Human Communication Research ISSN 0360-3989

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Slacking Off or Winding Down? An

Experience Sampling Study on the Drivers
and Consequences of Media Use for Recovery
Versus Procrastination
Leonard Reinecke1 & Wilhelm Hofmann2
1 Department of Communication, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz 55099, Germany
2 Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, 50931 Cologne, Germany

Today’s constant availability of media content provides users with various recreational
resources. It may also challenge self-control, however, once media exposure conflicts with
other goals and obligations. How media users deal with these self-regulatory chances
and risks in their daily lives is largely unknown. Our study addressed the predictors and
consequences of recreational and procrastinatory media use using experience sampling
methodology (N = 215; 1,094 media use episodes). Results suggest that trait (self-control,
performance goal orientation) as well as state variables (exhaustion) are significant pre-
dictors of media use for recovery versus procrastination. Whereas recreational media use
showed a positive effect on entertainment, which in turn enhanced subjective well-being,
negative self-evaluation elicited by procrastinatory media use negatively affected well-being.

Keywords: Well-Being, Media Enjoyment, Self-Control, Media Use, Media Effects.

doi:10.1111/hcre.12082

Media use has long become a crucial part of everyday life and occupies a considerable
share of leisure time in the lives of many users in the United States and around
the world (e.g., Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014). Mobile Internet connections,
smartphones, and wireless devices have revolutionized the dissemination of media
content, making information, entertainment, and communication available at any-
time and anyplace for a growing number of users who are “permanently online”
(Vorderer & Kohring, 2013, p. 188). This almost ubiquitous availability of media con-
tent offers many chances and benefits for self-regulation: Media exposure provides
opportunities for the regulation of mood and arousal (Zillmann, 1988), is associated
with the satisfaction of intrinsic human needs (Reinecke, Vorderer, & Knop, 2014;
Wirth, Hofer, & Schramm, 2012), and facilitates recovery from stress and strain
(Reinecke, Klatt, & Krämer, 2011). However, it does also pose a significant challenge
to the self-control capacities of media users (Panek, 2014). When distraction from
important but unpleasant tasks is just a click away, media use can easily distract from

Corresponding author: Leonard Reinecke; e-mail: leonard.reinecke@uni-mainz.de

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 1

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

the attainment of long-term goals and obligations. In fact, a growing body of research
has demonstrated that media use can be hard to resist in everyday life (Hofmann,
Vohs, & Baumeister, 2012) and that media content is frequently used to procrastinate
(Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001).
This suggests that media content represents a double-edged sword: On one hand,
media use can be a valuable resource for self-regulation and recovery. On the other
hand, it can be a potential threat to self-control and goal attainment in everyday life.
However, the factors that transform media use into a beneficial versus potentially
harmful self-regulatory experience are largely unknown.
The goal of this study was thus to explore the predictors of recreational versus pro-
crastinatory media use as well as the effects of both modes of media exposure using
the experience sampling method (Hektner, Schmidt, & Csikszentmihalyi, 2006). In
the following sections, we shall first review existing empirical research on the use of
media content for recovery and procrastination. We will then develop a set of hypothe-
ses that introduce state (mental and physical exhaustion) as well as trait (self-control
and achievement orientation) predictors of media use for recovery versus procrastina-
tion. We will then address the situational consequences resulting from the interplay
of both modes of media use for subjective well-being and propose that the differ-
ential patterns of negative self-conscious emotions and media enjoyment elicited by
recreational versus procrastinatory media use are central drivers of their well-being
outcomes. The findings will be discussed with regard to their implications for research
on media use and self-control, entertainment research, as well as the fast developing
field of research addressing the effects of media use on well-being.

Media-induced recovery: Media use as a self-regulatory resource

The notion that media use can provide self-regulatory benefits for media users has a
long tradition in communication research and media psychology. Most prominently,
mood management theory (Zillmann, 1988) proposes that media content has a
strong effect on affect and arousal and that selective exposure to media stimuli
follows the hedonic goal of excitatory homeostasis and mood optimization. Recent
research has demonstrated that the self-regulatory potential of media use extends
beyond the regulation of affect and arousal and includes the restoration of depleted
resources through media-induced recovery (Reinecke et al., 2011). Recovery refers to
the “process of replenishing depleted resources or rebalancing suboptimal systems”
(Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006, p. 331) and is a crucial precondition for health and
psychological well-being (Sluiter, de Croon, Meijman, & Frings-Dresen, 2003). Our
daily lives are characterized by alternating phases of work or other activities that
consume our physical and psychological resources and phases of rest and recreation
(Zijlstra & Sonnentag, 2006). Depleted resources can be restored during phases of
rest when they are no longer demanded (Craig & Cooper, 1992). Besides simple
resting, however, off-job activities are crucial components of successful recovery
(Sonnentag, 2001; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006). According to Sonnentag and Fritz
(2007), recovery experience is a multidimensional construct that encompasses four

2 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

distinct subprocesses: Leisure activities that offer (a) psychological detachment from
work and facilitate (b) relaxation as well as activities that provide (c) mastery expe-
riences and feelings of (d) control during leisure time are particularly effective in
facilitating the recovery process.
A growing body of research has demonstrated that media use can be a highly suc-
cessful recovery strategy (Reinecke et al., 2011; Rieger, Reinecke, Frischlich, & Bente,
2014) and that media users make frequent use of the recovery potential of media
entertainment (Reinecke, 2009). The existing evidence suggests that media use is more
than a simple “low-effort activity” (Sonnentag, 2001, p. 199) but can elicit the full spec-
trum of recovery experience (Reinecke, 2009; Reinecke et al., 2011). Furthermore, the
effects of media-induced recovery go beyond subjective recovery experience and have
consistently been linked to other recovery outcomes, such as increased vitality and
cognitive performance (Reinecke et al., 2011; Rieger et al., 2014).
The research reviewed above substantiates the positive potential of media use for
self-regulation. Media use for recovery from stress and strain is an effective strategy
to restore subjective energy and individual well-being and to increase subsequent
performance. Recreational media use thus represents an adaptive and functional
behaviour providing significant self-regulatory resources. This positive and restora-
tive potential of media use is contrasted by instances of procrastinatory media use
that undermine self-regulation and self-control and hinder rather than supporting
the functioning of the individual.

