ArticleBMC psychology2026
Lower metacognitive abilities predict procrastination: a cross-sectional study of a healthy adult sample.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProcrastination, the tendency to delay tasks despite negative consequences, is a widespread issue linked to poor mental health and reduced daily functioning. While often attributed to self-regulation failures, the specific cognitive mechanisms underlying procrastination remain unclear. This study investigates the role of executive functions (EF), measured through both self-report and performance-based tests, in predicting procrastination in adults.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with 108 adults (22–65 years) using the Irrational Procrastination Scale (IPS) to measure procrastination. EF was assessed using the self-report measure Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult version (BRIEF-A), which includes nine subscales organized in three factors (Behavior Regulation, Emotional Regulation, and Metacognition), and five performance-based tests assessing inhibition, working memory, cognitive flexibility, verbal fluency, and problem solving. Conscientiousness, neuroticism, depression, and rumination were included as covariates in a hierarchical multiple regression analysis.
resultsPerformance-based EF tests showed that participants performed within the normal to high average range across measures, indicating no clinically significant executive impairments. The BRIEF-A T-scores also reflected average executive functioning across all subscales. However, slightly elevated scores were observed on the Initiate and Working Memory subscales. The BRIEF-A metacognitive factor predicted procrastination best, in particular the Initiate subscale. Conscientiousness and age were also significant predictors, and the final model explained 55% of the variance. Self-reported problems on indices for Emotional and Behavior regulation correlated significantly positively with procrastination, but rendered non-significant when included together with the meta-cognitive index in a regression model. Performance-based EF tests showed no significant associations with procrastination.
conclusionsThe findings highlight the importance of metacognitive abilities in understanding procrastination, particularly problems with task initiation. The lack of association with performance-based EF tests underscores the need for real-world measures of EF in procrastination research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.