Zikri Bagas Munandar

Bibliometric Analysis on the Word Procrastination

Introduction

Bibliometric analysis on the word procrastination. Explore procrastination research trends (1973-2024) via bibliometric analysis. Uncover rising studies post-2010 on stress, self-control, and academic achievement.

Abstract

This study aims to understand how research trends on procrastination have evolved over time. Using bibliometric methods, the authors analyzed 1,000 documents from Google Scholar that discussed this topic from 1973 to 2024. The results of the analysis show that the number of studies on procrastination has increased significantly in recent years, especially after 2010. Topics that often appear are related to stress, self-control, academic achievement, and other psychological and social factors. Data visualization with the help of VOSviewer software shows that procrastination is a complex topic and involves many fields of science. This study is expected to help academics and practitioners to better understand the direction of research developments on procrastination and develop more effective treatment strategies.

Review

This study undertakes a timely bibliometric analysis to map the evolving research landscape surrounding the concept of procrastination. The aim to understand research trends using a substantial dataset of 1,000 documents over a five-decade span (1973-2024) promises valuable insights into a pervasive and increasingly relevant psychological and social phenomenon. By employing bibliometric methods and data visualization tools like VOSviewer, the authors position their work as a critical resource for academics and practitioners seeking to comprehend the developmental trajectory of procrastination research. The abstract effectively highlights key findings, noting a significant surge in studies, particularly post-2010, and identifying prominent thematic clusters such as stress, self-control, and academic achievement. The use of VOSviewer to illustrate the interdisciplinary complexity of procrastination research is a strong point, suggesting a sophisticated analysis of conceptual relationships. However, a crucial methodological point requiring deeper scrutiny in the full paper is the exclusive reliance on Google Scholar for data collection. While accessible, Google Scholar's indexing, citation counting, and filtering capabilities are known to differ significantly from curated databases like Web of Science or Scopus, which are typically preferred for comprehensive and replicable bibliometric analyses. The article would benefit from a thorough discussion on how this choice might impact the representativeness and completeness of the dataset and, consequently, the generalizability of its findings. Despite the potential methodological considerations regarding database choice, the study's stated objective to aid in understanding research direction and fostering effective intervention strategies is commendable. The insights derived from visualizing the intricate connections between procrastination and various psychological and social factors hold promise for guiding future research endeavors and informing practical applications. Once the full methodology and potential limitations are thoroughly elucidated, this analysis could serve as a valuable compass for researchers navigating the multifaceted field of procrastination studies and for practitioners seeking evidence-based approaches to address this common challenge.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.