Media procrastination: Media use as a challenge for self-control

Procrastination refers to “the voluntary delay of an intended and necessary and/or
[personally] important activity, despite expecting potential negative consequences
that outweigh the positive consequences of the delay” (Klingsieck, 2013, p. 26). Con-
sequently, procrastination represents a highly irrational behavior and a “quintessential
self-regulatory failure” (Steel, 2007, p. 65): Whereas successful self-control demands
for the regulation of one’s own impulses and situational responses “to bring them
into line with standards such as ideals, values, morals, and social expectations, and
to support the pursuit of long-term goals” (Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice, 2007, p. 351),
procrastination puts these individual standards and long-terms goals at risk.
Several studies have addressed the causes and predictors of procrastination
(Klingsieck, 2013; Steel, 2007; van Eerde, 2003). Procrastination has been linked
to relatively stable trait characteristics, such as low self-control or high impulsive-
ness (Steel, 2007; van Eerde, 2003). Furthermore, prior findings consistently have
demonstrated that procrastination is strongly related to task aversiveness, with more
difficult, effortful, or anxiety-inducing tasks being more frequently avoided than
more pleasurable and attractive tasks (Klingsieck, 2013; Pychyl, Lee, Thibodeau,
& Blunt, 2000; Steel, 2007). The relationship between task aversiveness and pro-
crastination has been further explicated by recent research which demonstrated
that short-term mood optimization is a key driver of procrastination (Sirois &
Pychyl, 2013): Procrastinators prioritize their short-term desire to terminate the

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 3

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

aversive feelings aroused by an upcoming task whereas the detrimental long-term

consequences of the task delay are largely ignored.
This notion of procrastination as an attempt to optimize mood strongly underlines
the potential attractiveness of media exposure as an effective “tool” for procrasti-
nators. Media exposure is easily accessible and often highly automatized (Bayer,
Dal Cin, Campbell, & Panek, 2016) and has a strong impact on current mood
(Zillmann, 1988). Traditional entertaining media content such as TV and video
games (Vorderer, Klimmt, & Ritterfeld, 2004), but also social media and online
communication (Reinecke, Vorderer et al., 2014), provide pleasurable experiences
and positive affect. Because procrastinators show a high preference for pleasurable
activities as distractors from aversive tasks (Pychyl et al., 2000; Van Eerde, 2000),
media content is likely to play a central role in their procrastinatory behavior.
In fact, a growing number of studies have provided initial evidence for a con-
nection between media use and procrastination. Procrastination has been linked to
“cyberslacking,” the use of the Internet for nonwork-related purposes at the work-
place (Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001, p. 432). Prior research has demonstrated that the use of
online content is a common strategy to avoid and delay work tasks during working
hours (Vitak, Crouse, & LaRose, 2011), and that the frequency of cyberslacking is
positively related to trait procrastination (Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001).
A second branch of research has explored the relationship between procras-
tination and problematic or excessive Internet use (Davis, Flett, & Besser, 2002;
Thatcher, Wretschko, & Fridjhon, 2008). Research in this area has demonstrated that
individuals who use the Internet excessively show a higher tendency to delay work
or other obligations to spend more time online (Thatcher et al., 2008), while other
researchers have gone even further and conceptualized online procrastination as a
central dimension of problematic Internet use (Davis et al., 2002).
A third group of studies has linked procrastination to general, unproblematic, and
nonpathological forms of Internet and social media use (Hinsch & Sheldon, 2013;
Quan-Haase & Young, 2010). In two studies conducted by Hinsch and Sheldon (2013),
the reduced use of social media and online games resulted in decreased procrastina-
tion. In line with this finding, participants in a study by Quan-Haase and Young (2010)
described the motivation to “put off something I should be doing” (p. 356) as one of
the strongest drivers to engage in social media use.
Very few studies have addressed procrastination in the context of traditional
offline media. In a study by Panek (2014), trait self-control was negatively related
to a composite index of leisure time media use (TV, DVD, online video, video on
demand, and Social Network Sites use). A more explicit link between offline media
use and procrastination was provided by research from Reinecke, Hartmann et al.
(2014), who found that TV and video games are frequently used for procrastination,
particularly by depleted media users.
The evidence reviewed above clearly supports the notion that exposure to media
content is a pleasurable distractor activity which is frequently used as an instrument of
procrastination. So far, however, the existing research has remained fragmentary and

4 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

based on a heterogeneous set of indicators of procrastinatory media use. To the best

of our knowledge, research investigating the use of media content for procrastination
in situ to explore its drivers and reciprocal interactions with other, more instrumental
forms of media use, such as media-induced recovery, does not exist.
The present research: Drivers and consequences of recreational and procrastinatory
media use
On a conceptual level, recreational and procrastinatory media use show striking
similarities concerning their underlying psychological dynamics: Both forms of
media use are driven by the motivation to terminate a noxious affective state. Media
use for recovery aims at ameliorating the negative and unpleasant effects of depleted
individual resources (Reinecke et al., 2011), whereas media use for procrastination
is targeted at distraction from negative feelings elicited by an aversive upcoming task
(Sirois & Pychyl, 2013). From a self-control perspective, therefore, both the wish to
engage in either recreational or procrastinatory media use represents a desire, that
is, an “affectively charged motivation toward a certain object, person, or activity that
is associated with pleasure or relief from displeasure” (Hofmann & Kotabe, 2012,
p. 709). With this in mind, why should we expect different determinants of and
consequences resulting from media use for recovery versus procrastination?
As outlined above, both recreational and procrastinatory media use have positive
proximal effects for media users: Both forms of media use represent a pleasurable activ-
ity and facilitate unwinding from stress and strain (recreational use; Reinecke et al.,
2011) and distraction from aversive tasks (procrastination; Sirois & Pychyl, 2013),
respectively. With regards to their distal effects, however, recreational and procrasti-
natory forms of media use show striking differences: Recreational media use not only
cures the negative affective short-term effects of exhaustion but makes a significant
contribution to the replenishment of depleted resources (Reinecke et al., 2011; Rieger
et al., 2014). Procrastinatory behavior, in contrast, merely irrationally postpones the
problem (i.e., the aversive task), does not provide any productive steps toward task ful-
fillment, and may jeopardize goal attainment as well as the physical and psychological
health of the procrastinating individual (Tice & Baumeister, 1997).
Consequently, recreational media use represents a case of strategic delay, whereas
procrastinatory media use is a form of irrational delay (Klingsieck, 2013). The concept
of strategic delay describes instances of delay where tasks are postponed for functional
reasons (e.g., prioritizing a situationally more important task) and that, ultimately,
result in positive consequences for goal attainment (Klingsieck, 2013). This well rep-
resents the case of recreational media use: Although recreational media use may come
at the cost of delaying other tasks, the resulting restoration of resources should facili-
tate subsequent goal attainment (Reinecke et al., 2011). The benefits of media-induced
recovery are thus likely to outweigh the negative consequences of the delay. In case of
procrastinatory media use, however, the resulting delay is unnecessary, dysfunctional,
and irrational.
These structural differences between media use for recovery and procrastination
should have crucial implications for the predictors and consequences of both forms

