Lindsey W. Vilca- South American Center for Education and Research in Public Health, Universidad Norbert Wiener, Lima, Peru
The objective of the study was to determine if sex plays a moderating role in the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination in 106 university students of both genders (28.3% male and 71.7% female) between the ages of 18 and 30 years (M = 19.7; SD = 2.7). The Academic Procrastination Scale and the Neuropsychological Battery of Executive Functions and Frontal Lobes (BANFE-2) were used to measure the variables. The results of the study showed that the degree of prediction of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex (involves the orbitofrontal cortex [OFC] and the medial prefrontal cortex [mPFC]) on academic procrastination is significantly moderated by the sex of the university students (β3 = 0.53; p < 0.01). For men, the estimated effect of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex on the degree of academic procrastination is −0.81. For women, the estimated effect of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex on the degree of academic procrastination is −0.28. In addition, it was shown that sex does not play a moderating role in the relationship between the tasks linked to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and academic procrastination (β3 = 0.12; p > 0.05). It was also determined that sex does not play a moderating role in the relationship between the tasks linked to the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC) and academic procrastination (β3 = 0.05; p > 0.05). It is concluded that only the executive functions associated with the orbitomedial cortex are moderated by the sex of the university students, where the impact of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex on academic procrastination in men is significantly greater than in women.
Introduction
In the university context, one of the most recurrent problems is academic procrastination where the student delays the development of their academic occupations voluntarily, usually doing it at the last minute (Steel et al., 2018). This construct can be defined as the voluntary delay of a planned, necessary and important activity, despite expecting possible negative consequences that outweigh the positive consequences of the delay (Steel, 2007; Klingsieck, 2013). In addition, this voluntary delay implies carrying out an alternative activity to the intended one and, therefore, is not synonymous with inactivity (H. C. Schouwenburg, 2004). Klingsieck (2013) raises seven characteristics of procrastination: (a) an intentional activity is delayed, (b) it is intended to start or end an activity, (c) The activity is necessary and of personal importance, (d) the delay is voluntary, (f) the delay is unnecessary, (g) the delay is made despite the negative consequences of the delay, and (h) the delay is accompanied by subjective discomfort or other negative consequences.
Several studies have shown that academic procrastination is present in all cultures, at all academic levels, and between genders (Steel, 2007; Klassen et al., 2008, 2010; Özer and Ferrari, 2011). In Turkey, a study on 784 university students showed that 52% frequently procrastinate (Özer et al., 2009). In China, a study of 1,184 university students reported that 74.1% procrastinate in at least one academic activity (Zhang et al., 2018). In Mexico, a study carried out on 521 psychology students from a public university showed that 57.9% have moderate academic procrastination (Chávez and Morales, 2017). In Peru, a study conducted on 517 psychology students from a private university showed that 14.1% have a high level of academic procrastination (Dominguez-Lara, 2017). The differences observed in the prevalence of academic procrastination could be explained by the sample size, the type of instrument used, and the methodology used to collect the data.
Regarding sexual differences in academic procrastination, there is an extensive discussion in the scientific literature due to the heterogeneity of the findings found in the different studies. Thus, several studies have found that there are significant differences between men and women in the level of academic procrastination (Özer et al., 2009; Steel and Ferrari, 2013; Mandap, 2016; Balkis and Duru, 2017). For example, a study conducted in Turkey on 441 university students found that men have higher levels of academic procrastination than women (Balkis and Duru, 2017). Another study in the Philippines with 200 university students showed that men procrastinate more than women (Mandap, 2016). Similarly, another study conducted in Turkey on 2,784 university students reported that men procrastinate more often than women (Özer et al., 2009). Another study on 16,413 English-speaking people showed that men are more likely to procrastinate (Steel and Ferrari, 2013).
However, other studies have not found significant differences between men and women (Sepehrian and Lotf, 2011; Zhou, 2020; Amoke et al., 2021). For example, a study conducted in China on 251 university students found no sex differences in academic procrastination (Zhou, 2020). Another study in Iran on 310 university students reported no significant differences between men and women in academic procrastination (Sepehrian and Lotf, 2011). Similarly, another study conducted in Nigeria on 804 people showed that gender does not significantly affect academic procrastination (Amoke et al., 2021). The heterogeneity of the results could be associated with methodological factors such as the size of the sample, the type of sampling used, and the measurement approach used. It could also be associated with cultural aspects.
That said, it was found that academic procrastination negatively affects the emotional well-being (Stead et al., 2010), life satisfaction (Özer and Saçkes, 2011) and even physical health (Sirois, 2015) of students. It is also related to the presence of anxious symptoms (Wang, 2021), high academic stress (Khalid et al., 2019), low self-esteem (Yang et al., 2021), and a greater presence of fraudulent academic behavior (Patrzek et al., 2015).
However, it is striking that despite the significant negative consequences of delaying their academic activities, most university students continue to procrastinate (Liu et al., 2020). This conduct could be explained by a failure to plan, regulate and control their behavior since they prioritize other secondary activities that imply more immediate gratification (Steel, 2007; Klassen et al., 2010; Park and Sperling, 2012). This behavior could also be explained by failing to self-regulate thoughts and emotions to maintain long-term behaviors such as studying for an exam or doing academic work (Steel and Ferrari, 2013). In this sense, emotional determinants such as impulsivity, emotional regulation, self-efficacy, motivation, and reward processing affect the level of academic procrastination (Wu et al., 2016; Wypych et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2018; Mohammadi Bytamar et al., 2020). Cognitive determinants also affect this construct, such as planning, goal setting, metacognitive skills, and cognitive flexibility (Tan et al., 2008; Rabin et al., 2011; Ziegler and Opdenakker, 2018; Sutcliffe et al., 2019). Therefore, there are emotional and cognitive determinants that affect the level of academic procrastination. These determinants depend directly on the prefrontal areas of the brain associated with Executive Functions; specifically, these areas allow coordinating, selecting, and organizing various behavioral options to achieve goals that following procedures or rules can only obtain (Diamond, 2013). The review of the scientific literature shows that various components of Executive Functions such as self-control, planning, working memory, organization of materials, and task monitoring predict procrastination (Rabin et al., 2011). Also, impulsivity (Rebetez et al., 2018), self-efficacy, and self-control (Przepiórka et al., 2019) predict the level of procrastination. Likewise, evaluation-focused self-regulation is positively related to procrastination, and action-focused self-regulation is negatively related to procrastination (Choy and Cheung, 2018).
The Model of Hot and Cold Executive Functions could explain the emotional and cognitive determinants of academic procrastination since it distinguishes two domains of executive functions (Ward, 2020). (a) Hot functions are mostly related to emotional and motivational aspects (Salehinejad et al., 2021). It is also closely linked to reward processing, such as reward sensitivity and delay discounting (tendency to choose a smaller but more immediate reward over a larger but later reward) (Poland et al., 2016; Poon, 2018). Furthermore, it is linked to affective decision-making, social skills, theory of mind, empathy, and social cognition (Chan et al., 2008; De Luca and Leventer, 2008). Hot executive functions are associated with the medial and orbital regions of the prefrontal cortex (Salehinejad et al., 2021), which includes the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) (McDonald, 2013; Baez and Ibanez, 2014) and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) (Zimmerman et al., 2016; Gazzaniga et al., 2019). Also, the medial region of the prefrontal cortex is crucial for emotional and motivational processing because it has connections with subcortical structures such as the limbic system, the amygdala, and the insular cortex (Sharpe and Shoenbaum, 2016; Matyi and Spielberg, 2021).
