

Siaputra, I. (2010). Temporal motivation theory: Best theory (yet) to explain procrastination.
Anima Indonesian Psychological Journal, 25 (3), 206-214. Retrieved from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/275715727_Temporal_Motivation_Theory_B
est_Theory_(yet)_to_Explain_Procrastination
Sharma, H.L., & Nasa, G. (2014). Academic self-efficacy: A reliable predictor of
educational performances. British Journal of education, 2 (3), 57-64. Retrieved from
http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Academic-Self-Efficacy-A-Reliable-
Predictor-of-Educational-Performances1.pdf
Sirin, E. (2011). Academic procrastination among undergraduates attending school of
physical education and sports: Role of general procrastination, academic motivation
and academic self-efficacy. Educational Research and Reviews, 6(5), 447-455.
Retrieved from http://www.academicjournals.org/article/article1379690340_Sirin.pdf
Taura, A., Abdullah, M., Roslan, S., & Omar, Z. (2015). Relationship between self-efficacy,
task value, self-regulation strategies and active procrastination among pre-service
teachers in colleges of education. International Journal of Psychology and Counseling
7(2), 11-17. DOI: 10.5897/IJPC2014.0297
Tsang, S., Hui, E., & Law, B. (2012). Self-efficacy as a positive youth development
construct: A conceptual review. The Scientific World Journal, 2012, 1-7. DOI:
10.1100/2012/452327
Vij, J., & Lomash, H. (2014). Role of motivation in academic procrastination. International
Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 5(8), 1065-1070. Retrieved from
http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper%5CRole-of-Motivation-in-Academic-
Procrastination.pdf

Wilson, B., & Nguyen, D. (2012). Belonging to tomorrow: An overview of procrastination.
International Journal of Psychological Studies, 4(1). DOI: 10.5539/ijps.v4n1p211
Ying, Y., & Lv, W. (2012). A study on higher vocational college students’ academic
procrastination behavior and related factors. I.J. Education and Management
Engineering, 7, 29-35. DOI: 10.5815/ijeme.2012.07.05
Zeenath, S., & Orcullo, D. (2012). Exploring academic procrastination among
undergraduates. International Proceedings of Economics Development & Research,
47, 42-46. DOI: 10.7763/IPEDR. 2012. V47. 9
Online Article:
Wiegartz, P. (2011, April 8). Can procrastination ever be a good thing?. Psychology Today.
Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-the-age-
anxiety/201104/can-procrastination-ever-be-good-thing

APPENDICES
Appendix A –------------------------------------------- Letter to Professors
Appendix B –------------------------------------------- Letter to Registrar
Appendix C –------------------------------------------ Cover Letter and Consent Form to Students
Appendix D -------------------------------------------– Questionnaire
Appendix E -------------------------------------------– Answer Sheets
Appendix F –------------------------------------------- Curriculum Vitae

Appendix A
Letter to Professors
January 7, 2015
To whom it may concern,
I, Jennifer G. Joseph, a 4th
year BS Psychology student, is conducting a research study entitled:
“A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic
Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students” in partial fulfillment of our
requirement in Research in Psychology 2. The study is all about the relationship of academic
procrastination, academic self-efficacy and academic school performance. The participants
will be all the students of Chinese General Hospital Colleges.
In line with that, may I request you to ask for the students to stay right after your class for me
to gather data by asking them to answer the questionnaire. Approximately, it will take 20
minutes for them to finish the test.
Hoping for your kind consideration and favorable response regarding this matter.
Thank you and God bless.
Respectfully yours, Noted by:
JENNIFER G. JOSEPH MR. TRISTAN ISAGANI PERALTA
Researcher Research Adviser

Appendix B
Letter to Registrar
January 6, 2016
Ms. Jocelyn B. Manalang
College Registrar
Chinese General Hospital Colleges
Dear Ms. Manalang,
I, Jennifer G. Joseph, a 4th
year BS Psychology student, will conduct a research study entitled:
“A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic
Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.” in partial fulfillment of our
requirement in Research in Psychology 2. The study is all about the relationship of academic
procrastination, academic self-efficacy and academic school performance.
In line with that, I would like to ask permission to have a copy of students’ general average
during the first semester of the academic year 2015-2016. The general average of first year to
fourth year students from all courses (BS Medical Technology, BS Nursing, BS Radiological
Technology, BS Psychology and Diploma in Midwifery) will be used as the measurement for
the academic school performance. Rest assured that the copy of grades will be used only for
the stated purpose and will be treated with utmost confidentiality.
Hoping for your kind consideration and favorable response regarding this matter.
Thank you and God bless.
JENNIFER G. JOSEPH MR. TRISTAN ISAGANI D. PERALTA

Appendix C
Cover Letter and Consent Form to Students
A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic
Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.
Dear Participants,
You are invited to take part in research survey about academic procrastination
tendencies, self-efficacy and school performance of students from Chinese General Hospital
Colleges. Your participation will require approximately 30 minutes and will be held at 5th
floor
Psychological Testing Room. There are no known risks or discomforts associated with this
survey. A small token will be given after you have completed the questionnaires. Taking part
in this study is completely voluntary. If you choose to be in the study you can withdraw at any
time without consequence. The information provided by you in the questionnaire will be used
solely for research purposes. It will not be used in a manner which would allow identification
of your individual responses.
Thank you for your participation.
JENNIFER G. JOSEPH MR. TRISTAN ISAGANI PERALTA
__________________________________________________________________________
RESPONDENT’S CONSENT FORM
I, _______________________________, hereby agree to participate in a research study
entitled “A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and
Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students”. I understand
that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time, without giving
reason and I will be having the opportunity to ask questions.
I am assured that the results of this study will be used for the purpose of the study and
all of my information will be kept confidential.
Signature over Printed Name Date

Appendix D
Questionnaire

Appendix E
Answer Sheet
Name (optional): ______________________ Course: _____________________
Year/Section: _________________________ Date: ______________________
A. Areas of Procrastination: B. Reasons for Procrastination:
C. Academic Self- Efficacy:
I. WRITING AN ESSAY
1.
2.
3.
II. STUDYING FOR EXAMS
4.
5.
6.
III. READING ASSIGNMENTS
7.
8.
9.
IV. ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS
10.
11.
12.
V. ATTENDANCE TASKS
13.
14.
15.
VI. SCHOOL ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL
16.
17.
18.
19. 32.
20. 33.
21. 34.
22. 35.
23. 36.
24. 37.
25. 38.
26. 39.
27. 40.
28. 41.
29. 42.
30. 43.
31. 44.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Appendix E
Curriculum Vitae
Name: Jennifer G. Joseph
Age: 20 years old
Address: Blk 46 Lot 21 Villa Luisa North, Bagumbong, Caloocan City
Birthdate: October 16, 1995
Birthplace: Quezon City
Contact Number: 09358931016
Email Address: jenjoseph1016@gmail.com
Educational Attainment:
Primary Education: St. Therese of Rose School
Secondary Education: St. Therese of Rose School
Tertiary Education: Chinese General Hospital Colleges
Motto:
“Spread love everywhere you go. Let no one ever come to you without leaving happier”
– Mother Teresa

A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.pdf

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.pdf

More from Ashley Smith

Recently uploaded

A Correlational Study of Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Academic Performance among Chinese General Hospital Colleges Students.pdf