Academic Procrastination, Self- Esteem, and Self-Efficacy in First- Term University Students in the City of Lima

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Dennis Arias-Cháveza, Teresa Ramos-Quispeb, Klinge Orlando Villalba- Condoric, Julio E Postigo-Zumaránd, aUniversidad Continental, Arequipa, Perú, ORCID, bUniversidad Nacional de San Agustín de Arequipa, Perú ORCID, cUniversidad Católica de Santa María, Perú, dUniversidad Continental, Arequipa, Perú, Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between academic procrastination and self-esteem and self-efficacy in university students in metropolitan Lima, 2019. The population consisted of 5,800 students, from which a sample of 566 subjects was extracted (283 male, 283 female), aged between 16 and 19 years. The study subjects were selected from the first two terms of 5 universities (4 private and 1 public) in metropolitan Lima. The following instruments were used: The Academic Procrastination Scale (APS), the Specific Perceived Self-efficacy Scale of Academic Situations (SPSSAS) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, the same that evidenced having psychometric properties of reliability (the method of applying internal consistency) and construct validity (an exploratory factor analysis was performed). The results show that there is a relationship between self-esteem and academic procrastination as Spearman’s correlation is -.163, the effect size is 0.4037 and the statistical power is 1.00. While the ratio between procrastination and self-efficacy is -.220, the size of the effect is 0.4690, and the statistical power exceeds 0.80, obtaining the value of 1.00. It is concluded that in both cases there are very weak type correlations. However, the effect size is large and the statistical power is very high.

Key words: Academic procrastination, self-esteem, self-efficacy, higher education.

339

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Introduction

Academic procrastination has been defined as the frequent and intentional delay of tasks or activities by students. This includes non-compliance with schedules, delivery of assignments out of date, and delaying developing work requested by teachers (Cardona, 2015; González- Brignardello & Sánchez, 2013). Several studies have concluded that this phenomenon is directly related to academic performance (Zarick & Stonebraker, 2009), self-efficacy (Alegre, 2013; Soltani, Jamali, Khojasteniam & Dargahi, 2016; Villegas, 2018; Quispe, 2018), and self-esteem (Medina & Tejada, 2015; Babu, Chandra, Mahesh & Amritha, 2019; Tayyaba & Saman, 2015; Brando-Garrido, Montes-Hidalgo, Limonero, Gómez-Romero & Tomás- Sábado, 2019) which evidences a direct involvement with academic life (Domínguez, Villegas & Centeno, 2014).

Procrastination is a product of the combination of various factors or events, among which are the deficit in behavioural self-control, low expectations of achievement, low self-concept, the perception of a task as not being valuable, a lack of self-regulation skills, impulsivity, self- efficacy, self-esteem as well as a temporary reduction of aversive states due to the postponement or avoidance of tasks, among other factors (Angarita, Sánchez & Barreiro, 2010; Steel, Brothen & Wambach, 2001).

Life in the university represents a series of challenges that require the fulfillment of certain academic goals in a short term (Furlan, Ferrero & Gallart, 2014) in order to develop competencies not only as an academic but also a professional. There are significant differences between the activities carried out in the first years versus those carried out in the last. For this reason, procrastination tends to be more recurrent in the latter (Ferrari, Johnson & McCown, 1995). With regard to careers, there is evidence to show that career students related to engineering tend to procrastinate more frequently than students of careers related to social sciences (Vallejos, 2005; Swart, Lombard. & De Jager, 2010).

Self-efficacy is defined as the evaluation carried out by a person of his or her own abilities due to the possibility of action (Carpi & Breva, 1997). It was proposed by Bandura (1997), who affirmed that although this phenomenon does not have a global reach as in the case of self-esteem, self-efficacy is related to the own abilities for the organization and execution of those actions that are necessary to achieve goals or desired results. Along these lines, Bandura defines it as “the beliefs in one’s ability to organize and execute the actions required to handle future situations” (1997, p. 2).

Self-efficacy is considered a determining psychological variable and is strongly predictive of academic performance since it allows measuring not only the process in which a student performs at the university, but also subsequent academic success (Bandura, 1997; Pajares et 340

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

al., 2001). For Bandura (1986) the motivation that a student feels to commit to those activities in which they feel more competent and safer is related to self-efficacy, since their commitment will be reinforced based on what he/she believes can be achieved. That is why it can be said that the higher the sense of competence, the greater the demands, aspirations, and dedication of the students (Bong, 2001; Huertas, 1997).

