Investigation of Academic Procrastination Prevalence and Its Relationship with Academic Self-Regulation and Achievement Motivation among High-School Students in Tehran City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was carried out with the aim of Investigation of academic procrastination prevalence and its relationship with academic self-regulation and achievement motivation among high-school students in Tehran city. The sample included 624 high school students (312 Boys & 312 Girls) from different areas and regions that selected using random cluster-multistage sampling method. Procrastination Assessment Scale-Student (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), Self-Regulated Learning Strategies questionnaire (Zimmerman & Pons, 1982) and Achievement motivation test (Hermans, 1970) were used in this study. Data were analyzed in two parts, descriptive and inferential statistics. The results of academic procrastination prevalence using descriptive statistic showed that over half of students nearly always or always procrastinate. Also, results showed that boys and girls procrastinate with the same rate, in general. And boys more than girls procrastinate only on preparing academic tasks. The result of regression analysis also showed that academic self-regulation and achievement motivation predict academic procrastination significantly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".