On the other hand, (b) cold functions are related to purely cognitive information processing, where their processes do not involve much emotional arousal and instead require a great deal of logical and critical analysis, where there is the conscious control of thoughts and actions (Chan et al., 2008; Rubia, 2011). In this domain, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, planning, working memory, verbal fluency, and problem-solving are involved (Poland et al., 2016; Nejati et al., 2018; Salehinejad et al., 2021). Attentional flexibility, concept formation, and the ability to monitor and adapt behavior according to changing social circumstances are also involved (Wood and Worthington, 2017). Cold executive functions are associated with the lateral region of the prefrontal cortex, which includes the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (Gazzaniga et al., 2019; Ward, 2020). A meta-analysis study carried out in 193 studies that used the magnetic resonance technique showed that the lateral region of the prefrontal cortex, the anterior cingulate cortex, and the parietal cortex were activated in the main domains of cold executive functions: working memory, inhibition, flexibility, and planning (Niendam et al., 2012). Another study also shows that these three regions are connected and are part of the fronto-cingulum-parietal network (FPN) that allows cognitive control, where the dlPFC plays a fundamental role (Salehinejad et al., 2021). It is important to note that both domains work together to perform adaptive functions, where emotional, social, and cognitive activities are involved (Zelazo and Carlson, 2012; Ruiz-Castañeda et al., 2020).
Then, understanding the fundamental role of executive functions in the initiation and maintenance of complex behaviors, it could be hypothesized that executive functions predict the degree of academic procrastination. However, the review of the literature also shows that the performance of executive functions in men and women is not the same (Silverman, 2003; Li et al., 2009; Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012; Weis et al., 2013; Weafer and de Wit, 2014; Gaillard et al., 2021b).
Several studies show that women have a greater capacity for delayed gratification (Weafer and de Wit, 2014) and greater behavioral self-regulation than men (Weis et al., 2013). In addition, women have a greater ability to use executive skills associated with controlling emotional reactions, cognitive reappraisal, and emotional coping (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012). Women also use emotional regulation strategies to a greater extent and are more flexible in implementing these strategies (Goubet and Chrysikou, 2019). In contrast, men tend to avoid or repress emotional experiences (Barrett and Bliss-Moreau, 2009) and have greater problems with impulsivity (Riley et al., 2016). A meta-analysis study showed sex differences in the delay discount task (Gaillard et al., 2021a). Specifically, they found that women performed better than men, with a high effect size (Hedges’ g = 0.64). Women had a greater ability to discriminate and choose larger and later rewards than smaller and more immediate rewards. Similarly, another meta-analysis study conducted in 102 studies showed that women outperform men in delay capacity (Hedges’ g = 0.25–0.26) (Silverman, 2021).
However, in the scientific literature, there are also meta-analysis studies that show that there are no sex differences in tasks associated with executive functions, such as the study by Cross et al. (2011), where it was shown that there were no sex differences in the late discount. Similarly, another meta-analysis showed no sex differences in the ability to delay gratification (Silverman, 2003). Another systematic review study found little support for significant differences between men and women in executive function performance (Grissom and Reyes, 2019). The heterogeneity of these results could be associated with aspects such as the type of measurement used, cultural aspects, and specific characteristics of the sample.
On the other hand, sexual differences have also been studied using neuroimaging techniques. A study by Li et al. (2006) showed that men need more neural resources (greater activation of the bilateral medial frontal cortex, cingulate cortex, globus pallidus, thalamus, and parahippocampal gyrus) to have a similar performance to women in stop sign tests, which suggests greater impulsiveness in men. Another follow-up study by the same authors found that women have greater performance control and a greater effective response to error (Li et al., 2009). Also, several studies found sex differences in the middle, superior, and inferior frontal gyrus and OFC, which are involved in response inhibition capacity (Li et al., 2009; Gaillard et al., 2020).
On the other hand, neurological structures such as the mPFC and the amygdala, associated with emotional processing and decision making, follow different patterns of functional lateralization in men and women (Reber and Tranel, 2017). In women, decision-making and emotional processing are linked to the left side of the mPFC, while in men, it is linked to the right side of the mPFC (Reber and Tranel, 2017). In addition, women show a greater volume of mPFC and right OFC (Welborn et al., 2009).
A possible explanation for sex differences in the performance of executive functions can be partially explained by sex differences in the controllability of structural brain networks (Cornblath et al., 2019). A systematic review study of twenty-one neuroimaging studies showed sexual differences in the neural networks that underlie all executive control tasks (Gaillard et al., 2021b). This result suggests that men and women use different strategies depending on the task’s demands. Similarly, other studies have shown that the sex differences observed in executive functions could be partly explained by the experiences and cognitive strategies used by women and men (Satterthwaite et al., 2015; Wierenga et al., 2019).
For all the above, it can be affirmed that there is more evidence in the scientific literature in favor of differences between men and women in the performance of executive functions. Also, the functional and structural differences associated with executive functions could explain why men who procrastinate have higher levels of impulsivity (Strüber et al., 2008), lower levels of self-regulation (Higgins and Tewksbury, 2006), lower levels of self-motivation (Franklin et al., 2018) and greater problems in planning, monitoring and evaluating academic tasks (Limone et al., 2020). Unlike women who procrastinate, who have greater problems regulating cognitive and meta-cognitive processes (Limone et al., 2020).
Based on the above, it could be hypothesized that executive functions significantly predict the degree of academic procrastination and that gender plays a moderating role in the relationship between both variables (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Hypothetical model: moderating role of sex.
It is important to mention that most studies that assess the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination use self-report scales to assess executive functions (Rabin et al., 2011; Sabri et al., 2016; Gutiérrez-García et al., 2020), which constitutes an important limitation since they depend directly on the perception that those evaluated have of their capacities. Also, although most studies use samples of university students, they do not precisely measure academic procrastination since they use scales that measure procrastination in general. Responding to this need, this study proposes the following specific hypotheses: (1) the functions linked to the orbitomedial cortex significantly predict academic procrastination. (2) Sex plays a moderating role between functions linked to the orbitomedial cortex and academic procrastination. (3) Functions linked to the dlPFC significantly predict academic procrastination. (4) Sex plays a moderating role between functions linked to the dlPFC and academic procrastination. (5) Functions linked to the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC) significantly predict academic procrastination. (6) Sex plays a moderating role between functions linked to the aPFC and academic procrastination.
Materials and methods
Participants
In the present study, the sample consisted of 106 university students of both sexes (28.3% men and 71.7% women) between the ages of 18 and 30 years (M = 19.7; DS = 2.7) who were in the first and second year of Psychology at a private university in Lima, Peru. For data collection, a non-probabilistic convenience sampling was used, and the following inclusion criteria were used: (a) students who have signed the informed consent, (b) students over 18 years of age, and (c) students who are enrolled in the academic cycle of the university. The following exclusion criteria were also used: (a) Students who did not complete the two evaluation sessions, (b) Students who had some physical or sensory limitation that prevented them from answering the instruments on their own, and (c) Students who did not complete both tests. A post hoc procedure was performed to estimate statistical power, for which the following criteria were used: (a) effect size, (b) probability of error, (c) sample size, and (d) number of predictors. The statistical power was 0.98, considered adequate to estimate the regression models.
Measures
Neuropsychological battery of executive functions and frontal lobes
The battery was developed by Flores Lázaro et al. (2008, 2012) to evaluate functions associated with the orbitomedial cortex (formed by the OFC and the mPFC), the dlPFC and the aPFC. In addition, the authors of the battery, following anatomical-functional criteria, selected a set of tests to measure these functions. For the OFC and the mPFC, the following tests were used: Stroop Effect (form A and B), Card Game, Mazes (traversing), and Card Classification (Maintenance Errors). The Stroop test measures inhibitory control capacity. In addition, several neuroimaging studies have shown that this test is associated with OFC and CPFM (Adleman et al., 2002; Jourdan Moser et al., 2009; Song and Hakoda, 2015; Cipolotti et al., 2016). The card game test is an adaptation of the Iowa Gambling test and assesses the ability to detect and avoid risky selections and to detect and maintain good selections. Several studies have found this test to be associated with OFC and mPFC (Bolla et al., 2004; Aram et al., 2019; Zha et al., 2022). On the other hand, the maze test assesses the ability to plan, respect limits, and follow the rules. The test primarily involves orbitofrontal and dorsolateral areas (Stevens et al., 2003; Thonnard et al., 2021). To evaluate the orbitofrontal areas, the traversing qualification criterion was used. The other qualifying criteria were used to measure CPFM.
