Klingsieck (2013): Defining Procrastination
Klingsieck's review synthesised the literature into a working definition: procrastination is the voluntary delay of an intended and necessary or personally important activity, despite expecting negative consequences that outweigh the positives of delaying. The paper also mapped the field's four research perspectives, differential psychology (traits), motivational and volitional psychology, clinical psychology, and situational approaches, and distinguished true procrastination from strategic delay. It is the standard citation for what counts as procrastination.
| Citation | Klingsieck, K. B. (2013). Procrastination: When good things don't come to those who wait. European Psychologist, 18(1), 24–34. |
|---|---|
| Study type | Narrative review and conceptual analysis |
| Key contribution | A seven-criterion working definition separating procrastination from other forms of delay |
| Framework | Four perspectives: differential, motivational/volitional, clinical, situational |
What the review argues
Klingsieck works through the definitional criteria one by one: the delayed activity must be intended, the delay voluntary rather than imposed, the activity necessary or personally important, and the delay must happen despite awareness of likely harm, typically accompanied by subjective discomfort. Delay that fails these tests, waiting for missing information, deliberately scheduling a task for later, prioritising under real constraints, is not procrastination. The review then shows how four research traditions each explain a slice of the phenomenon, from stable traits to task and situation factors.
Why it matters
Loose definitions make procrastination research, and self-diagnosis, mushy. This paper gives a test you can apply to your own delays: if you never intended to do the task today, or postponing it genuinely serves your plans, you are scheduling, not procrastinating. The four-perspective map also explains why advice conflicts: trait researchers reach for self-regulation training, clinicians for therapy, situationists for changing the task, and each is right for a different slice of people.
Caveats
As a conceptual review it presents no new data and no pooled effect sizes, and its definitional criteria, while widely cited, are not universally adopted: researchers still disagree about whether so-called active or arousal procrastination is real procrastination or mislabelled scheduling. The underlying literature it organises leans heavily on student samples and self-report scales, a limitation the review itself notes.
Peer-reviewed review in European Psychologist, the standard modern citation for the definition of procrastination.
Related
Active vs passive procrastinationSteel (2007) meta-analysis
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between procrastination and delay?
All procrastination is delay, but delay only becomes procrastination when it is voluntary, the task was intended and matters, and you expect to be worse off for postponing it. Waiting for a reason, or deliberately rescheduling, is just planning.
Is there an official definition of procrastination?
There is no single official one, but Klingsieck's formulation is the closest thing to a field standard: the voluntary delay of an intended and important activity despite expecting negative consequences that outweigh the benefits of delaying.