A student who has high expectations of self-efficacy will enjoy greater academic motivation. Over time, this will lead him/her to obtain better results, since he/she will be able to effectively self-regulate his/her learning, showing great intrinsic motivation during it (González & Tourón, 1992). In this sense, the greater the expectation of self-efficacy, the greater the motivation and performance of the students when performing learning tasks. Whatever the objective of strengthening education, it should focus on increasing the feelings of self-worth and competence of students. If this is achieved, self-esteem and self-concept will be strengthened, which are important aspects for the development of motivation towards achievement, interpersonal relationships and, in general, a way of coping with various tasks and challenges that arise (Bandura, 1987; Roa, 1990).

Self-esteem, defined as a structured and volatile group of perceptions that the subject has of him/herself (Rogers, 1991), and is considered by some authors as a critical factor since it has a negative impact on the psychological and social aspect of the person. In this sense, Garaigordobil (2008) states that if there are low levels of self-esteem, the presence of psychopathological symptoms such as anxiety, depressive symptoms, suicidal tendencies, among others, will be promoted. University life requires developing skills that allow the student to face new situations. These abilities are related to cognitive and motivational factors which will have an impact on academic success. Achieving success implies that students can adapt to their environment which is constantly changing in order to cope with the challenges they are faced with.

Coopersmith (1990) states that self-esteem is composed of three fundamental factors. The first, called general self-esteem, is related to the overall appreciation a person feels. The second, called volatile self-esteem, is one that depends on sex, age, and other defining features. The third, called evaluative self-esteem, results from the process in which the person evaluates their performance, attitudes and qualities according to their moral. With regard to its dimensions, self-esteem is composed of: a) itself (the subject’s own confidence in achieving his/her goals and abilities), b) social peers (measures the subject’s relationship with their social environment), c) home and parents (measures the subject’s ability to interact with their parents and their household members), and d) university (it measures the subject’s ability to assimilate knowledge, assume academic responsibilities, etc.).

341

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Self-esteem and self-efficacy are concepts that are related to each other. The first one consists in the personal self-assessment of the individual, while the second arises from the perception that an individual has about his/her ability to achieve something. In this sense, the feeling of self-efficacy will influence the degree of involvement and persistence of an individual to complete a task, with the consequent influence on their self-esteem (Reina, Oliva & Parra, 2010). Being a university student involves a series of difficulties that often hinder the successful development of the professional career. Low levels of self-esteem and self- efficacy will generate the beginning and persistence of a student before a task, job or learning activity, that is, it will promote procrastination (Alegre, 2013; Arias-Chávez et al., 2020).

The present study focuses on determining to what extent procrastination is related to self- efficacy and self-esteem to provide relevant data in order to help and improve the learning and professional development processes of students.

Objective

To determine the relationships between academic procrastination and self-esteem and self- efficacy in of first terms university students in the city of Lima, 2019.

Materials and Method

The population composition was 5,800 students, of which a sample of 566 subjects (283 male, 283 female) was extracted aged between 16 and 19 years (average of 17.89 and standard deviation of 1.50). The subjects were chosen from the first two terms of 5 universities from metropolitan Lima: 4 private and 1 public. For the selection, an incidental non-probabilistic procedure was used.

Regarding the data collection instruments used, these were: a) The Specific Perceived Self-Efficacy Scale of Academic Situations (SPSSAS), designed by Palenzuela (1983), measures the overall appreciation of competence in the academic field. This scale consists of 10 items, which were originally answered using a ten-point scale. However, later studies in which this instrument was adapted have used it on scales of six and four alternatives. In the present study, the scale of four alternatives was used (where 1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 3 = quite a few times, and 4 = always) since it has psychometric studies that support it, which were carried out in the Peruvian student population (Domínguez, Villegas, Yauri, Mattos & Ramírez, 2012). b) The Academic Procrastination Scale (APS) designed by Busko (1998). This scale stands out for its brevity (12 items) and its structure. The APS (originally with 16 items), was built 342

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

to be used with university students. Álvarez-Blas (2010) translated its content into the Spanish spoken in Peru, and was used in a Lima school population. In both the Álvarez-Blas (2010) and Busko (1998) studies, academic procrastination (AP) is considered as one- dimensional.