For the dlPFC, the following tests were used: Self-Directed Pointing, Visuospatial Working Memory, Alphabetical Ordering of Words, Card Sorting (perseveration and timing), Mazes (planning and timing), Tower of Hanoi (three and four disks), Consecutive Addition and Subtraction (form A and B), Verbal Fluency and Semantic Classification. The Self-Directed Pointing Test assesses the ability to use visuospatial working memory to self-directed point to a series of figures. It mainly involves dorsolateral prefrontal areas, especially their ventral portions (Lamar and Resnick, 2004). The visuospatial working memory test assesses the ability to maintain the identity of objects located in a specific order and space. It is based on the Corsi cube test but introduces the variant proposed by Goldman-Rakic et al. (1996) and Petrides (2000) of pointing to figures that represent real objects. The test is associated with the dlPFC (Ross et al., 2007). The alphabetical order of words tests measures the mental ability to manipulate and order verbal information in working memory. Performance on this test is also associated with the dlPFC (Tsukiura et al., 2001; Tsujimoto et al., 2004). The Card Sorting Test is based on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and assesses a person’s mental flexibility. Performance on this test is directly related to dlPFC (Lie et al., 2006; Gläscher et al., 2019).
The maze test also allows the ability to systematically anticipate (plan) visuospatial behavior, which is associated with dlPFC (Kaller et al., 2011; Kronovsek et al., 2021). Specifically for this test, time and dead-end planning errors are considered. The Tower of Hanoi test assesses the ability to plan a series of actions that only together and in sequence lead to a specific goal (sequential planning). Performance on this test is associated with the dlPFC (Ruiz-Díaz et al., 2012; Niki et al., 2019). The addition and subtraction task evaluates the ability to perform simple calculation operations in reverse sequence both within and between tens. Performance on this test is associated with the dlPFC (Burbaud et al., 1999; Barahimi et al., 2021). Finally, the verbal fluency test measures the ability to efficiently select and produce as many verbs as possible within a limited time. Performance on this test is linked to the dlPFC (Akiyama et al., 2018; Panikratova et al., 2020).
For the aPFC, the following tests were used: Semantic classifications (number of abstract categories), Selection of proverbs, and Metamemory. The Semantic Classification test measures the ability to produce the greatest number of abstract categories (abstract attitude). The performance in this test mainly involves areas of the aPFC (Koenig et al., 2005; Matsumoto et al., 2021). The Proverbs Selection Test assesses the ability to understand, compare, and select figurative responses. Performance on this test is associated with aPFC (Thoma and Daum, 2006; Ferretti et al., 2007). Finally, the metamemory task measures the ability to develop a memory strategy (metacognitive control), as well as to make performance prediction judgments (metacognitive judgments) and adjustments between performance judgment and actual performance (metacognitive monitoring). Performance on this test is linked to the aPFC area (Kikyo et al., 2002; Chua et al., 2014).
The qualification process of the BANFE-2 battery was carried out in two stages: First, the scores of each one of the tests were obtained following the qualification norms given in the test manual. That is, a score was obtained for the criteria of each test. Only in some criteria was the original score coded in a range of 1 to 5 points depending on the age and schooling of the person evaluated. Second, the scores by cortical area (Orbitomedial, Dorsolateral, and aPFC) were obtained by adding the associated criteria for each area. These scores are the ones used for the regression models. It is important to mention that the entire qualification process was carried out following the instructions given in the test manual (Flores Lázaro et al., 2012). A detailed description of the associated areas, domains, tests, and their grading system can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1. Structure of the BANFE-2 neuropsychological battery.
Academic procrastination scale (APS)
The instrument was developed by Busko (1998) to measure the degree of academic procrastination in university students. For the study, the version adapted to Peru was used, where the two-dimensional model presented adequate fit indices (RMSEA = 0.079; CFI = 1.00; GFI = 0.97) and adequate reliability indices, both for the academic self-regulation dimension (ω = 0.83) and the postponement of activities (ω = 0.75) (Dominguez-Lara et al., 2014). The scale’s factor structure was confirmed in another study by the same author (Dominguez-Lara, 2016). Regarding the scale structure, the 12 items form two dimensions: academic self-regulation (2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14) and postponement of activities (1, 8, and 9). In addition, the items have five response categories ranging from: “Never” (1) to “Always” (5), where a higher score on the scale shows greater academic procrastination. In the sample used, the global scale presents adequate internal consistency indices (α = 0.79; ω = 0.80).
Procedure
The standards given in the Declaration of Helsinki for the study were followed (World Medical Association, 2013). Among these, the following principles were emphasized: (a) autonomy of the people to participate in the study, (b) respect toward the participants, (c) beneficence, and (d) justice to treat the participants with fairness and transparency. In addition, the study had the approval of the Institutional Research Ethics Committee (CIEI) of a private university in Lima (204085), and informed consent was also used for the participation of people in the study.
A non-probabilistic sample was used for data collection, and the instruments were applied individually in an evaluation room. For both tests, we had the help of three fifth-year psychology students, who received training for six sessions in the application of the test. A psychologist with a Master’s degree in Psychology and a specialty in Neuropsychology directed the training of the evaluators. During the evaluation process, the anonymity and confidentiality of the results were ensured, where the study’s objectives were explained to the university students, doubts related to the procedure were resolved, and they signed informed consent. In addition, the tests were applied in two sessions of approximately 35 min.
Statistical analyses
To determine whether gender plays a moderating role between the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination, a hierarchical regression analysis was used following the procedures described by Aiken et al. (1991). In addition, estimated marginal means (EMMs) of academic procrastination at different levels of executive functions by gender were calculated. Executive function effects were also tested separately for males and females with a simple slope analysis.
For the simple linear regression models, the following equation was used:
Where β1 is the slope. In model 1, it is associated with the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex. In model 2, it is associated with the tasks linked to the dlPFC. In model 3, it is associated with the tasks linked to the aPFC.
For the moderation analyses, the following equation was used:
Where β1 represents the estimated effect of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex (model 1), the tasks linked to the dlPFC (model 2), and the tasks linked to the aPFC (model 3) on academic procrastination for the male group.
All statistical analyzes were performed using the “lm()” function for hierarchical regression and the “emmeans” package (Russell et al., 2021). The RStudio environment (RStudio Team, 2018) for R (R Core Team, 2019) was used in both cases.
Results
Descriptive analysis
Table 2 shows the descriptive analysis and the relationship between the study variables. In the total sample, it is evident that the tasks linked to the medial orbital cortex have a negative relationship with university students’ degree of academic procrastination (r = −0.59). However, the degree of academic procrastination does not show a relationship with the tasks linked to the dlPFC (r = 0.09) and the aPFC (r = −0.00).
Table 2. Descriptive analysis and correlation between variables.
Regarding the male sample, it is evident that the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex negatively correlates with the degree of academic procrastination (r = −0.71). It can also be seen that the tasks linked to the dlPFC has a negative and weak relationship with the degree of academic procrastination (r = −0.22). However, the degree of academic procrastination does not show a relationship with the tasks linked to the aPFC (r = −0.03). Regarding the sample of women, it can be seen that the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex has a negative relationship with the degree of academic procrastination (r = −0.62). It is also seen that the tasks linked to the dlPFC has a weak relationship with the degree of academic procrastination (r = 0.14). However, the degree of academic procrastination does not show a relationship with the tasks linked to the aPFC (r = 0.03). Therefore, it can be seen that the strength of the relationship between the orbitomedial cortex and academic procrastination varies in the groups of men and women.
Hypothesis test of the explanatory model
Table 3 shows the results of the analysis of the interaction of the sex of the university students on the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination.
Table 3. Model of the moderating effect of sex in the relationship of the variables.