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 5

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

of media use. On a trait level, different personality characteristics are likely to predis-
pose individuals for recreational versus procrastinatory media use. A key variable that
should be closely related to the individual susceptibility to procrastinatory behavior
is trait self-control. Once a conflict between a current desire (e.g., entertaining media
use) and other long-term goals (e.g., an aversive task or obligation) is detected by
the individual, self-control processes moderating between short-term need satisfac-
tion and long-term goal attainment will be initiated (Hofmann, Baumeister, Forster,
& Vohs, 2012; Hofmann & Kotabe, 2012).
The execution of self-regulatory strategies and resistance to temptation is effortful
and demands for the volitional resources of the individual (Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice,
2007). Whether self-control is successful or not thus heavily depends on the indi-
vidual’s willpower: If the available volitional resources are low, impulsive behavior
or self-control failures, such as procrastination, are more likely to occur (Hofmann,
Friese, & Strack, 2009; Hofmann & Kotabe, 2012). Whereas volitional energy shows
situational fluctuations (Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice, 2007), a large body of research has
also demonstrated significant individual differences in trait self-control, which has
been linked to academic performance, interpersonal success, and increased psycho-
logical health (e.g., Hofmann, Luhmann, Fisher, Vohs, & Baumeister, 2014; Tangney,
Baumeister, & Boone, 2004).
Individuals with high trait self-control should be more successful at resisting
procrastination than individuals suffering from chronically low levels of volitional
energy, because they manage to resolve conflicts among short-term desires and
long-term goals more effectively (Hofmann et al., 2014). This view is supported by
a considerable number of studies that have demonstrated a negative relationship
between general procrastination and self-control (Klingsieck, 2013; Steel, 2007; van
Eerde, 2003). Accordingly, we expect to find the same pattern of relationship between
trait self-control and procrastinatory media use:
H1: Trait self-control is negatively related to media use for procrastination.

In contrast to media use for procrastination, recreational media use as a form of

strategic rather than dysfunctional delay does not represent an instance of self-control
failure but rather a form of goal-oriented behavior—in the sense of a “means” that
serves a particular “end,” that of recovery. The replenishment of depleted resources
via media use increases performance in subsequent tasks (Reinecke et al., 2011). This
should make media use for recovery purposes a particularly interesting strategy for
individuals with a strong focus on goal attainment. Prior research has demonstrated
significant individual differences in performance goal orientation (Button, Mathieu, &
Zajac, 1996; Elliot & Church, 1997; Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999) that have impor-
tant implications for goal-related behavior and coping with challenges and obstacles.
Performance goals have been linked to increased task performance as well as
functional strategies of goal attainment such as persistence and effort (Elliot &
Church, 1997; Elliot et al., 1999). Its potential to facilitate subsequent performance
characterizes media-induced recovery as an efficient goal attainment strategy, making

6 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

it a particularly attractive behavioral means for individuals with a strong performance

goal orientation:
H2: Performance goal orientation is positively related to media use for recovery.
In addition to trait predictors, self-regulatory media use should also be guided by
situational variables. As recreational media use aims at the restoration of resources,
subjective feelings of resource depletion (i.e., exhaustion) should be a strong situ-
ational cue for recovery-related media use. Physical and psychological exhaustion
should increase the salience of homeostasis needs and thus trigger recreational
media use as a functional self-regulatory strategy. This rationale is supported by
cross-sectional research that has demonstrated a positive relationship between the
subjective need for recovery and the self-reported frequency of media use for recre-
ational purposes (Reinecke, 2009). Individuals perceiving higher levels of situational
exhaustion should thus show a higher tendency for recreational media use:
H3: Perceived exhaustion is positively related to media use for recovery.
This mechanism should not extend to procrastinatory media use, since procras-
tination aims at postponing an aversive task irrespective of the individual’s current
capability for goal attainment. In other words, procrastinators do not turn to media
use because they are too tired to execute the task at hand successfully and with the
intention to increase the likelihood of successful goal attainment through media use.
Rather, procrastinatory media use irrationally prioritizes proximal pleasure at the cost
of long-term goals (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013). We thus do not expect to find a significant
relationship between exhaustion and media procrastination.
We further propose that besides the different mechanisms driving media use
for recovery versus procrastination, both forms of media exposure do also differ
markedly in their situational consequences due to the self-conscious emotions
elicited by them. Self-conscious emotions (e.g., shame and guilt) are activated by
self-evaluative processes that relate stimuli, events, and behavior to the personal
goals and standards of the individual (Tangney & Dearing, 2002; Tracey & Robins,
2004). They provide valuable feedback for the self-control process (Baumeister,
Vohs, DeWall, & Zhang, 2007; Hofmann, Kotabe, & Luhmann, 2013), as negative
self-conscious emotions signal maladaptive behavior.
This suggests striking differences with regard to the self-evaluations elicited by
recreational and procrastinatory media use. Media use for recovery as a form of pro-
ductive behavior facilitating goal attainment should not elicit negative self-conscious
emotions such as guilt. Procrastinatory media use, however, is in direct contrast with
self-regulatory goals and the individual’s personal “restrain standards” (Hofmann
et al., 2009, p. 163), and should thus result in negative self-evaluations. This rationale
is supported by research from Hofmann et al. (2013) who found that self-conscious
emotions were negatively related to the enactment of nontemptations (i.e., desires
that do not conflict with other goals) but positively correlated with the enactment
of temptations. Furthermore, prior research has found guilt reactions both to
procrastination in general (Pychyl et al., 2000) as well as to media procrastination in

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 7

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

specific (Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001; Reinecke, Hartmann, et al., 2014), lending further
support to the notion that recreational and procrastinatory media use will result in
different patterns of self-evaluation:
H4a: Media use for recovery is negatively related to negative self-evaluation.

H4b: Media use for procrastination is positively related to negative self-evaluation.