c) The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. In the 1960s, Rosenberg developed a scale of 10 items to measure self-esteem (Rosenberg, 1989). The scale was developed on the basis of 5,024 data extracted from adolescents from American schools. Ten items focused on feelings of respect and self-acceptance were included. Half of the items are stated positively and the other half negatively to control the effect of self-administered acquiescence. For this study, the version of the scale translated and validated in Spanish by Atienza, Moreno & Balaguer (2000) was used. Each item is valued as follows: from items 1 to 5, the answers from A to Dare scored from 4 to 1. From items 6 to 10, the answers from A to D are scored from 1 to 4.

Design

This is a correlational investigation as it aims to measure the relationship between procrastination and self-esteem and self-efficacy. It is also a cross-sectional or transactional study because the information analysed is given in a unique moment.

The instruments were applied collectively to each sample in the classrooms of the five chosen universities. The application time did not exceed 15 minutes in total since the instruments are very short and simple to apply. Participation in the research was promoted by professors who teach courses in the first term of the chosen universities. Prior to this activity, the corresponding permits were requested and personalized training was carried out in order to guarantee the correct collection of the data. Before starting the process, a brief presentation was made to the students about the purpose of the study and the characteristics of the instruments. The students, after requesting their authorization orally, completed this task without any academic or monetary pressure.

Results

Psychometric Analysis Self-Efficacy Scale

The psychometric analysis of the Self-Efficacy Scale (see Table 1) concludes that the items have homogeneity indices ranging from .324 (item 9) to .711 (item 5), these being significant exceeded the minimum values established by the Kline criterion (2000) of 0.20. It can therefore be affirmed that the items of the self-efficacy scale have correct homogeneity indices. The reliability coefficient was obtained using the internal consistency method, 343

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

calculating a Cronbach’s alpha of .880 based on the 10 items on the scale. After the evaluation process, it was concluded that the Self-Efficacy Scale has high reliability.

Table 1: Reliability of the Self-efficacy Scale M SD ritc I consider myself qualified enough to successfully face any 2,82 ,719 ,671 academic task I think I have enough capacity to understand a subject well and 2,82 ,714 ,662 quickly I feel confident to address situations that test my academic ability 2,82 ,744 ,707 I have the conviction that I can take excellent exams 2,85 ,753 ,684 I believe that I am a quite qualified and competent person in my 2,88 ,731 ,711 academic life I don’t care if the teachers are demanding and hard, because I trust 2,59 ,808 ,534 a lot in my own academic capacity If I set my mind, I think I have enough capacity to get a good 3,22 ,699 ,537 academic record I think I can pass the courses quite easily, and even get good grades 2,75 ,741 ,626

I am one of those people who does not need to study to pass a 2,15 ,836 ,324 written exam or a full course I think I am prepared and quite qualified to achieve many academic 2,91 ,755 ,668 successes Note: n = 576, ritc = Corrected item-test correlations.

Regarding the construct validity of the Scale (see table 2), it was obtained through exploratory factor analysis. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index was .913, demonstrating this value that the instrument has explanatory potential, while Bartlett’s sphericity test is significant because it is the Chi-square of 2452.004 and the p = 0.00 being lower than p < .05, demonstrating that it is pertinent to perform a factor analysis with the resulting data. Finally, the exploratory factor analysis through the principal component method establishes the conformation of a single factor that explains 49.80% of the total variance. This allows the researchers to conclude that the Self-efficacy Scale has an optimal construct validity.

344

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Table 2: Construct validity of the Self-efficacy Scale through exploratory factor analysis Component 1 I consider myself qualified enough to face any academic task successfully ,770 I think I have enough capacity to understand a subject well and quickly ,742 I feel confident to address situations that test my academic ability ,788 I have the conviction that I can take excellent exams ,767 I believe that I am a quite qualified and competent person in my academic ,800 life I don’t care if the teachers are demanding and hard, because I trust a lot in ,612 my own academic capacity If I set my mind, I think I have enough capacity to get a good academic ,642 record I think I can pass the courses quite easily, and even get good grades ,692 I am one of those people who does not need to study to pass a written exam ,386 or a full course I think I am prepared and quite qualified to achieve many academic ,759 successes Extraction method: principal component analysis. Note: 1 component removed.