Regarding the first specific hypothesis, it is observed that the tasks linked to the medial orbital cortex predict a 34% variance of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = 0.34; p < 0.01). Furthermore, when the dlPFC (p = 0.551), aPFC (p = 0.998), and age (p < 0.05) are included in the model as covariates, the orbitomedial cortex continues to have a significant impact on academic procrastination (p < 0.01) and the explained variance of the model remains similar (ΔR2 = 0.36; p < 0.01). For the second specific hypothesis, when sex is included as a moderating variable in the model, the degree of explained variance increases significantly (ΔR2 = 0.41; p < 0.01). It can also be seen that the regression coefficient for the interaction of orbitomedial orbital cortex × sex is significant (β3 = 0.53; p < 0.01), therefore, the degree of prediction of the medial orbital cortex on academic procrastination depends significantly on the sex of the university students. For men, the estimated effect of the orbitomedial cortex on the degree of academic procrastination is −0.81 (β1). For women, the estimated effect of the orbitomedial cortex on the degree of academic procrastination is −0.28 (β1 + β3). Simple slope analysis shows that the slope of the orbitomedial cortex for males is significantly greater than for females (p < 0.01) (see Figure 2). Then, the moderation analysis shows that the effects of tasks linked to the medial orbital cortex on academic procrastination for men and women are significantly different, which is in line with the second specific hypothesis.
Figure 2. Moderating effect of the sex of the students on the relationship between the executive functions and academic procrastination. (A) Moderating effect between the orbitomedial cortex and academic procrastination. (B) Moderating effect between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and academic procrastination. (C) Moderating effect between the anterior prefrontal cortex and academic procrastination.
Regarding the third specific hypothesis, it can be seen that the tasks linked to the dlPFC fail to predict the degree of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = −0.01; p = 0.558). It can also be seen that the regression coefficient for the dlPFC × Sex interaction is not significant (β3 = 0.12; p = 0.154). In addition, the analysis of simple slopes shows that the slope of the dlPFC for men and women is similar (p = 0.123). These results provide evidence to reject the third and fourth specific hypotheses.
Regarding the fifth specific hypothesis, it can be seen that the tasks linked to the aPFC fail to predict the degree of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = −0.01; p = 0.986). It can also be seen that the regression coefficient for the interaction aPFC × Sex is not significant (β3 = 0.05; p = 0.676). In addition, the analysis of simple slopes shows that the slope of the aPFC for men and women is similar (p = 0.849). These results provide evidence to reject the fifth and sixth specific hypotheses.
Discussion
Regarding the first specific hypothesis, it was shown (step 1) that the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex significantly predicts the degree of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = 0.34; p < 0.01). To understand this result, it is essential to point out that the orbitomedial cortex refers to the mPFC and the OFC (Flores Lázaro et al., 2012). The mPFC plays a fundamental role in the processes of (a) regulation and attentional effort (Hauser et al., 2014), (b) decision making between two potentially pleasant outcomes (Saunders et al., 2017), and (c) regulation of motivational states (Fuster, 2002). The OFC also has important processes involved in (a) processing and regulation of affective states (Dixon et al., 2017), (b) behavior regulation (Jonker et al., 2015), (c) change detection (Rolls, 2004), (d) decision-making based on risk-benefit estimation (Zald and Andreotti, 2010), and (e) short- and long-term reward valuation (Peters and D’Esposito, 2016).
Then the processes involved in the mPFC and the OFC can explain the behavior of voluntarily delaying a necessary or important academic activity, despite expecting possible negative consequences that outweigh the positive consequences of the delay. Also, these processes can explain why a failure in inter-temporal choice occurs in procrastination, that is, the tendency to prefer smaller rewards received in the short term to larger rewards received in the long term (Peters and D’Esposito, 2016). In addition, this first result could explain why several previous studies have found that procrastination is related to a failure in self-control (Rebetez et al., 2018; Zhao et al., 2019), in emotional regulation (Eckert et al., 2016; Ljubin-Golub et al., 2019), in the regulation of motivation (Grunschel et al., 2016; Ljubin-Golub et al., 2019) and time management (Wolters et al., 2017).
Regarding the second specific hypothesis, a second analysis (step 2) showed that the tasks linked to the degree of prediction of the orbitomedial cortex on academic procrastination is significantly modulated by the sex of the university students (β3 = 0.53; p < 0.01). The impact of the tasks linked to the orbitomedial cortex on academic procrastination in males (−0.81) is significantly greater than in females (−0.28). This difference in impact could be related to the fact that neurological structures such as the mPFC and the amygdala, strongly involved in emotional processing and decision making, follow different patterns of functional lateralization in men and women (Reber and Tranel, 2017). In women, decision-making and emotional processing are linked to the left side of the mPFC, while in men, it is linked to the right side of the mPFC (Reber and Tranel, 2017). It could also be related to sex differences in the volume of OFC and mPFC (Gur et al., 2002; Wood et al., 2008). Thus, women show a greater volume of mPFC and right OFC (Welborn et al., 2009). In addition, these structural differences in men and women explain the differences in the use of two emotional regulation strategies: reappraisal and suppression (Welborn et al., 2009). These functional and structural differences could also explain why male procrastinators have higher levels of impulsivity (Strüber et al., 2008), lower levels of self-regulation (Higgins and Tewksbury, 2006) and greater problems planning, monitoring, and evaluating tasks academic (Limone et al., 2020). Unlike women who procrastinate, who have greater problems regulating cognitive and meta-cognitive processes (Limone et al., 2020).
Regarding the third specific hypothesis, it was first evidenced (step 1) that the tasks linked to the dlPFC fails to predict the degree of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = −0.01; p = 0.558). In addition, for the fourth specific hypothesis, a second analysis (step 2) showed that gender does not play a moderating role in the relationship between both variables (β3 = 0.12; p = 0.154). To understand these results, it is important to distinguish between hot and cold executive functions. Hot executive functions involve emotion processing and regulation, motivation, reward processing (immediate versus long-term reward), and decision-making based on the subjective value of the reward. While cold executive functions are involved in purely cognitive information processing (Ward, 2020). Several cognitive processes are linked to academic procrastination, such as cognitive flexibility, planning, goal setting, metacognitive skills, and cognitive flexibility (Tan et al., 2008; Rabin et al., 2011; Ziegler and Opdenakker, 2018; Sutcliffe et al., 2019). However, in the present study, other cognitive processes were evaluated, such as verbal fluency, productivity, visuospatial planning, sequential planning, reverse sequencing, and working memory (visual, verbal, and visuospatial). In this sense, the study shows evidence that these domains do not predict academic procrastination. It is important to mention that these domains are linked to the dlPFC (Lamar and Resnick, 2004; Tsujimoto et al., 2004; Ross et al., 2007; Gläscher et al., 2019; Niki et al., 2019; Panikratova et al., 2020; Barahimi et al., 2021), one of the cortical regions associated with cold executive functions. In contrast, the OFC is mainly associated with hot executive functions (Salehinejad et al., 2021). This would explain why the tasks linked to the dlPFC fail to explain academic procrastination, but the tasks linked to the OFC do.
Regarding the fifth specific hypothesis, it was first evidenced (step 1) that the tasks linked to the aPFC fails to predict the degree of academic procrastination (ΔR2 = −0.01; p = 0.986). In addition, for the sixth specific hypothesis, a second analysis (step 2) showed that gender does not play a moderating role between both variables (β3 = 0.05; p = 0.676). These results could be because aPFC is mainly related to high-level cognitive functions, such as meta-memory, figurative meaning comprehension, and abstract attitude (Ramnani and Owen, 2004; Flores Lázaro et al., 2008), which are purely cognitive functions. In contrast, academic procrastination is not a problem of cognitive processing but rather an eminently affective, motivational, and processing problem of perceived rewards (Damme et al., 2019).
