지연행동유형에 따른 일상적 창의성, 인지적 유연성, 자기효능감의 차이

Abstract

The purpose of this study based on classified groups, explore the difference in everyday creativity, cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy. Although preceding studies suggest positive aspect of active procrastination by classifying procrastination, questions are raised whether it can be considered as positive characteristic or potential risk group. Therefore, this study aims to verify through cluster analysis if subtypes of procrastination are spontaneous classification and explore through difference in everyday creativity, cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy if active procrastination has adaptive and functional characteristic, which is different from other types. This study was conducted on 400 university students of 7 universities located in G and B metropolitan cities and G city. A total of 400 data were collected and 380 ones were analyzed except for 20 insincere responses. Frequency analysis and correlation analysis were conducted on the data while were multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted on 2nd-stage cluster analysis. Major results of this study are as follows; First, as the result of correlation analysis among variables, general procrastination has significant negative relationship with active procrastination, everyday creativity, cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy while active procrastination has significant positive relationship with everyday creativity, cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy. Second, as the result of cluster analysis, subjects were classified as active procrastination group, passive procrastination group and non-procrastination group. Third, as the result of MANOVA on everyday creativity, cognitive flexibility and self-efficacy on the 3 groups, in everyday creativity, there was difference between active procrastination group and passive procrastination group while there was no difference between non-procrastination group and the other two groups(1>3,2 p< .05). In cognitive flexibility, there was distinctively clear difference among the 3 groups. Active procrastination group was the highest followed in descending order by non-procrastination group and passive procrastination group (1>2>3, p<.001). In self-efficacy, active procrastination and non-procrastination group showed significantly higher scores than passive procrastination group (1,2>3, p<.001). However, there was no significant difference between active procrastination and non-procrastination group. The significance of this study is as follows; first, it elucidated adaptive and functional aspect of active procrastination. Second, it newly clarified the relationship among subtypes of procrastination, everyday creativity and cognitive flexibility. Third, through 2nd-stage cluster analysis, it reconfirmed that procrastination is spontaneously classified into 3groups. Fourth, this study is expected to beused as basic material for effective intervention strategy in counseling field by providing strengths/weaknesses of procrastination types for visitors who have difficulty in their performing abilities.