Do interoceptive deficits contribute to decision-making problems in academic procrastination

Interoception plays an important role for intuitive decision-making. One possible explanation is that the perception of
somatic markers when simulating the outcome of different action alternatives guides the selection for the potentially best
option. In the present study, we aimed at investigating if chronically procrastinating individuals show interoceptive deficits,
which may explain poor decision-making performance. We tested 19 chronic procrastinators (14 females) and 22 nonprocrastinating
control individuals (14 females), recruited from students and staff of the University of Luxembourg. This
study consisted of a laboratory experiment including questionnaires assessing procrastinating behavior and two separate
behavioral paradigms. Using the Schandry Heartbeat Perception Task as an indicator for interoceptive accuracy and the
Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) for the assessment of decision-making performance. Questionnaire data confirmed significantly
higher procrastination scores in that group. While male participants showed a significantly higher interoceptive accuracy
score than their female counterparts, procrastinators and non-procrastinators did not differ significantly in interoception.
Furthermore, no differences in the choice of deck selections were found between procrastinators and non-procrastinators.
Interoceptive accuracy was unrelated to decision-making performance. No significant group differences were found
for either analysis regarding the performance development as well as sex differences in the IGT. We observed a learning
effect in the IGT, with choices for profitable decks increasing over time and poor choices declining. The current study did
neither support reduced decision-making problems, nor interoceptive deficits in procrastination. Future studies should
incorporate interoceptive indicators of other organ systems and self-report measures to elucidate possible alterations in
procrastination.