Regarding the study’s limitations, firstly, a non-probabilistic sampling was used, which limits the generalization of the results. It is recommended that future studies use representative samples to generalize the results. Secondly, the sample size was modest, although sufficient to test the regression models. It is essential to point out that the BAFE 2 allows for an objective evaluation of executive functions, for which an individual evaluation and a minimum of two evaluation sessions are required. This evaluation characteristic could justify the sample size reached in the present study, which was similar to that reported in other studies where the BAFE-2 was used (Rincón-Campos et al., 2019; Muchiut et al., 2021; San-Juan et al., 2022). Third, there was an unequal distribution of genders in the sample, where women were the majority group. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out more studies with balanced samples of men and women and larger and more representative ones to see if the present results can be replicated. Fourth, in the study of the variables, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was not included. Therefore, it is recommended that future studies include this type of evaluation to understand the results better. Fifth, covariates such as year of study, among others, were not included in the study. It is recommended that future studies include these variables to understand the results better. Sixth, OFC and mPFC were measured with the same score and under the term orbitomedial cortex. This procedure is directed by the instrument used. Therefore, it is suggested that future studies use instruments that use separate scores for the OFC and the mPFC for a better understanding of the results. Despite these limitations, the study findings are important and promising as it is the first study to assess the moderating role of gender in the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination using a neuropsychological battery, which allows a more objective evaluation of executive functions, unlike a self-report test.
Based on the above, it is concluded that only the tasks linked to the medial orbital cortex significantly predicts the degree of academic procrastination. In addition, the degree of prediction of the tasks linked to the medial orbital cortex on academic procrastination is significantly moderated by the sex of the university students.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Institutional Research Ethics Committee (CIEI) of the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (204085). The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
LV provided initial conception, organization, and main writing of the text, involved in data collection, analyzed the data, and prepared all figures and tables.
Funding
Open access publication fees were funded by the Universidad Norbert Wiener.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the respondents, who kindly participated in this research.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Adleman, N. E., Menon, V., Blasey, C. M., White, C. D., Warsofsky, I. S., Glover, G. H., et al. (2002). A developmental fMRI study of the Stroop color-word task. NeuroImage 16, 61–75. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2001.1046
Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., and Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Akiyama, T., Koeda, M., Okubo, Y., and Kimura, M. (2018). Hypofunction of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depression during verbal fluency task: A multi-channel near-infrared spectroscopy study. J. Affect. Disord. 231, 83–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.01.010
Amoke, C. V., Ede, M. O., Umeano, C. E., Okeke, C. I., Onah, S. O., Ezeah, M. A., et al. (2021). Interaction Effect of Gender on Academic Procrastination and Achievement Orientation among In-School Adolescents. Int. J. High. Educ. 10:202. doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v10n6p202
Aram, S., Levy, L., Patel, J. B., Anderson, A. A., Zaragoza, R., Dashtestani, H., et al. (2019). The Iowa Gambling Task: A Review of the Historical Evolution. Scientific Basis, and Use in Functional Neuroimaging. SAGE Open 9:215824401985691. doi: 10.1177/2158244019856911
Baez, S., and Ibanez, A. (2014). The effects of context processing on social cognition impairments in adults with Asperger’s syndrome. Front. Neurosci. 8:270. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00270
Balkis, M., and Duru, E. (2017). Gender differences in the relationship between academic procrastination, satifaction with academic life and academic performance. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 15, 105–125. doi: 10.14204/ejrep.41.16042
Barahimi, S., Einalou, Z., and Dadgostar, M. (2021). Evaluation of hemodynamic response function during mental arithmetic task in fNIRS data using GLM method. Neurosci. Inform. 1:100004. doi: 10.1016/j.neuri.2021.100004
Barrett, L. F., and Bliss-Moreau, E. (2009). She’s Emotional. He s Having a Bad Day: Attributional Explanations for Emotion Stereotypes. Emotion 9, 649–658. doi: 10.1037/a0016821
Bolla, K. I., Eldreth, D. A., Matochik, J. A., and Cadet, J. L. (2004). Sex-related differences in a gambling task and its neurological correlates. Cereb. Cortex 14, 1226–1232. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhh083
Burbaud, P., Camus, O., Guehl, D., Bioulac, B., Caille, J., and Allard, M. (1999). A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of mental subtraction in human subjects. Neurosci. Lett. 273, 195–199.
Busko, D. (1998). Causes and Consequences of Perfectionism and Procrastination: A Structural Equation Model. Guelph: The University of Guelph.
Chan, R. C. K., Shum, D., Toulopoulou, T., and Chen, E. Y. H. (2008). Assessment of executive functions: Review of instruments and identification of critical issues. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 23, 201–216. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2007.08.010
Chávez, J. K., and Morales, M. (2017). Procrástinación académica de estudiantes en el primer año de carrera. Rev. Electrón. Sobre Cuerpos Acad. Grupos de Invest. En Iberoamérica 4, 1–16.
Choy, E. E. H., and Cheung, H. (2018). Time Perspective. Control, and affect mediate the relation between regulatory mode and procrastination. PLoS One 13:e0207912. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207912
Chua, E. F., Pergolizzi, D., and Weintraub, R. R. (2014). “The Cognitive Neuroscience of Metamemory Monitoring: Understanding Metamemory Processes, Subjective Levels Expressed, and Metacognitive Accuracy,” in The Cognitive Neuroscience of Metacognition, eds S. Fleming and C. Frith (Berlin: Springer), 267–291. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45190-4_12
Cipolotti, L., Spanò, B., Healy, C., Tudor-Sfetea, C., Chan, E., White, M., et al. (2016). Inhibition processes are dissociable and lateralized in human prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychologia 93, 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.09.018
Cornblath, E. J., Tang, E., Baum, G. L., Moore, T. M., Adebimpe, A., Roalf, D. R., et al. (2019). Sex differences in network controllability as a predictor of executive function in youth. NeuroImage 188, 122–134. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.11.048
Cross, C. P., Copping, L. T., and Campbell, A. (2011). Sex Differences in Impulsivity: A Meta-Analysis. Psychol. Bull. 137, 97–130. doi: 10.1037/a0021591
Damme, K. S. F., Kelley, N. J., Quinn, M. E., Glazer, J. E., Chat, I. K. Y., Young, K. S., et al. (2019). Emotional content impacts how executive function ability relates to willingness to wait and to work for reward. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 19, 637–652. doi: 10.3758/s13415-019-00712-4
De Luca, C. R., and Leventer, R. J. (2008). “Developmental trajectories of executive functions across the lifespan,” in Executive Functions and the Frontal Lobes: A Lifespan Perspective, eds V. Anderson, R. Jacobs, and P. J. Anderson (Milton Park: Taylor & Francis), 23–56. doi: 10.4324/9780203837863
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Funtions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64, 135–168. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
Dixon, M. L., Thiruchselvam, R., Todd, R., and Christoff, K. (2017). Emotion and the Prefrontal Cortex: An Integrative Review. Psychol. Bull. 143, 1033–1081. doi: 10.1037/bul0000096
Dominguez-Lara, S. A. (2016). Datos normativos de la Escala de Procrastinación Académica en estudiantes de psicología de Lima. Rev. Evaluar 16, 20–30.
Dominguez-Lara, S. A. (2017). Prevalencia de procrastinación académica en estudiantes universitarios de Lima Metropolitana y su relación con variables demográficas. Rev. de Psicol. 7, 81–95.
Dominguez-Lara, S. A., Villegas-García, G., and Centeno-Leyva, S. B. (2014). Procrastinación Académica: Validación De Una Escala En Una Muestra De Estudiantes De Una Universidad Privada. Liberabit 20, 293–304.
Eckert, M., Ebert, D. D., Lehr, D., Sieland, B., and Berking, M. (2016). Overcome procrastination: Enhancing emotion regulation skills reduce procrastination. Learn. Individ. Differ. 52, 10–18. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.10.001
Ferretti, T. R., Schwint, C. A., and Katz, A. N. (2007). Electrophysiological and behavioral measures of the influence of literal and figurative contextual constraints on proverb comprehension. Brain Lang. 101, 38–49. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.07.002
Flores Lázaro, J. C., Ostrosky-Solís, F., and Lozano Gutiérrez, A. (2008). Batería de Funciones Frontales y Ejecutivas: Presentación. Rev. Neuropsicol. Neuropsiquiatría Neurociencias 8, 141–158.
Flores Lázaro, J. C., Ostrosky-Solís, F., and Lozano Gutiérrez, A. (2012). BANFE: Batería Neuropsicológica de Funciones Ejecutivas y Frontales - 2. Mexico City: Manual Moderno.