Variance explained 49.83%, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sample adequacy measure = .913, Bartlett Chi-square sphericity test = 2452.004 G.L. = 45 p = .0000. n = 573

Academic Procrastination Scale

The reliability of the items of the Academic Procrastination Scale (see Table 3) was evaluated using the internal consistency method. This was achieved by obtaining a Cronbach’s alpha value of .819 for the 12 items. In addition, homogeneity indices were obtained ranging from .272 (item 4) to .623 (item 10), being greater than the criteria of Kline (2000). Therefore, it can be concluded that the Academic Procrastination Scale is reliable.

345

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Table 3: Reliability of the Academic Procrastination Scale M SD ritc When I have to do a homework, I usually leave it for the last 3,04 ,846 ,575 minute I usually prepare in advance for exams 2,72 ,890 ,606 When I have trouble understanding something, I immediately try 2,44 ,913 ,415 to get help I attend classes regularly 1,47 ,913 ,272 I try to complete the assigned work as soon as possible 2,37 ,800 ,564 I postpone the work of the courses that I don’t like 2,97 ,949 ,572 I postpone the readings of the courses that I don’t like 3,10 ,974 ,570 I constantly try to improve my study habits 2,24 ,868 ,503 I invest the necessary time to study even when the subject is 2,66 ,911 ,623 boring I try to motivate myself to keep my pace of study 2,20 ,912 ,527 I try to finish my important work with time to spare 2,51 ,868 ,599 I take the time to review my assignments before submitting them 2,69 1,216 ,479 Note: n = 712, ritc = Corrected item-test correlations.

Regarding the construct validity of the Scale (see Table 4), it was evaluated through exploratory factor analysis. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index obtained a value of .856, highlighting its adequate explanatory potential. In addition, Bartlett’s sphericity test is significant, being the Chi-square of 2088.968 and p < .05. The exploratory factor analysis, which used the principal components method, concludes that the scale is two-dimensional, since two factors arise that explain 47.759% of the total variance obtaining factor saturations between .850 (item 6) and. 252 (item 12). Therefore, it can be concluded that the Academic Procrastination Scale has a construct validity.

Table 4: Validity of the Academic Procrastination Scale construct through exploratory factor analysis Component 1 2 When I have to do a homework, I usually leave it for the last minute ,744 ,181 I usually prepare in advance for exams ,548 ,453 I postpone the work of the courses that I don’t like ,850 ,078 I try to complete the assigned work as soon as posible ,498 ,363 I postpone the readings of the courses that I don’t like ,833 ,089 When I have trouble understanding something, I immediately try to get help ,271 ,448 I attend classes regularly -,127 ,635

346

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

I constantly try to improve my study habits ,173 ,673 I invest the necessary time to study even when the subject is boring ,456 ,582 I try to motivate myself to keep my pace of study ,184 ,735 I try to finish my important work with time to spare ,412 ,519 I take the time to review my assignments before submitting them ,097 ,252 Note: Extraction method: principal component analysis. Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization. a. The rotation converged in 3 iterations.

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

The reliability of the items of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (see Table 5) was evaluated using the internal consistency method, obtaining a Cronbach’s alpha value of .877 for the 10 items also having homogeneity indices ranging from .250 (item 8) to .730 (item 3), being greater than the criteria of Kline (2000). Therefore, it can be concluded that the Self-Esteem Scale is reliable.

Table 5: Reliability of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale M SD ritc I feel like I’m a worthy person, at least to the same extent as the 3,47 ,643 ,524 others I think I have a good number of qualities 3,24 ,653 ,625 In general I am prone to think that I am a failure 3,19 ,718 ,730 I’m able to do things as well as most people 3,25 ,628 ,587 I feel like I don’t have much reason to be proud of myself 3,03 ,817 ,573 I have a positive attitude towards myself 3,18 ,680 ,696 In general, I am satisfied with myself 3,05 ,683 ,706 I wish I valued myself more 1,92 ,837 ,250 Sometimes I feel really useless 2,96 ,856 ,721 Sometimes I think I'm not good at anything 3,13 ,825 ,700 Note: n = 712, ritc = Corrected item-test correlations.