We further propose that recreational and procrastinatory media use has different
effects on media enjoyment. Recent models of media enjoyment have emphasized the
role of appraisal processes for the occurrence of entertainment experience (Vorderer
& Hartmann, 2009). Accordingly, the emotions and experiences elicited during media
exposure are cognitively reappraised with regard to their compatibility with the indi-
viduals current hedonic (e.g., mood optimization) and eudaimonic (e.g., personal
growth, social desirability, etc.) goals. If this reappraisal process yields a positive eval-
uation, media exposure is perceived as entertaining and results in media enjoyment.
As the negative self-conscious emotions elicited by procrastinatory media use indi-
cate a conflict between media use and the individual’s goals, they should be negatively
related to media enjoyment (Reinecke, Hartmann et al., 2014). Recreational media
use, however, does not conflict with individual standards, but is consistent with the
goal of restoring depleted resources, and should thus be positively related to media
enjoyment (Reinecke et al., 2011):
H5a: Negative self-evaluation is negatively related to media enjoyment.

H5b: Media use for recovery is positively related to media enjoyment.

H5c: Media use for procrastination has an indirect negative effect on media enjoyment
via negative self-evaluation.
Finally, we propose that the affective reactions resulting from procrastinatory
and recreational media use also have an effect on the situational well-being of
media users. Results from Hofmann et al. (2013) revealed a detrimental effect of the
negative self-conscious emotions elicited by giving in to a temptation on situational
happiness. We expect to find a similar effect of the self-conscious emotions resulting
from procrastinatory media use on subjective well-being. Furthermore, since media
enjoyment represents a pleasurable affective experience (Vorderer et al., 2004), we
suggest that it will positively contribute to situational well-being:
H6a: Negative self-evaluation is negatively related to subjective well-being.

H6b: Media enjoyment is positively related to subjective well-being.

Method
Participants
A total of N = 215 adults (70% females) from the United States participated in this
study. Age ranged between 18 and 67 years (M = 29.78, SD = 9.70). Forty percent of
the participants were university students and 27% were unemployed at the time of

8 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

the study. Four percent of the participants had completed high school as their highest
level of education and 34% had completed some college but currently held no col-
lege degree, while the majority of participants had either completed college (38%)
or postgraduate studies (21%). Half of the participants (50%) were not in a relation-
ship whereas the remaining participants were married (20%), engaged (3%), or in a
steady relationship (24%). Participants were recruited via ads in the local networks
of the online platform Craigslist (www.craigslist.org) in the metropolitan areas of
Washington D.C., Boston, Chicago, and Dallas.

Procedure
Participants following the invitation to participate were first redirected to a website
providing a short introduction to the study. Participants were informed that the goal of
the research project was to examine “people’s use and experience with media” and that,
upon registration, they would be asked to respond to short online surveys sent to their
cellphones several times a day for three consecutive days. After granting informed
consent, the participants responded to an in-take survey that assessed demographic
variables, trait measures, and their mobile phone number. The experience sampling
data collection started 1 day after participation in the in-take survey.
Experience sampling data were collected over a period of three consecutive
days for each participant. On each day, six signals in the form of text messages (via
Short Message Service; SMS) were distributed to the cellphones of the participants
throughout a time window between 09:00 a.m. to 09:00 p.m using the SurveySignal
application (Hofmann & Patel, 2015). To assure that signals were delivered equally
over the day for all participants, they were sent randomly within 2-hour segments
of the 12-hour daily sampling interval with the condition that consecutive signals
were 45 minutes apart at minimum (Hektner et al., 2006). Each signal sent to the
participants’ smartphone included an URL leading to an online survey containing the
experience sampling measures that were responded to via the participants’ cellphone.
If participants did not respond to the online measure within 2 hours after the signal,
the survey for the respective sampling point was closed. On average, participants
responded to M = 12.97 (SD = 4.36) out of the 18 signals over the 3-day sampling
period, yielding a median response rate of 77.7% and resulting in a total of 2,789
sampling points. Participants were reimbursed for each signal they responded to with
a 0.50$ gift certificate for the online vendor Amazon.com.

Experience sampling data collection

The first part of the experience sampling protocol assessed the current psycho-
logical state of the respondents. Participants responded to the question “How
do you feel right now” on twelve 7-point semantic differentials coded from −3
to +3. Exhaustion was assessed with two items (“mentally exhausted—mentally
rested” and “physically exhausted—physically rested”) which were recoded so that
higher values represent higher levels of exhaustion and combined into a single
mean index (M = −.40; SD = 1.62) which showed sufficient internal consistency

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 9

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

(Cronbach’s α = .79). Self-evaluation was measured with three items (“guilty—

proud,” “incompetent—competent,” and “unproductive—productive”) that were
also recoded so that higher values indicate higher levels of negative self-evaluation.
The 3-item scale (M = −.89; SD = 1.29) showed satisfactory internal consistency
(α = .75). Subjective well-being (M = .73; SD = 1.28) was measured with eight
items (“sad—happy,” “irritable—cheerful,” “lonely—sociable,” “weak—strong,”
“passive—active,” “drowsy—alert,” “bored—excited,” and “stressed—calm”) which
were adapted from Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi (1990) and showed a high internal
consistency (α = .90).
The second part of the protocol assessed general media use, media use for recov-
ery or procrastination, and media enjoyment. In a first step, participants reported
whether they were currently using media or had recently (within the last 30 minutes)
used media. For participants reporting no current or recent media use, the experience
sampling protocol ended at that point. The remaining participants reported what
media they were currently using or had recently used (“watching television,” “using
the Internet,” “playing computer/video game,” “using other media”). Participants
who indicated they were currently using or had recently used the Internet were asked
to report whether they were using/had used the Internet “for any activities other
than work-related purposes.” For participants whose current/recent Internet use
was exclusively of work-related nature or who reported the use of “other” media,
the experience sampling protocol ended at that point to avoid potential confounds
between leisure-time and work-related media use and to focus on the use of TV,
Internet, and video games.
Subsequent to the assessment of media use, participants reported their media
enjoyment (M = 2.61; SD = 1.09) by responding to the question “How much [are you
enjoying/did you enjoy] the media content you [are using right now/were using]?” 1
on a scale from 0 “not at all” to 4 “very much.” Furthermore, recreational (M = 2.49;
SD = 2.14) and procrastinatory media use (M = 2.14; SD = 2.07) was measured
with the question “Why [do/did] you [currently/recently] use media?” Participants
responded to two items (“to recover from work or other exhausting tasks” and “to
avoid doing other things I should be doing”) on a scale from 0 “does not apply at all”
to 6 “fully applies.” Additionally, and to further explore the prevalence of instances
of media use that present users with self-regulatory challenges, perceived conflict
between current/recent media use and other goals was assessed with the question “To
what extent [does/did] your [current/recent] media use conflict with other important
goals you [have right now/had]?” Participants responded on a scale from 0 “not at
all” to 4 “very much” (M = 1.26; SD = 1.29). If participants indicated the presence
of goal conflict (responses >0 “not at all”) they were requested to indicate which
goals their media use conflicted with by choosing all options that applied from a list
of 12 different goals (leisure, not delaying things, efficient time use, moral integrity,
socializing, social recognition, sport achievement, professional achievement, educa-
tional achievement, good appearance, bodily fitness, other) adapted from Hofmann,
Vohs et al. (2012).