Franklin, P., Tsujimoto, K. C., Lewis, M. E., Tekok-Kilic, A., and Frijters, J. C. (2018). Sex differences in self-regulatory executive functions are amplified by trait anxiety: The case of students at risk for academic failure. Pers. Individ. Differ. 129, 131–137. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.019
Fuster, J. M. (2002). Frontal lobe and cognitive development. J. Neurocytol. 31, 373–385. doi: 10.1023/a:1024190429920
Gaillard, A., Fehring, D. J., and Rossell, S. L. (2021b). Sex differences in executive control: A systematic review of functional neuroimaging studies. Eur. J. Neurosci. 53, 2592–2611. doi: 10.1111/ejn.15107
Gaillard, A., Fehring, D. J., and Rossell, S. L. (2021a). A systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioural sex differences in executive control. Eur. J. Neurosci. 53, 519–542. doi: 10.1111/ejn.14946
Gaillard, A., Rossell, S. L., Carruthers, S. P., Sumner, P. J., Michie, P. T., Woods, W., et al. (2020). Greater activation of the response inhibition network in females compared to males during stop signal task performance. Behav. Brain Res. 386:112586. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2020.112586
Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B., and Mangun, G. R. (2019). Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind, 5th editio Edn. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
Gläscher, J., Adolphs, R., and Tranel, D. (2019). Model-based lesion mapping of cognitive control using the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Nat Commun. 10:20. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07912-5
Goldman-Rakic, P. S., Cools, A. R., and Srivastava, K. (1996). The Prefrontal Landscape: Implications of Functional Architecture for Understanding Human Mentation and the Central Executive. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. 351, 1445–1453. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1996.0129
Goubet, K. E., and Chrysikou, E. G. (2019). Emotion regulation flexibility: Gender differences in context sensitivity and repertoire. Front. Psychol. 10:935. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00935
Grissom, N. M., and Reyes, T. M. (2019). Let’s call the whole thing off: Evaluating gender and sex differences in executive function. Neuropsychopharmacology 44, 86–96. doi: 10.1038/s41386-018-0179-5
Grunschel, C., Schwinger, M., Steinmayr, R., and Fries, S. (2016). Effects of using motivational regulation strategies on students’ academic procrastination, academic performance, and well-being. Learn. Individ. Differ. 49, 162–170. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.008
Gur, R. C., Gunning-Dixon, F., Bilker, W. B., and Gur, R. E. (2002). Sex differences in temporo-limbic and frontal brain volumes of healthy adults. Cereb. Cortex 12, 998–1003. doi: 10.1093/cercor/12.9.998
Gutiérrez-García, A. G., Huerta-Cortés, M., and Landeros-Velazquez, M. (2020). Academic Procrastination in Study Habits and Its Relationship with Self-Reported Executive Functions in High School Students. J. Psychol. Neurosci. 2, 1–9. doi: 10.47485/2693-2490.1004
Hauser, T. U., Iannaccone, R., Ball, J., Mathys, C., Brandeis, D., Walitza, S., et al. (2014). Role of the medial prefrontal cortex in impaired decision making in juvenile attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. JAMA Psychiatry 71, 1165–1173. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.1093
Higgins, G. E., and Tewksbury, R. (2006). Sex and self-control theory: The measures and causal model may be different. Youth Soc. 37, 479–503. doi: 10.1177/0044118X05283423
Jonker, F. A., Jonker, C., Scheltens, P., and Scherder, E. J. A. (2015). The role of the orbitofrontal cortex in cognition and behavior. Rev. Neurosci. 26, 1–11. doi: 10.1515/revneuro-2014-0043
Jourdan Moser, S., Cutini, S., Weber, P., and Schroeter, M. L. (2009). Right prefrontal brain activation due to Stroop interference is altered in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder - A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study. Psychiatry Res. Neuroimaging 173, 190–195. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2008.10.003
Kaller, C. P., Rahm, B., Spreer, J., Weiller, C., and Unterrainer, J. M. (2011). Dissociable contributions of left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in planning. Cereb. Cortex 21, 307–317. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhq096
Khalid, A., Zhang, Q., Wang, W., Ghaffari, A. S., and Pan, F. (2019). The relationship between procrastination, perceived stress, saliva alpha-amylase level and parenting styles in Chinese first year medical students. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 12, 489–498. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S207430
Kikyo, H., Ohki, K., and Miyashita, Y. (2002). Neural Correlates for Feeling-of-Knowing: An fMRI Parametric Analysis. Neuron 36, 177–186. doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00939-X
Klassen, R. M., Ang, R. P., Chong, W. H., Krawchuk, L. L., Huan, V. S., Wong, I. Y. F., et al. (2010). Academic procrastination in two settings: Motivation correlates, behavioral patterns, and negative impact of procrastination in Canada and Singapore. Appl. Psychol. 59, 361–379. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00394.x
Klassen, R. M., Krawchuk, L. L., and Rajani, S. (2008). Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 33, 915–931. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.07.001
Klingsieck, K. B. (2013). Procrastination when good things don’t come to those who wait. Eur. Psychol. 18, 24–34. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000138
Koenig, P., Smith, E. E., Glosser, G., Devita, C., Moore, P., Mcmillan, C., et al. (2005). The neural basis for novel semantic categorization. NeuroImage 24, 369–383. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.08.045
Kronovsek, T., Hermand, E., Berthoz, A., Castilla, A., Gallou-Guyot, M., Daviet, J. C., et al. (2021). Age-related decline in visuo-spatial working memory is reflected by dorsolateral prefrontal activation and cognitive capabilities. Behav. Brain Res. 398:112981. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2020.112981
Lamar, M., and Resnick, S. M. (2004). Aging and prefrontal functions: Dissociating orbitofrontal and dorsolateral abilities. Neurobiol Aging 25, 553–558. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2003.06.005
Li, C. R., Huang, C., Constable, R. T., and Sinha, R. (2006). Gender differences in the neural correlates of response inhibition during a stop signal task. NeuroImage 32, 1918–1929. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.05.017
Li, C. R., Zhang, S., Duann, J., Yan, P., Sinha, R., and Mazure, C. M. (2009). Gender Differences in Cognitive Control: An Extended Investigation of the Stop Signal Task. Brain Imaging Behav. 3, 262–276. doi: 10.1007/s11682-009-9068-1
Lie, C., Specht, K., Marshall, J. C., and Fink, G. R. (2006). Using fMRI to decompose the neural processes underlying the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. NeuroImage 30, 1038–1049. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.031
Limone, P., Sinatra, M., Ceglie, F., and Monacis, L. (2020). Examining procrastination among university students through the lens of the self-regulated learning model. Behav. Sci. 10:184. doi: 10.3390/bs10120184
Liu, G., Cheng, G., Hu, J., Pan, Y., and Zhao, S. (2020). Academic Self-Efficacy and Postgraduate Procrastination: A Moderated Mediation Model. Front. Psychol. 11:1752. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01752
Ljubin-Golub, T., Petričević, E., and Rovan, D. (2019). The role of personality in motivational regulation and academic procrastination. Educ. Psychol. 39, 550–568. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2018.1537479
Mandap, C. M. (2016). Examining the Differences in Procrastination Tendencies among University Students. Int. J. Educ. Res. 4, 431–436.
