Tice & Baumeister (1997): The Costs of Procrastination
Tice and Baumeister tracked students across a semester and found that procrastinators enjoyed lower stress and less illness early on, while deadlines were still distant, but by the end of term they reported more stress, more illness symptoms and earned lower grades than non-procrastinators. Summed across the semester, the costs outweighed the early benefits. It is the classic evidence that procrastination is a self-defeating trade of long-term wellbeing for short-term relief.
| Citation | Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance, stress, and health: The costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychological Science, 8(6), 454–458. |
|---|---|
| Study type | Longitudinal study across an academic semester, two studies |
| Key finding | Procrastinators had less stress and illness early in the term, but more stress, more illness and lower grades by the end |
| Net effect | Total costs exceeded the early benefits; procrastination was self-defeating overall |
What the study found
Students completing a health psychology course were scored on trait procrastination, then followed through the semester with symptom checklists, stress reports and eventual grades. Early in the term the procrastinators were actually better off: less stress and fewer illness symptoms while their non-procrastinating peers were already grinding. The pattern reversed late in the term, when procrastinators reported more stress and more symptoms, and their papers and exams came in with lower marks. Adding the two periods together, procrastinators lost on health and on performance.
Why it matters
The study explains why procrastination survives despite its reputation: it genuinely pays off at first. The relief is real and immediate while the costs are distant, which is exactly the reward structure that temporal discounting punishes us with. It also gives an honest answer to 'I work better under pressure': in this data, work produced under end-of-term pressure was graded worse, not better.
Caveats
Both studies used student samples in a single course context, health and stress were self-reported, and trait procrastination was measured rather than manipulated, so third variables such as conscientiousness could contribute to both procrastination and outcomes. A 2015 replication attempt found the performance cost but a murkier stress pattern, so treat the exact health timeline as suggestive rather than settled.
Peer-reviewed longitudinal study in Psychological Science, among the most cited empirical papers on procrastination outcomes.
Related
Steel (2007) meta-analysisTemporal discounting
Frequently asked questions
Do people really work better under pressure?
Not in this study: procrastinators' end-of-term work received lower grades on average, alongside more stress and illness. The feeling of productivity under deadline pressure is mostly the contrast with earlier avoidance, not evidence of better output.
Is procrastination actually bad for your health?
This study found more self-reported stress and illness symptoms in procrastinators by semester's end, and later work by Sirois links chronic procrastination to worse health behaviours and higher stress. The evidence is consistent but largely correlational, so no one can promise specific health outcomes either way.