10 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

Trait measures
The intake survey assessed demographic data (age, gender, level of education, student
status, employment, and relationship status) as well as relevant trait measures. Trait
self-control was measured with the 13 items of the Brief Self-Control Scale (Tangney
et al., 2004). Participants responded to the items (e.g., “I am good at resisting temp-
tation”) on a 5-point scale from 1 “not at all” to 5 “very much”. The scale (M = 3.74;
SD = .95) showed a satisfactory internal consistency (α = .85). Trait achievement ori-
entation (M = 5.48; SD = .91) was assessed with the eight items of the Performance
Goal Orientation Scale (Button et al., 1996). Participants responded to the items (e.g.,
“I prefer to do things that I can do well rather than things that I do poorly”) on a
7-point scale from 1 “strongly disagree” to 7 “strongly agree” (α = .85).

Data analytic procedure

To account for the nested structure of the experience sampling data (observa-
tions within persons), all analyses (with the exception of descriptive analyses of
raw data) were conducted with multilevel analysis. Dependent variables were left
in their original metric for all multilevel analyses. All Level 1 predictors were
person-mean-centered to obtain an unbiased estimate of the pure Level 1 relation-
ship between the dependent and independent variables (Enders & Tofighi, 2007).
Continuous Level 2 predictors were grand-mean-centered for all analyses (Enders
& Tofighi, 2007). We included media content (TV; Internet; video game), recency of
media use (current; recent), gender (male; female), and age as control variables. The
three categorical control variables were effects coded, with “video games,” “recent
media use,” and “male” as base categories (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003). This
allowed us to estimate the effects of our predictors across all such situations while
statistically controlling for possible effects of these variables on our outcome variables.

Results
Descriptive findings
Media use was reported in 1,430 of the 2,798 sampled episodes (51.3%), indicat-
ing a relatively high frequency of media use in the sample. These media occurrences
included 277 sampling points with exclusively work-related Internet use and 59 cases
of the use of undisclosed “other” media that were excluded from further analysis.
In the remaining 1,094 episodes with nonwork-related media exposure, participants
most frequently used the Internet (54.5%), followed by TV (37.3%) and video games
(8.1%). Social Network Sites such as Facebook or Twitter (23.1%), YouTube or other
video streaming sites (14.7%), and online news (13.9%) were the three most frequently
used content categories in episodes with Internet use, whereas drama (26.7%), com-
edy (20%), and reality TV (16.6%) were the TV programs watched most frequently in
episodes with TV exposure. Casual or puzzle games (19.6%), sports games (13.7%),
and adventure games (11.8%) were the game types most frequently played in episodes
with game use. Participants reported current media use more frequently (67.4%) than
recent media use.

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 11

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

Conflicts between media use and other important goals were reported on more
than half of all media use occurrences (61.2%), yielding a relatively high prevalence
of self-regulatory challenges originating from media use in everyday life. On average,
when conflict was present, participants reported moderate levels of conflict strength
(M = 2.05; SD = 1.05). Media use conflicted most frequently with efficient time use
(54.7%), not delaying things (35.3%), and professional achievement (23.8%), further
substantiating the role of media use for procrastination. Participants reported con-
flicts in 63.2% of episodes with TV use, followed by 60.7% of episodes with game use,
and 58.3% of episodes with Internet use. Conflict was equally distributed among the
media genres, χ2 (2) = 2.88, p = .238.

Test of hypotheses
Detailed results of all multilevel regression analyses are presented in Table 1. In a first
step, the trait (H1 and H2) and state (H3) predictors of recreational and procrastina-
tory media use were tested. As predicted in H1 and H2, respectively, trait self-control
was negatively related to media use for procrastination (β = −.15, p = .005) whereas
trait performance goal orientation was positively related to media use for recovery
(β = .12, p = .026). Supporting the discriminant validity of these individual differ-
ence variables, trait self-control was unrelated to media use for recovery (β = −.03,
p = .567) and trait performance goal orientation was not a significant predictor of
procrastinatory media use (β = .08, p = .124). This pattern of results further substanti-
ates the notion that recreational media use represents a functional and goal-oriented
behavior whereas media use for procrastination represents a form of self-control fail-
ure. Furthermore, and as predicted in H3, higher levels of exhaustion were positively
related to media use for recovery (β = .12, p < .001). Exhaustion was not, however,
related to media use for procrastination (β = −.01, p < .825), further supporting our
suggestion that procrastination is not a strategic and functional reaction to situational
resource depletion.
In a second step, the situational consequences of recreational and procrastinatory
media use were tested. As predicted in H4a, recreational media use was negatively
associated with negative self-evaluation (β = −.05, p = .041), whereas procrastinatory
media use showed a positive relationship with negative self-evaluation, support-
ing H4b (β = .10, p < .001). The data also confirmed the hypothesized effects on
media enjoyment. As predicted in H5a, the negative self-evaluation elicited by
procrastinatory media use was negatively related to media enjoyment (β = −.15,
p < .001), whereas media use for recovery was positively related to media enjoyment
as predicted in H5b (β = .06, p = .014). To test the indirect effect of procrastinatory
media use on enjoyment via negative self-evaluation predicted in H5c, a Sobel test
was computed (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). The test confirmed a significant indirect
effect (z = −3.52, p > .001) and supported H5c. Finally, the data also showed the
expected pattern of results with regard to situational well-being. As predicted in H6a,
negative self-evaluation had a negative effect on situational well-being (β = −.43,

12 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

 Table 1 Summary of Results of Multilevel Regression Analyses

Media Use for

Media Use for Recovery Procrastination Negative Self-Evaluation
Predictor B SE β p B SE β p B SE β p
L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

