Explaining lower-order traits through higher-order factors: the case of trait procrastination, conscientiousness, and the specificity dilemma

In proposing that the higher‐order factor (lack of) Conscientiousness is the major proximal source of the lower‐order trait procrastination, this study set up three approaches to examine this question: the degree to which a measure of the factor would parallel a measure of the trait in predicting dilatory behaviour and negative affect, the degree to which the factor would replace the trait in these predictions, and the extent to which the relations of the trait and the factor to negative affect would be mediated by Neuroticism. University students, 232 females and 48 males, completed a trait procrastination scale and the Conscientiousness and Neuroticism factor scales of the NEO‐PI‐R. They also responded to a measure of dilatory behaviour concerning their academic work, and to a measure of negative affect involving dejection and agitation. Trait procrastination was negatively related to the Conscientiousness factor and to each of its facets. Relations of trait procrastination and of Conscientiousness tended to parallel one another. Indicative of the specificity dilemma, trait procrastination outperformed Conscientiousness in predicting trait‐specific dilatory behaviour. On the other hand, Conscientiousness was the better predictor of dejection. The mediating role of Neuroticism tended to be comparable in linking both the trait and the factor to negative affect. Discussion centres on additional ways to overcome the specificity dilemma when attempting to locate the proximal source of a lower‐order trait within a higher‐order factor. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.