Matsumoto, A., Soshi, T., Fujimaki, N., and Ihara, A. S. (2021). Distinctive responses in anterior temporal lobe and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex during categorization of semantic information. Sci. Rep. 11:13343. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-92726-7
Matyi, M. A., and Spielberg, J. M. (2021). Differential spatial patterns of structural connectivity of amygdala nuclei with orbitofrontal cortex. Hum. Brain Mapp. 42, 1391–1405. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25300
McDonald, S. (2013). Impairments in social cognition following severe traumatic brain injury. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 19, 231–246. doi: 10.1017/S1355617712001506
Mohammadi Bytamar, J., Saed, O., and Khakpoor, S. (2020). Emotion Regulation Difficulties and Academic Procrastination. Front. Psychol. 11:524588. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.524588
Muchiut, ÁF., Vaccaro, P., and Pietto, M. L. (2021). Inteligencia, funciones ejecutivas y rendimiento académico de adolescentes de 13 y 14 años de Resistencia (Chaco, Argentina). Interdiscip. Rev. de Psicol. Ciencias Afines 38, 83–102. doi: 10.16888/interd.2021.38.3.5
Nejati, V., Salehinejad, M. A., and Nitsche, M. A. (2018). Interaction of the Left Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex (l-DLPFC) and Right Orbitofrontal Cortex (OFC) in Hot and Cold Executive Functions: Evidence from Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS). Neuroscience 369, 109–123. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.10.042
Niendam, T. A., Laird, A. R., Ray, K. L., Dean, Y. M., Glahn, D. C., and Carter, C. S. (2012). Meta-analytic evidence for a superordinate cognitive control network subserving diverse executive functions. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 12, 241–268. doi: 10.3758/s13415-011-0083-5
Niki, C., Kumada, T., Maruyama, T., Tamura, M., and Muragaki, Y. (2019). Role of frontal functions in executing routine sequential tasks. Front. Psychol. 10:169. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00169
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2012). Emotion Regulation and Psychopathology: The Role of Gender. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 8, 161–187. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143109
Özer, B. U., and Ferrari, J. R. (2011). Gender Orientation and Academic Procrastination: Exploring Turkish High School Students. J. Individ. Differ. 9, 33–40.
Özer, B. U., and Saçkes, M. (2011). Effects of academic procrastination on college students’ life satisfaction. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 12, 512–519. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.02.063
Özer, B. U., Demir, A., and Ferrari, J. R. (2009). Exploring academic procrastination among turkish students: Possible gender differences in prevalence and reasons. J. Soc. Psychol. 149, 241–257. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.149.2.241-257
Panikratova, Y. R., Vlasova, R. M., Akhutina, T. V., Korneev, A. A., Sinitsyn, V. E., and Pechenkova, E. V. (2020). Functional connectivity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex contributes to different components of executive functions. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 151, 70–79. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2020.02.013
Park, S. W., and Sperling, R. A. (2012). Academic Procrastinators and Their Self-Regulation. Psychology 3, 12–23. doi: 10.4236/psych.2012.31003
Patrzek, J., Sattler, S., van Veen, F., Grunschel, C., and Fries, S. (2015). Investigating the effect of academic procrastination on the frequency and variety of academic misconduct: A panel study. Stud. High. Educ. 40, 1014–1029. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.854765
Peters, J., and D’Esposito, M. (2016). Effects of Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Lesions on Self-Control in Intertemporal Choice. Curr. Biol. 26, 2625–2628. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.035
Petrides, M. (2000). The role of the mid-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in working memory. Exp. Brain Res. 133, 44–54. doi: 10.1007/s002210000399
Poland, S. E., Monks, C. P., and Tsermentseli, S. (2016). Cool and hot executive function as predictors of aggression in early childhood: Differentiating between the function and form of aggression. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 34, 181–197. doi: 10.1111/bjdp.12122
Poon, K. (2018). Hot and cool executive functions in adolescence: Development and contributions to important developmental outcomes. Front. Psychol. 8:2311. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02311
Przepiórka, A., Błachnio, A., and Siu, N. Y. F. (2019). The relationships between self-efficacy, self-control, chronotype, procrastination and sleep problems in young adults. Chronobiol. Int. 36, 1025–1035. doi: 10.1080/07420528.2019.1607370
R Core Team (2019). A language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R version 3.6.1). Vienna, AUS: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rabin, L. A., Fogel, J., and Nutter-Upham, K. E. (2011). Academic procrastination in college students: The role of self-reported executive function. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 33, 344–357. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2010.518597
Ramnani, N., and Owen, A. M. (2004). Anterior prefrontal cortex: Insights into function from anatomy and neuroimaging. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 5, 184–194. doi: 10.1038/nrn1343
Reber, J., and Tranel, D. (2017). Sex differences in the functional lateralization of emotion and decision-making in the human brain. J. Neurosci. Res. 95, 270–278. doi: 10.1002/jnr.23829
Rebetez, M. M. L., Rochat, L., Barsics, C., and Van der Linden, M. (2018). Procrastination as a Self-Regulation Failure: The Role of Impulsivity and Intrusive Thoughts. Psychol. Rep. 121, 26–41. doi: 10.1177/0033294117720695
Riley, E., Okabe, H., Germine, L., Wilmer, J., Esterman, M., and Degutis, J. (2016). Gender Differences in Sustained Attentional Control Relate to Gender Inequality across Countries. PLoS One 11:e0165100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165100
Rincón-Campos, Y. E., Sanchez-Lopez, J., López-Walle, J. M., and Ortiz-Jiménez, X. (2019). Dynamics of executive functions, basic psychological needs, impulsivity, and depressive symptoms in american football players. Front. Psychol. 10:2409. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02409
Rolls, E. T. (2004). The functions of the orbitofrontal cortex. Brain Cogn. 55, 11–29. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00277-X
Ross, T. P., Hanouskova, E., Giarla, K., Calhoun, E., and Tucker, M. (2007). The reliability and validity of the self-ordered pointing task. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 22, 449–458. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2007.01.023
Rubia, K. (2011). “Cool” inferior frontostriatal dysfunction in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder versus “hot” ventromedial orbitofrontal-limbic dysfunction in conduct disorder: A review. Biol. Psychiatry 69:e69–e87. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.09.023
Ruiz-Castañeda, P., Santiago-Molina, E., Aguirre-Loaiza, H., and Daza González, M. T. (2020). Cool” and “Hot. Executive Functions in Patients With a Predominance of Negative Schizophrenic Symptoms. Front. Psychol. 11:571271. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571271
Ruiz-Díaz, M., Hernández-González, M., Guevara, M. A., Amezcua, C., and Ågmo, A. (2012). Prefrontal EEG Correlation During Tower of Hanoi and WCST Performance: Effect of Emotional Visual Stimuli. J. Sex. Med. 9, 2631–2640. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02782.x
Russell, V., Buerkner, P., Herve, M., Love, J., Riebl, H., and Singmann, H. (2021). Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means.
Sabri, Y., Hamdy, I., El-Wasify, M., El-Wasify, M., and Saleh, E.-S. (2016). Causal attributions and executive functions of academic procrastination in Mansoura University students. Egypt. J. Psychiatry 37:70. doi: 10.4103/1110-1105.193010
Salehinejad, M. A., Ghanavati, E., Rashid, H. A., and Michael, A. (2021). Hot and cold executive functions in the brain: A prefrontal- cingular network. Brain Neurosci. Adv. 5:23982128211007769. doi: 10.1177/23982128211007769
San-Juan, D., Mas, R. N. M., Gutiérrez, C., Morales, J., Díaz, A., Quiñones, G., et al. (2022). Effect of the anodal transcranial direct current electrical stimulation on cognition of medical residents with acute sleep deprivation. Sleep Sci. 15, 89–96. doi: 10.5935/1984-0063.20220007
Satterthwaite, T. D., Wolf, D. H., Roalf, D. R., Ruparel, K., Erus, G., Vandekar, S., et al. (2015). Linked Sex Differences in Cognition and Functional Connectivity in Youth. Cereb. Cortex 25, 2383–2394. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhu036
Saunders, B., Lin, H., Milyavskaya, M., and Inzlicht, M. (2017). The emotive nature of conflict monitoring in the medial prefrontal cortex. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 119, 31–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.01.004
Schouwenburg, H. C. (2004). “Procrastination in Academic Settings: General Introduction,” in Counseling the Procrastinator in Academic Settings, eds C. H. Schouwenburg and T. A. P. Lay (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association), 3–17. doi: 10.1037/10808-001
Sepehrian, F., and Lotf, J. J. (2011). The Effects of Coping Styles and Gender on Academic Procrastination among University Students. J. Basic Appl. Sci. Res 1, 2987–2993.