Additionally, the construct validity of the Scale (see Table 6) was evaluated through exploratory factor analysis. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index obtained a value of .900, highlighting its adequate explanatory potential. In addition, Bartlett’s sphericity test is significant, being the Chi-square of 2649.006 and p <.05. The exploratory factor analysis using the principal components method concludes that the scale is two-dimensional, since two factors arise that explain 61.330% of the total variance obtaining factor saturations between .789 (item 1) and .505 (item 5 ). Therefore, it can be concluded that the Self-Esteem Scale has a construct validity.

347

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Table 6: Validity of the Self-Esteem Scale construct through exploratory factor analysis Component 1 2 2. I think I have a good number of qualities ,789 ,205 1. I feel like I’m a worthy person, at least to the same extent as the others ,771 4. I’m able to do things as well as most people ,746 ,206 6. I have a positive attitude towards myself ,557 ,544 8. I wish I valued myself more -,263 ,747 9. Sometimes I feel really useless ,411 ,721 10. Sometimes I think I'm not good at anything ,467 ,642 7. In general, I am satisfied with myself ,506 ,606 3. In general I am prone to think that I am a failure ,534 ,603 5. I feel like I don’t have much reason to be proud of myself ,430 ,505

Note: Extraction method: principal component analysis. Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization. a. The rotation converged in 3 iterations.

Descriptive Analysis

When analysing the goodness of fit to the normal curve by means of the Kolmogorov- Smirnov test (see Table 7), statistics were obtained with high and significant value for the self-esteem, self-efficacy and academic procrastination scales, concluding that the scales have a remote distribution than normal. Therefore, a statistical analysis of the non-parametric data was performed.

Table 7: Analysis of goodness of fit to the normal Kolmogorov-Smirnov curve Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic gl Sig. Self-esteem ,101 573 ,000 Self-efficacy ,076 573 ,000 Procrastination ,047 573 ,005

Hypothesis Testing

The hypothesis states that there is a significant and inverse relationship between self-efficacy and academic procrastination in first-term university students in Lima. The contrast was performed through the Spearman correlation coefficient.

348

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Table 8 shows the existence of a relationship between self-efficacy and academic procrastination. The correlation is -.220. The effect size is large, being 0.4690, the correlation also being validated and showing that it is relevant and important. As for the statistical power, the values are higher than 0.80, obtaining the value of 1.00, and these results can be generalized to the entire population of university students in the city of Lima.

Table 8: Correlation of the variables self-efficacy and academic procrastination Academic procrastination Self-efficacy Spearman’s rho -0.220** Sig. (bilateral) 0.0000 P 0.4690 1-β 1.0000 N 573 Note: ** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tails).

Therefore, the hypothesis proposed for this research is accepted as there is a significant and negative relationship between self-efficacy and academic procrastination, although the relationship between the two variables is not very high.

Regarding self-esteem and procrastination, the hypothesis states that there is a significant and inverse relationship between self-esteem and academic procrastination in first-term university students in Lima. The contrast was performed in the same way, through the Spearman correlation coefficient.

Table 9 shows that there is an inverse relationship between self-esteem and academic procrastination. The correlation is -.163. The effect size is large, being 0.4037, the correlation also being validated and showing that it is relevant and important. As for the statistical power, the values exceed 0.80, obtaining the value of 1.00, and these results can be generalized to the entire population of university students in the city of Lima.

Table 9: Correlation of the variables Self-esteem and Academic procrastination

Academic procrastination Self-esteem Spearman’s rho -0.163** Sig. (bilateral) 0.0000 p 0.4037 1-β 1.0000 N 573 Note: ** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tails). 349

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Therefore, the hypothesis proposed for this research is accepted, since there is a significant and negative relationship between self-esteem and academic procrastination, although the relationship between both variables is low.

Discussion

Regarding the general objective of this study, for cases of academic self-efficacy and procrastination and academic self-esteem and procrastination, in both groups there are very weak correlations. However, the effect size is large and the statistical power is very high. The result obtained leads the researchers to accept the expected hypothesis for the present study. It also shows that there is a relationship between self-esteem and academic procrastination. Spearman’s correlation is -.163. The effect size is 0.4037. The statistical power is 1.00, and these results can be generalized to the entire population of university students in the city of Lima.

