Validation of the Procrastination at work scale: A seven-language study

Publication date

2020

Authors

Metin, U.B.ISNI 000000043641431X
Taris, T.W.ORCID 0000-0003-1946-3307ISNI 0000000042649423
Peeters, M.C.W.ISNI 0000000369311213
Korpinen, M.
Smrke , U.
Razum , J.
Pilar, I.
Kolářová, M.
Baykova , R.
Gaioshko, D.

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

Procrastination at work has been examined relatively scarcely, partly due to the lack of a globally validated and context-specific workplace procrastination scale. This study investigates the psychometric characteristics of the Procrastination at Work Scale (PAWS) among 1,028 office employees from seven countries, namely, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. Specifically, it was aimed to test the measurement invariance of the PAWS and explore its discriminant validity by examining its relationships with work engagement and performance. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis shows that the basic factor structure and item loadings of the PAWS are invariant across countries. Furthermore, the two subdimensions of procrastination at work exhibited different patterns of relationships with work engagement and performance. Whereas soldiering was negatively related to work engagement and task performance, cyberslacking was unrelated to engagement and performance. These results indicate further validity evidence for the PAWS and the psychometric characteristics show invariance across various countries/languages. Moreover, workplace procrastination, especially soldiering, is a problematic behavior that shows negative links with work engagement and performance.

Keywords

procrastination at work, work engagement, performance, multi-group analysis, Taverne

Citation

Metin, U B, Taris, T W, Peeters, M C W, Korpinen, M, Smrke , U, Razum , J, Pilar, I, Kolářová, M, Baykova , R & Gaioshko, D 2020, 'Validation of the Procrastination at work scale: A seven-language study', European Journal of Psychological Assessment, vol. 36, pp. 767-776. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000554