Sharpe, M. J., and Shoenbaum, G. (2016). Back to Basics: Making Predictions in the Orbitofrontal- Amygdala Circuit. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 131, 201–206. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2016.04.009
Silverman, I. W. (2003). Gender Differences in Delay of Gratification: A Meta-Analysis. Sex Roles 49, 451–463. doi: 10.1023/A:1025872421115
Silverman, I. W. (2021). Gender differences in inhibitory control as assessed on simple delay tasks in early childhood: A meta-analysis. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 45, 533–544. doi: 10.1177/01650254211020385
Sirois, F. M. (2015). Is procrastination a vulnerability factor for hypertension and cardiovascular disease? Testing an extension of the procrastination–health model. J. Behav. Med. 38, 578–589. doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9629-2
Song, Y., and Hakoda, Y. (2015). An fMRI study of the functional mechanisms of Stroop/reverse-Stroop effects. Behav. Brain Res. 290, 187–196. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2015.04.047
Stead, R., Shanahan, M. J., and Neufeld, R. W. J. (2010). “I’ll go to therapy, eventually”: Procrastination, stress and mental health. Pers. Individ. Differ. 49, 175–180. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.028
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychol. Bull. 133, 65–94. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65
Steel, P., and Ferrari, J. (2013). Sex, Education and Procrastination: An Epidemiological Study of Procrastinators’ Characteristics from a Global Sample. Eur. J. Pers. 27, 51–58. doi: 10.1002/per.1851
Steel, P., Svartdal, F., Thundiyil, T., and Brothen, T. (2018). Examining Procrastination Across Multiple Goal Stages: A Longitudinal Study of Temporal Motivation Theory. Front. Psychol. 9:327. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00327
Stevens, M. C., Kaplan, R. F., and Hesselbrock, V. M. (2003). Executive-cognitive functioning in the development of antisocial personality disorder. Addict. Behav. 28, 285–300. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4603(01)00232-5
Strüber, D., Lück, M., and Roth, G. (2008). Sex, aggression and impulse control: An integrative account. Neurocase 14, 93–121. doi: 10.1080/13554790801992743
Sutcliffe, K. R., Sedley, B., Hunt, M. J., and Macaskill, A. C. (2019). Relationships among academic procrastination, psychological flexibility, and delay discounting. Behav. Anal. 19, 315–326. doi: 10.1037/bar0000145
Tan, C. X., Ang, R. P., Klassen, R. M., Yeo, L. S., Wong, I. Y. F., Huan, V. S., et al. (2008). Correlates of academic procrastination and students’ grade goals. Curr. Psychol. 27, 135–144. doi: 10.1007/s12144-008-9028-8
Thoma, P., and Daum, I. (2006). Neurocognitive mechanisms of figurative language processing — Evidence from clinical dysfunctions. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 30, 1182–1205. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.09.001
Thonnard, D., Callaerts-Vegh, Z., and D’Hooge, R. (2021). Effects of orbitofrontal cortex and ventral hippocampus disconnection on spatial reversal learning. Neurosci. Lett. 750:135711. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2021.135711
Tsujimoto, S., Yamamoto, T., Kawaguchi, H., Koizumi, H., and Sawaguchi, T. (2004). Prefrontal Cortical Activation Associated with Working Memory in Adults and Preschool Children: An Event-related Optical Topography Study. Cereb. Cortex 14, 703–712. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhh030
Tsukiura, T., Fujii, T., Takahashi, T., Xiao, R., Inase, M., Iijima, T., et al. (2001). Neuroanatomical discrimination between manipulating and maintaining processes involved in verbal working memory; a functional MRI study. Cogn. Brain Res. 11, 13–21. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00059-8
Wang, Y. (2021). Academic procrastination and test anxiety: A cross-lagged panel analysis. J. Psychol. Couns. Sch. 31, 122–129. doi: 10.1017/jgc.2020.29
Ward, J. (2020). The Student‘S Guide To Cognitive Neuroscience, 4th editio Edn. Milton Park: Routledge.
Weafer, J., and de Wit, H. (2014). Addictive Behaviors Sex differences in impulsive action and impulsive choice. Addict. Behav. 39, 1573–1579. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.10.033
Weis, M., Heikamp, T., and Trommsdorff, G. (2013). Gender differences in school achievement: The role of self-regulation. Front. Psychol. 4:442. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00442
Welborn, B. L., Papademetris, X., Reis, D. L., Rajeevan, N., Bloise, S. M., and Gray, J. R. (2009). Variation in orbitofrontal cortex volume: Relation to sex, emotion regulation and affect. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 4, 328–339. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsp028
Wierenga, L. M., Marieke, G. N., van Rossenberg, F., and Crone, E. (2019). Sex Effects on Development of Brain Structure and Executive Functions: Greater Variance than Mean Effects. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 31, 730–753. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01375
Wolters, C. A., Won, S., and Hussain, M. (2017). Examining the relations of time management and procrastination within a model of self-regulated learning. Metacogn. Learn. 12, 381–399. doi: 10.1007/s11409-017-9174-1
Wood, J. L., Heitmiller, D., Andreasen, N. C., and Nopoulos, P. (2008). Morphology of the ventral frontal cortex: Relationship to femininity and social cognition. Cereb. Cortex 18, 534–540. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhm079
Wood, R. L., and Worthington, A. (2017). Neurobehavioral abnormalities associated with executive dysfunction after traumatic brain injury. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 11:195. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00195
World Medical, and Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA 310, 2191–2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Wu, H., Gui, D., Lin, W., Gu, R., Zhu, X., and Liu, X. (2016). The procrastinators want it now: Behavioral and event-related potential evidence of the procrastination of intertemporal choices. Brain Cogn. 107, 16–23. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2016.06.005
Wypych, M., Matuszewski, J., and Dragan, W. (2018). Roles of impulsivity, motivation, and emotion regulation in procrastination - path analysis and comparison between students and non-students. Front. Psychol. 9:891. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00891
Yang, X., Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Hong, W., and Jiang, S. (2021). The relations between academic procrastination and self-esteem in adolescents: A longitudinal study. Curr. Psychol. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02075-x [Epub ahead of print].
Zald, D. H., and Andreotti, C. (2010). Neuropsychological assessment of the orbital and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychologia 48, 3377–3391. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.08.012
Zelazo, P. D., and Carlson, S. M. (2012). Hot and Cool Executive Function in Childhood and Adolescence: Development and Plasticity. Child Dev. Perspect. 6, 354–360. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00246.x
Zha, R., Li, P., Liu, Y., Alarefi, A., Zhang, X., and Li, J. (2022). The orbitofrontal cortex represents advantageous choice in the Iowa gambling task. Hum. Brain Mapp. 43, 3840–3856. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25887
Zhang, Y., Dong, S., Fang, W., Chai, X., Mei, J., and Fan, X. (2018). Self-efficacy for self-regulation and fear of failure as mediators between self-esteem and academic procrastination among undergraduates in health professions. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 23, 817–830. doi: 10.1007/s10459-018-9832-3
Zhao, J., Meng, G., Sun, Y., Xu, Y., Geng, J., and Han, L. (2019). The relationship between self-control and procrastination based on the self-regulation theory perspective: the moderated mediation model. Curr. Psychol. 40, 5076–5086. doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00442-3
Zhou, M. (2020). Gender differences in procrastination: The role of personality traits. Curr. Psychol. 39, 1445–1453. doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-9851-5
Ziegler, N., and Opdenakker, M. C. (2018). The development of academic procrastination in first-year secondary education students: The link with metacognitive self-regulation, self-efficacy, and effort regulation. Learn. Individ. Differ. 64, 71–82. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2018.04.009
Keywords: hot and cold executive functions, orbitofrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, academic procrastination, undergraduate students, sex
Citation: Vilca LW (2022) The moderating role of sex in the relationship between executive functions and academic procrastination in undergraduate students. Front. Psychol. 13:928425. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.928425
Received: 25 April 2022; Accepted: 29 July 2022;
Published: 22 August 2022.
Edited by:
Lawrence M. Parsons, The University of Sheffield, United KingdomReviewed by:
Daniel Gustavson, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, United StatesThomas Brothen, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, United States
Lena Maria Wieland, Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education (DIPF), Germany
Copyright © 2022 Vilca. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Lindsey W. Vilca, lwvilca@upeu.edu.pe