This is corroborated by the research of Medina & Tejada (2015), who, with a sample of 407 university students, conclude that there is a significant inverse correlation between academic procrastination and self-esteem. Therefore, their research affirms that at higher levels of self- esteem there are lower levels of academic procrastination, and at lower levels of self-esteem there are higher levels of academic procrastination. For his part, Dueñas (2018) concludes that there is no correlation between the self-regulation variables of academic procrastination and personal self-esteem in a sample of 130 fifth-term university of students from the Arequipa, Peru.

On the other hand, Bhaman, Fahimeh & Gholamreza (2013) conclude in their study on academic procrastination and their relationship with self-esteem and satisfaction of life that self-esteem represents 12.6% of the variance of academic procrastination (Beta = .29, p < .001). In India, Babu, Chandra, Mahesh, and Amritha (2019), in their study on the relationship between academic procrastination and self-esteem among Dentistry students in the city of Bengaluru, stated the existence of a significant weak positive correlation (r = 0.25, p < 0.001) between academic procrastination scores and self-esteem scores. Finally, in a study conducted in Pakistani students, Tayyaba and Saman (2015) concluded that there is a significant negative correlation r = -0.067 between procrastination and self-esteem in university students and also a negative correlation between age and procrastination.

Regarding the relationship between procrastination and self-efficacy, the result obtained leads to accept the hypothesis expected for the present study. The correlation is -.220. The effect size is large, being 0.4690. As for the statistical power, the values exceed 0.80, obtaining the value of 1.00, and these results can be generalized to the entire population of university students in the city of Lima. 350

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

This is corroborated by Alegre (2013) who states that self-efficacy and academic procrastination have a low, negative (r = -.234) and significant correlation (p = .000), the statistical power being high (power = .95). For his part, Bustos (2017) disagrees since it shows in his results a direct and highly significant correlation (p < .01) between self-efficacy and academic procrastination.

Soltani, Jamali, Khojasteniam & Dargahi (2016) corroborate the importance of self-efficacy and the capacity for psychological recovery to determine the academic procrastination of students. Therefore, providing training based on learning self-efficacy skills and psychological recovery capacity in academic settings will lead to a reduction in academic procrastination and, in conclusion, to better academic performance among students.

Villegas (2018), in his study on procrastination and academic self-efficacy in secondary school students of the Simón Bolívar College in Tarapoto (Peru), obtained a Spearman's correlation coefficient which demonstrates that there is a significant inverse correlation between academic procrastination and self-efficacy (r = -, 350 **, p = 0.00). This means that the greater the academic procrastination, the less self-efficacy will be in the students in the 4th and 5th grade of secondary school. Finally, Quispe (2018) disagrees with the result obtained by Villegas, noting that the levels of perceived self-efficacy are significantly related to the frequency of academic procrastination of the students.

The results are consistent with the theoretical basis, confirming the results of Nader’s (2014) study on the relationship between self-efficacy, self-esteem and procrastination in Iranian students of undergraduate Psychology, This led Nader (2014) to the conclusion that the relationship of procrastination with self-esteem and self-efficacy was significant. The results showed the acceptance of the complete mediator model of self-esteem compared to alternative models. It also highlights the study of Flett, Russo & Hewitt (1994) on the dimensions of perfectionism and constructive thinking as a coping response, who investigate that self-esteem is likely to influence procrastination. The mediation model suggests that procrastinators suffer from low self-efficacy resulting in a general tendency to engage in behaviours such as delay and avoidance of tasks, that protect his/her personal and social image by providing an excuse for poor performance and negative outcomes. Therefore, counsellors and educators should focus on the level of self-esteem of the procrastinators, in addition to their levels of self-efficacy. It can be said that helping students reinforce self- efficacy can reduce postponement trends. However, the findings indicated that the intervention could be more effective if students are helped to raise their levels of self-esteem. Therefore, it is advisable to develop the sense of effectiveness and self-esteem of university students to prevent academic procrastination and therefore have repercussions that generate attrition.

351

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

It is important to remember the research by Tice & Baumeister (1997) which described procrastination as a type of “self-destructive behaviour because it apparently leads to stress, disease, and poor performance”. These authors discovered that procrastinators can enjoy lower levels of stress when they postpone things compared to non-procrastinators. However, their stress could affect them with a redoubled force in the long term as they face the consequences of not having completed their tasks on time. This, in turn, isvery harmful to their health.