Base predictors
Intercept 2.48 .13 — <.001 2.01 .13 — <.001 −.79 .08 — <.001
Trait self-control −0.07 .12 −.03 .567 −.34 .12 −.15 .005 — — — —
Trait performance goal orientation 0.29 .13 .12 .026 .20 .13 .08 .124 — — — —
Exhaustion 0.21 .04 .12 <.001 −.01 .04 −.01 .825 — — — —
Media use for recovery — — — — — — — — −.04 .02 −.05 .041
Media use for procrastination — — — — — — — — .09 .02 .10 <.001
Negative Self-Evaluation — — — — — — — — — — — —
Media Enjoyment — — — — — — — — — — — —
Trait control variables (Level 2)
Gender 0.07 .13 .03 .585 .09 .13 .04 .456 .00 .08 .00 .999
Age .00 .01 .01 .791 −.00 .01 −.02 .681 −.03 .01 −.24 <.001
Situational control variables (Level 1)

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

Media use: TV 0.26 .10 .06 .01 −.05 .10 −.01 .587 −.04 .06 −.01 .518
Media use: Internet −0.15 .09 −.04 .102 .04 .09 .01 .676 −.06 .05 −.03 .239
Media use: Current versus recent −0.18 .06 −.07 .005 −.10 .06 −.04 .099 −.11 .04 −.07 .002
Explained variancea
Level 1 (within subjects) R2 = .08 R2 = .00 R2 = .13
Level 2 (between subjects) R2 = .00 R2 = .07 R2 = .00

13
Slacking Off or Winding Down?
14
Table 1 Continued

Media Enjoyment Subjective Well-Being

Predictor B SE β p B SE β p

Base predictors
Intercept 2.56 .06 — <.001 .75 .07 — <.001
Trait self-control — — — — — — — —
Trait performance goal orientation — — — — — — — —
Slacking Off or Winding Down?

Exhaustion — — — — — — — —
Media use for recovery 0.05 .02 .06 .014 −.01 .01 −.02 .306
Media use for procrastination −0.03 .02 −.03 .200 .01 .02 .01 .721
Negative self-evaluation −0.17 .03 −.15 <.001 −.60 .03 −.43 <.001
Media enjoyment — — — — .12 .03 .07 <.001
Trait control variables (Level 2)
Gender −0.02 .06 −.02 .713 −.10 .07 −.07 .192
Age 0.01 .01 .11 .036 .03 .01 .23 <.001
Situational control variables (Level 1)
Media use: TV 0.05 .06 .02 .337 .12 .04 .04 .005
Media use: Internet −0.12 .05 −.05 .023 −.03 .04 −.01 .466
Media use: Current versus recent 0.04 .03 .03 .211 −.03 .03 −.02 .269
Explained variancea
Level 1 (within subjects) R2 = .05 R2 = .53
Level 2 (between subjects) R2 = .02 R2 = .00
a Toprovide an analog to R2 in ordinary regression, we followed the procedure recommended by Hox (2010, pp. 70–71). Specifically, the explained
Level 1 (within subject) variance was estimated by comparing the Level 1 residual error variance in the null model (intercept only) to the Level 1
residual error variance in the final model (intercept and all predictor variables). Analogously, the explained Level 2 (between subject) variance was
estimated by comparing the Level 2 residual error variance in the null model (intercept only) to the Level 2 residual error variance in the final model
(intercept and all predictor variables).

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann
L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

p < 001.), whereas media enjoyment positively contributed to subjective well-being

(β = .07, p < .001).

Discussion
The aim of this study was to extend prior research on media use and self-control by
exploring the prevalence of self-regulatory challenges originating from media use and
by testing the predictors and situational consequences of media use for recovery ver-
sus procrastination based on experience sampling data. Our findings strongly support
the notion that media use provides significant chances and risks for self-regulation in
the everyday lives of media users. The results of our descriptive statistical analyses
demonstrated a high prevalence of media-related goal conflict with more than half of
the assessed media occurrences showing at least some degree of conflict with other
important goals. This suggests that, from a self-control perspective, media use quite
frequently represents a temptation demanding self-control resources and that media
use often occurs although it is inconsistent with other current goals. Accordingly,
media use for procrastination was relatively salient in our sample. These results clearly
underlined the fact that media exposure is frequently used as a tool for procrastination
and emphasize the relevance of procrastination as an important driver of media use.
Furthermore, our findings with regard to H1 and H2 identified two central trait
predictors of media use for procrastination versus recovery, respectively. As pre-
dicted in H1, media use for procrastination was negatively related to trait self-control.
This finding underlines the maladaptive nature of media procrastination as a self-
regulatory failure and suggests that individual differences in trait self-control are
an important protective factor making media user less susceptible to dysfunctional
forms of media use.
Trait self-control was not related to media use for recovery, further underlining the
functional nature of media-induced recovery. Rather than representing a temptation
that is in conflict with other goals and responsibilities and that needs to be controlled
through self-control, recreational media use is a goal-oriented behavior that facilitates
subsequent performance (Reinecke et al., 2011). This rationale is further supported
by the significant relationship between media use for recovery and trait performance
orientation (H2), indicating that people high in performance orientation select recre-
ational media use more frequently as a means to recovery.
This study further demonstrated that recreational and procrastinatory media use
were not exclusively driven by individual differences but also triggered by situational
cues (H3). As predicted, media users showed a higher tendency to use media exposure
for recreational purposes when they experienced physical or mental exhaustion. This
suggests that subjective exhaustion increases the salience of homeostatic needs and
triggers attempts to restore depleted resources via media exposure. Exhaustion was
not, however, related to procrastinatory media use, further underlining that media
use for procrastination is not a form of strategic delay aimed at the compensation of
situational depletion, but a form of dysfunctional delay that conflicts with successful
self-regulation.

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 15

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

We also showed that these structural differences between recreational and pro-
crastinatory media use have important implications for the situational normative
appraisal of media use in the form of self-conscious emotions (H4a and H4b). As a
goal-oriented behavior that is in line with current self-regulatory goals, media use
for recovery was negatively related to negative self-evaluation in this study (H4a). In
contrast, procrastinatory media use as a dysfunctional behavior that conflicts with
the goals and standards of the individual, resulted in negative normative appraisal
and was positively related to negative self-evaluation (H4b). This pattern of findings
replicates and extends prior research linking general and media-related procrastina-
tion to negative self-evaluations and guilt (Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001; Pychyl et al., 2000;
Reinecke, Hartmann, et al., 2014).
Our results further reveal that recreational and procrastinatory media use have
a strong influence on media users’ affective reactions to media content (H5a, H5b,
and H5c) and on their psychological well-being (H6a and H6b). As predicted, media
use for recovery was positively related to media enjoyment (H5a), whereas the
negative self-evaluation elicited by procrastinatory media use resulted in lower media
enjoyment (H5b and H5c). This further demonstrated the dysfunctional nature of
procrastinatory media use: Not only does procrastination hindered long-term goal
attainment and resulted in negative distal effects (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013; Tice &
Baumeister, 1997). The negative self-evaluation triggered by procrastinatory media
use also reduced its proximal effects and impaired short-term mood optimization
through media enjoyment. This further supported the findings from Hofmann et al.
(2013), demonstrating that negative self-conscious emotions significantly reduced
the hedonic net effect of giving in to temptations.
Beyond extending our insights into the affective consequences of recreational and
procrastinatory media use, these findings have important theoretical implications for
communication research in general. They underline that the effects of media exposure
do not solely depend on media users processing of and reaction to the media message,
but also on the normative interpretation of media use. This study substantially extends
prior research (e.g., Reinecke, Hartmann, et al., 2014), by further revealing the mech-
anisms that yield a positive versus negative normative evaluation of media use and by
demonstrating the situational consequences of the self-conscious emotions elicited by
procrastinatory and recreational media use.
Our findings also have significant implications for entertainment research and
provide empirical support for recent theoretical models linking media enjoyment to
need satisfaction and goal congruence (Vorderer & Hartmann, 2009). Previous exper-
imental research has provided evidence of the pivotal role of intrinsic need satisfaction
in general (Tamborini et al., 2011; Wirth et al., 2012) and of the satisfaction of recov-
ery needs in specific (Reinecke et al., 2011) for media enjoyment. To the best of our
knowledge, however, this study is the first to demonstrate these relationships in situ
and based on experience sampling data.
Furthermore, our results extend prior research on media use and well-being. Our
findings suggest that recreational and procrastinatory forms of media use represent

16 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

the opposing ends of a continuum of functional versus dysfunctional media exposure

with antagonistic effects on well-being. Whereas the negative self-evaluation trig-
gered by procrastinatory media use has a significant detrimental effect on subjective
well-being (H6a), recovery-related media use contributes to situational well-being
via increased media enjoyment (H6b). This substantially extends prior research that
has addressed the self-regulatory benefits of media use in laboratory settings (e.g.,
Reinecke et al., 2011; Rieger et al., 2014) by exploring the interaction of functional
and dysfunctional forms of media use in the everyday lives of media users and by
identifying the resulting affective reactions as an important moderator of the effects
of media use on well-being.
Several limitations of this study must be noted. First, due to characteristic limita-
tions of experience sampling questionnaires that need to ensure maximum brevity of
the sampling protocol, several relevant variables had to be assessed with single-item
measures (e.g., media use for recovery vs. procrastination, media enjoyment).
Although this may reduce the reliability of measurement, it is a common procedure
and a methodological necessity in experience sampling research that is compensated
for by the large number of observations (and hence, power). Furthermore, although
our study assessed and statistically controlled for different global categories of media
use (Internet, TV, and games), the role of the specific media content used in the
respective episode goes beyond the scope of this article. However, because our results
demonstrated that the frequency of goal conflict did not differ between the global
media genres and as the effects predicted in H1–H6 were controlled for the influence
of media type, we believe that the pattern of results found in this study should
generalize to different media contents.
A further potential limitation refers to the demographic characteristic of our
sample. Although participants were sampled from different age groups and socioeco-
nomic backgrounds, younger and highly educated participants are overrepresented
in this study. However, as the general patterns of effects found in this study are
highly consistent with prior research on self-control and procrastination (Hofmann,
Baumeister, et al., 2012; Steel, 2007), they are likely to apply to the general population.
Overall, this study has clearly underlined the relevance of integrating theory and
findings from self-control research in media uses and effects research. Although the
results provide new insights into the interplay of functional and dysfunctional forms
of media use and the resulting consequences for subjective well-being, several ques-
tions remain unanswered. Perhaps the most interesting and pressing question for
future research pertains to the reasons for self-regulatory failures related to media use.
Our results demonstrated that situational goal conflicts related to media exposure are
very salient for media users. Why, then, do they act against their better knowledge
and what factors increase the risk for media procrastination?
General models of self-control suggest two important “ingredients” of successful
resistance to temptation (Hofmann & Kotabe, 2012): control motivation (i.e., forming
an intention to resist a desire) and volition (mobilizing the necessary willpower and
perseverance to resist a desire). Media use as a volitional self-control failure should be

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 17

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

strongly related to the self-regulatory capacity available to the individual when facing
a temptation (Hofmann & Kotabe, 2012).
In fact, the results of this study underlined that trait self-control is a key fac-
tor determining the individual susceptibility of media-related procrastination. Media
procrastination as a motivational self-control failure could be based on the false expec-
tations of media users. Prior research has suggested that procrastination is driven
by a desire for short-term mood optimization (Sirois & Pychyl, 2013). This study
demonstrates, however, that the mood management potential resulting from media
enjoyment was considerably impaired through the negative self-evaluation triggered
by procrastinatory media use.
This might suggest that media users are prone to overestimating the proximal
benefits of procrastinatory media use, which should reduce their motivation to resist
media-related temptations. Future research should thus address the role of affective
forecasting errors (Wilson & Gilbert, 2005) for procrastinatory media use. Further
exploring these potential drivers of media procrastination and possible intervention
strategies that could help media users to better cope with media-related goal con-
flicts would significantly extend our understanding of the interplay of functional and
dysfunctional forms of media use in everyday life and the resulting consequence for
psychological health and well-being.

Note
1 The temporal perspective (current versus recent media use) of this and all subsequent
items was automatically adapted in accordance with the participants’ preceding response
to the current versus recent media use item.

References
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., DeWall, C. N., & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes
behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 11, 167–203. doi:10.1177/1088868307301033
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of self-control.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 351–355.
Bayer, J. B., Dal Cin, S., Campbell, S. W., & Panek, E. (2016). Consciousness and
self-regulation in mobile communication. Human Communication Research, 42, 71–97.
doi:10.1111/hcre.12067
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). American time use survey—2013 results. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational
research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 67, 26–48. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0063
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Craig, A., & Cooper, R. E. (1992). Symptoms of acute and chronic fatigue. In A. P. Smith & D.
M. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of human performance (Vol. 3, pp. 289–339). London,
England: Academic Press.