352

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

REFERENCES

Alegre, A. A. (2013). Autoeficacia y procrastinación académica en estudiantes universitarios de Lima Metropolitana. Propósitos y Representaciones, 1(2), 57-82. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.20511/pyr2013.v1n2.29

Álvarez-Blas, O. (2010). Procrastinación general y académica en una muestra estudiantes de secundaria de Lima. Persona, 13, 159- 177

Angarita, D., Sánchez, A., & Barreiro, E. (2010). Relación entre los niveles y tipos de procrastinación académica y el rendimiento académico en estudiantes de psicología de la Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz, Bogotá. Colombia.

Arias-Chávez, D., Ramos-Quispe, T., Villalba-Condori, K., & Cangalaya-Sevillano, L. (2020). Self-efficacy and academic procrastination: Study conducted in university students of Metropolitan Lima. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Atienza, F. L., Moreno, Y., & Balaguer, I. (2000). Análisis de la dimensionalidad de la Escala de Autoestima de Rosenberg en una muestra de adolescentes valencianos. Revista de Psicología. Universitas Tarraconensis, 23(2), 29-42.

Babu P., Chandra K. M., Vanishree M. K., & Amritha N. (2019). Relationship between academic procrastination and self-esteem among dental students in Bengaluru City. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent,17, 146-151

Bandura, A. (1986). Bases sociales de pensamiento y de acción: la teoría cognitiva social. Englewood cliffs: Prentice-hall.

Bandura, A. (1987). Pensamiento y acción: fundamentos sociales. Barcelona: Martínez Roca, S.A.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy. The exercise of control. New Jersey: Freeman

Bhaman, T., Fahimeh, Z. & Gholamreza, M. (2013). Academic Procrastination and its Relationship with Self-Esteem and Life Satisfaction. International Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 87-104.

Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and taskvalue in predicting college students course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 553-570.

353

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Brando-Garrido, C., Montes-Hidalgo, J., Limonero, J., Gómez-Romero, M.; & Tomás- Sábado, J. (2019). Relación de la procrastinación académica con la competencia percibida, el afrontamiento, la autoestima y la autoeficacia en estudiantes de enfermería. Enfermería Clínica, 29(6). doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2019.07.012

Busko, D. A. (1998). Causes and consequences of perfectionism and procrastination: A structural equation model (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). The University of Guelph, Canada.

Bustos, K. (2017). Autoeficacia y procrastinación académica en ingresantes de una Universidad Privada de Trujillo (Thesis). Retrieved from http://repositorio.upn.edu.pe/handle/11537/12102

Cardona, L. (2015). Relaciones entre procrastinación académica y estrés académico en estudiantes universitarios (Thesis). Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín: Colombia.

Carpi, A. & Breva, A. (1997). La predicción de la conducta a través de los constructos que integran la teoría de acción planeada. Revista Electrónica de Motivación y Emoción, 4(7). Recovered from http://www.reme.uiis.es/articulos/abreva7191302101/texto.html.

Coopersmith, S. (1990). SEI: Self-Esteem-Inventories. Palo Alto Consulting Psychologists Press.

Domínguez, S, Villegas G, Yauri C, Mattos E, & Ramírez F. (2012). Propiedades psicométricas de una escala de autoeficacia para situaciones académicas en estudiantes universitarios peruanos. Revista de Psicología, 2(1):27-39.

Domínguez, S., Villegas, G. & Centeno, S. (2014). Procrastinación académica: validación de una escala en una muestra de estudiantes de una universidad privada. LIBERABIT, 20(2), 293-304.

Dueñas, J. (2018). Correlación entre procrastinación y autoestima personal en estudiantes del quinto de secundaria de la I.E. (J.E.C.) San Martín de Socabaya – Arequipa (Thesis). Retrieved from http://repositorio.uigv.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.11818/3080/TESIS_Javier%20A gusto%20Due%C3%B1as%20Torres.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

Ferrari, J., Johnson, J. & McCown, W. (1995). Procrastination and task avoidance. Theory, research and treatment. New York, LLC. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899- 0227-6

Flett, G. L., Russo, F. A., & Hewitt, P. L. (1994). Dimensions of perfectionism and constructive thinking as a coping response. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive- Behaviour Therapy, 12(3), 163-179. 354