18 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

Davis, R. A., Flett, G. L., & Besser, A. (2002). Validation of a new scale for measuring
problematic internet use: Implications for pre-employment screening. CyberPsychology &
Behavior, 5, 331–345.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance
achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and
exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91,
549–563.
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel
models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12, 121–138.
doi:10.1037/1082-989X.12.2.121
Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2006). Experience sampling method:
Measuring the quality of everyday life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hinsch, C., & Sheldon, K. M. (2013). The impact of frequent social Internet consumption:
Increased procrastination and lower life satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12,
496–505. doi:10.1002/cb.1453
Hofmann, W., Baumeister, R. F., Forster, G., & Vohs, K. D. (2012). Everyday temptations: An
experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 102, 1318–1335. doi:10.1037/a0026545
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Strack, F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dual-systems
perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 162–176.
doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01116.x
Hofmann, W., & Kotabe, H. (2012). A general model of preventive and interventive
self-control. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 707–722.
doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2012.00461.x
Hofmann, W., Kotabe, H., & Luhmann, M. (2013). The spoiled pleasure of giving in to
temptation. Motivation and Emotion, 37, 733–742. doi:10.1007/s11031-013-9355-4
Hofmann, W., Luhmann, M., Fisher, R. R., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2014). Yes, but
are they happy? Effects of trait self-control on affective well-being and life satisfaction.
Journal of Personality, 82, 265–277. doi:10.1111/jopy.12050
Hofmann, W., & Patel, P. V. (2015). SurveySignal: A convenient solution for experience
sampling research using participants’ own smartphones. Social Science Computer Review,
33, 235–253. doi:10.1177/0894439314525117
Hofmann, W., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2012). What people desire, feel conflicted
about, and try to resist in everyday life. Psychological Science, 23, 582–588.
doi:10.1177/0956797612437426
Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Klingsieck, K. B. (2013). Procrastination: When good things don’t come to those who wait.
European Psychologist, 18, 24–34. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000138
Kubey, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Television and the quality of life: How viewing
shapes everyday experience. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lavoie, J. A. A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2001). Cyberslacking and the procrastination superhighway:
A web-based survey of online procrastination, attitudes, and emotion. Social Science
Computer Review, 19, 431–444. doi:10.1177/089443930101900403

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 19

Slacking Off or Winding Down? L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann

Panek, E. (2014). Left to their own devices: College students’ “guilty pleasure” media use and
time management. Communication Research, 41, 561–577. doi:10.1177/0093650213
499657
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in
communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage
sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13–54).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pychyl, T. A., Lee, J. M., Thibodeau, R., & Blunt, A. (2000). Five days of emotion: An
experience sampling study of undergraduate student procrastination. Journal of Social
Behavior & Personality, 15, 239–254.
Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A
comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society,
30, 350–361. doi:10.1177/0270467610380009
Reinecke, L. (2009). Games and recovery: The use of video and computer games to recuperate
from stress and strain. Journal of Media Psychology, 21, 126–142. doi:10.1027/1864-1105.
21.3.126
Reinecke, L., Hartmann, T., & Eden, A. (2014). The guilty couch potato: The role of ego
depletion in reducing recovery through media use. Journal of Communication, 64,
569–589. doi:10.1111/jcom.12107
Reinecke, L., Klatt, J., & Krämer, N. C. (2011). Entertaining media use and the satisfaction of
recovery needs: Recovery outcomes associated with the use of interactive and
noninteractive entertaining media. Media Psychology, 14, 192–215.
doi:10.1080/15213269.2011.573466
Reinecke, L., Vorderer, P., & Knop, K. (2014). Entertainment 2.0? The role of intrinsic and
extrinsic need satisfaction for the enjoyment of Facebook use. Journal of Communication,
64, 417–438. doi:10.1111/jcom.12099
Rieger, D., Reinecke, L., Frischlich, L., & Bente, G. (2014). Media entertainment and
well-being—Linking hedonic and eudaimonic entertainment experience to
media-induced recovery and vitality. Journal of Communication, 64, 456–478.
doi:10.1111/jcom.12097
Sirois, F., & Pychyl, T. (2013). Procrastination and the priority of short-term mood
regulation: Consequences for future self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7,
115–127. doi:10.1111/spc3.12011
Sluiter, J. K., de Croon, E. M., Meijman, T. F., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. (2003). Need for
recovery from work related fatigue and its role in the development and prediction of
subjective health complaints. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 60(Suppl I),
i62–i70.
Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: A diary study.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 196–210.
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The recovery experience questionnaire: Development and
validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 204–221.
Sonnentag, S., & Zijlstra, F. R. H. (2006). Job characteristics and off-job activities as predictors
of need for recovery, well-being, and fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 330–350.
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of
quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65–94. doi:10.1037/
0033-2909.133.1.65

20 Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association

L. Reinecke & W. Hofmann Slacking Off or Winding Down?

Tamborini, R., Grizzard, M., Bowman, N. D., Reinecke, L., Lewis, R. J., & Eden, A. (2011).
Media enjoyment as need satisfaction: The contribution of hedonic and nonhedonic
needs. Journal of Communication, 61, 1025–1042. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01593.x
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good
adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of
Personality, 72, 271–324.
Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. New York: Guilford.
Thatcher, A., Wretschko, G., & Fridjhon, P. (2008). Online flow experiences, problematic
Internet use and Internet procrastination. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2236–2254.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.10.008
Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Longitudinal study of procrastination, performance,
stress, and health: The costs and benefits of dawdling. Psychological Science, 8, 454–458.
Tracey, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2004). Putting the self into self-conscious emotions: A
theoretical model. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 103–125.
Van Eerde, W. (2000). Procrastination: Self-regulation in initiating aversive goals. Applied
Psychology, 49, 372–389. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00021
van Eerde, W. (2003). A meta-analytically derived nomological network of procrastination.
Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1401–1418.
Vitak, J., Crouse, J., & LaRose, R. (2011). Personal Internet use at work: Understanding
cyberslacking. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1751–1759.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.03.002
Vorderer, P., & Hartmann, T. (2009). Entertainment and enjoyment as media effects. In J.
Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp.
532–550). New York: Routledge.
Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media
entertainment. Communication Theory, 14, 388–408. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.
2004.tb00321.x
Vorderer, P., & Kohring, M. (2013). Permanently online: A challenge for media and
communication research. International Journal of Communication, 7, 188–196.
Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing what to want. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 131–134. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00355.x
Wirth, W., Hofer, M., & Schramm, H. (2012). Beyond pleasure: Exploring the eudaimonic
entertainment experience. Human Communication Research, 38, 406–428.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01434.x
Zijlstra, F. R. H., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). After work is done: Psychological perspectives on
recovery from work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15,
129–138.
Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management through communication choices. American
Behavioral Scientist, 31, 327–340.

Human Communication Research (2016) © 2016 International Communication Association 21