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Furlan, L., Ferrero, M. & Gallart, G. (2014). Ansiedad ante los exámenes, Procrastinación y Síntomas Mentales en Estudiantes Universitarios. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 6(3), 31-39. Retrieved from https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/racc/article/view/8726/Furlan

Garaigordobil, M. (2018). Bullying y cyberbullying: análisis y directrices para su prevención e intervención’. Retrieved from http://epce.blogs.uoc.edu/es/2018/02/15/maite- garaigordobil-bullying-yciberbullying-son-problema-salud-publica/

González, M. & Tourón, J. (1992). Autoconcepto y rendimiento escolar: sus implicaciones en la motivación y en la autorregulación del aprendizaje. Pamplona: Ediciones de la Universidad de Navarra.

González-Brignardello, M. P. & Sánchez-Elvira-Paniagua, A. (2013). ¿Puede amortiguar el engagement los efectos nocivos de la procrastinación académica? Acción Psicológica, 10(1), 117-134. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ap.10.1.7039

Haldorai and U. Kandaswamy (2019), “Supervised Machine Learning Techniques in Intelligent Network Handovers,” EAI/Springer Innovations in Communication and Computing, pp. 135–154. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15416-5_7

Huertas, J. (1997). Motivación. Querer aprender. Buenos Aires: Aique.

Kline, P. (2000). The handbook of psychological testing (2.a ed.). Londres: Routledge.

Medina, M. & Tejada, M. (2015). La autoestima y procrastinación académica en jóvenes universitarios (Thesis). Retrieved from https://tesis.ucsm.edu.pe/repositorio/bitstream/handle/UCSM/3518/76.0263.PS.pdf?seq uence=1&isAllowed=y

Nader, H. (2014). Relationships Between Self-Efficacy, Self-Esteem and Procrastination in Undergraduate Psychology Students. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci, 8(3), 42–49.

Palenzuela, D. (1983). Construcción y validación de una escala de autoeficacia percibida específica de situaciones académicas. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta, 9(21), 185- 219.

Quispe, G. (2018). Niveles de autoeficacia percibida y frecuencia de procrastinación académica en estudiantes de secundaria de la I.E. N.o 1263 (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from http://www.repositorioacademico.usmp.edu.pe/bitstream/usmp/3538/1/quispe_agi.pdf

355

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Reina, M.a C., Oliva, A. y Parra, A. (2010). Percepciones de autoevaluación: autoestima, autoeficacia y satisfacción vital en la adolescencia. Psychology, Society & Education, 1(2), 55-69.

Roa, M. (1990). La valoración del sí mismo. Santiago de Chile: Patris.

Rogers, K. (1991). El proceso de convertirse en persona: México: Ed. Paidós.

Rosenberg, M. (1989). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Edición revisada. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

S. Suman Rajest; Dr. P. Suresh, International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology, “The Postwar Novel as Postmodern: Billy Pilgrim’s Imagination and the Critical Tendency towards Teleology, Slaughterhouse – Five” ISSN: 2454-132X.

Soltani Z, Jamali N, Khojasteniam A, & Dargahi, S. (2016). Role of Self- Efficacy and Psychological Resiliency in Academic Procrastination of Students. Educ Strategy Med Sci, 9(4) :277-284

Steel, P., Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2001). Procrastination and personality, performance, and mood. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 95-106

Swart, A. J., Lombard, K. & de Jager, H. (2010) Exploring the relationship between time management skills and the academic achievement of African engineering students – a case study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(1), 79-89. doi: 10.1080/03043790903480316

Tayyaba, N. & Saman, I. (2015). Relationship between Procrastination & Self Esteem among Male & Female University Students. European Academic Research, 3(2). Recovered from http://euacademic.org/UploadArticle/1679.pdf 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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00460.x

Vallejos, S. R. (2015). Procrastinación académica y ansiedad frente a las evaluaciones en estudiantes universitarios (Thesis). Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima.

Villegas, M. (2018). Procrastinación y autoeficacia académica en los estudiantes del nivel secundario del Colegio Simón Bolívar de Tarapoto, 2018 (Thesis). Retrieved from http://repositorio.ucv.edu.pe/handle/UCV/25462

356

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 11, Issue 10, 2020

Zarick, L. & Stonebraker, R. (2009). I’ll do it tomorrow: The logic of procrastination. College Teaching, 57(4), 211-215.

357