It is common to wonder why, despite clearly understanding what we should do, certain tasks keep being postponed.
This gap between intention and action is often interpreted as a lack of motivation, discipline, or method. Yet this interpretation is reductive and rarely leads to lasting solutions.
In recent years, scientific research has taken a closer look at the precise mechanisms that lead to procrastination.
Rather than focusing on personality or willpower, some studies analyze how the brain evaluates effort, reward, and time at the moment a decision is made.
The study on which this article is based, published in Nature Communications, provides particularly valuable insight. It does not seek to explain why certain tasks are unpleasant, but how the brain arbitrates between acting now or postponing.
Understanding this mechanism makes it possible to take a different view of procrastination and to identify more subtle levers for action, without forcing yourself or judging yourself unnecessarily.
There are times when you know exactly what you need to do. The task is identified, the purpose is clear, and you could even explain to someone else why it would be better to start now.
Yet you postpone it. Then you postpone it again. And after a while, you begin to wonder whether the problem lies in your motivation, your discipline, or your ability to organize yourself.
Recent scientific research offers a different perspective. It does not seek to moralize this behavior or reduce it to a character flaw. It seeks to understand what happens at the precise moment when the decision is made.
The study by Le Bouc and Pessiglione (2022) proposes a neuro-computational explanation of procrastination. In other words, it describes a decision-making mechanism and shows that this mechanism makes it possible to predict the tendency to procrastinate across independent situations, including a real-life situation.
In this article, you will understand what this study highlights, keeping the key terms while explaining them clearly. Then you will see how to use these findings to adjust the way you act, without forcing yourself and without inventing any “miracle technique.”
Procrastination is not a problem of willpower
Let us start with a simple definition. In the study, procrastination is described as voluntarily delaying a task even though one knows that this delay may have negative consequences.
This definition is essential because it avoids a common confusion. Procrastinating does not mean “not understanding” or “not knowing.” Procrastinating rather means: I know, but I postpone anyway.
This is why explanations based solely on motivation are often insufficient.
To understand more deeply why some strategies work better than others, it is useful to understand the precise mechanism by which the brain arbitrates between acting now or postponing.
For additional insight and concrete levers for action, you can consult my article offering advice on how to stop procrastinating.
Of course, some tasks are more or less appealing, more or less tiring, more or less useful. But the study shows that there is a deeper, more stable factor that explains why some people postpone more than others, even when the information is identical.
In summary, procrastination is not necessarily a moral weakness. It can be the consequence of a decision bias.
The key concept: temporal evaluation bias
To understand the study, we need to introduce a central notion: temporal evaluation bias. This bias describes the fact that our brain does not evaluate the present and the future symmetrically.
The further away an event is in time, the less it influences the immediate decision. This mechanism applies both to what is pleasant and to what is unpleasant.
So far, nothing surprising. But the study adds a decisive clarification: reward and effort are not affected in the same way by this temporal bias. And it is precisely this asymmetry that helps explain why procrastination is so common.
In summary, the brain transforms the representation of the future. But this transformation is not identical for what you hope to gain and for what you will have to provide.
Future reward and future effort are not perceived in the same way
The first important finding: the future reward loses intensity over time, but in a relatively moderate way. In other words, a benefit expected tomorrow or in a few weeks generally retains an attractive value in the mind.
The second finding, much more decisive: future effort is strongly attenuated in mental representation. The study shows that the more a task is postponed, the lighter, more accessible, almost obvious the required effort appears.
This means that the same action can be perceived as burdensome when it must be carried out immediately, and as much simpler when it is projected into the future. This is not a conscious reasoning process, but an implicit estimation of the effort required.
In summary, procrastination is not only linked to a lack of desire. It often rests on the impression that the effort will be easier later, while the final reward remains sufficiently attractive to justify postponement.
Why postponing feels logical in the moment
If you have ever had the thought — “I’ll do it tomorrow, it will be easier” — you have already experienced the mechanism described in the study.
At the moment of decision, your brain implicitly compares two options. The first option is to do it now: the effort is immediate and therefore perceived as high.
The second option is to do it later: the effort is in the future and therefore perceived as strongly reduced, while the future reward remains relatively attractive. The result of this calculation is simple: postponing seems coherent.
This is why procrastination is not experienced as a mistake when it occurs. It is experienced as a reasonable choice. Then, the next day, the same calculation repeats itself.
In summary, procrastination is based on a cognitive illusion: the future seems far less costly than it will actually be.
Procrastinating means deciding multiple times
Another major contribution of the study is to show that procrastination is not a single decision. In real life, it functions as a series of iterative decisions. Each day, you face the same choice: do it today or postpone again.
The authors compare two ways of modeling this behavior. In a “static” model, you would decide once and for all on the ideal date.
In a “dynamic” model, you postpone or act by repeating the decision over time. The result of the study is clear: the dynamic model better explains the actual behavior observed at home.
In summary, daily procrastination is not a plan. It is a repetition.
Why deadlines work
You have probably already observed this phenomenon: without a deadline, a task can remain pending for a very long time; with a deadline, the probability of doing it increases as the date approaches.
The dynamic model explains this simply. The closer the deadline gets, the fewer opportunities remain to postpone. The “menu” of future options shrinks. And mechanically, the probability of deciding “I’ll do it now” increases.
In summary, a deadline does not always create motivation. It modifies the structure of the decision.
What the study shows at the brain level
The study is based on intertemporal choices performed under functional MRI. The authors observe partially distinct brain systems involved in reward valuation, in the processing of aversive costs, and in the integration of effort–reward–time information.
The most important point, to remain faithful to the article, is the following: the variable most associated with procrastination, both in the laboratory and in a real-life task at home, is the degree to which effort cost is attenuated when it is postponed in time.
In other words, procrastination is linked to the way the brain “lightens” future effort.
In summary, it is not primarily a question of reward. It is a question of how effort is represented over time.
How to use these findings without forcing yourself
At this stage, one question becomes central: if the problem is an underestimation of future effort, what can you concretely adjust today?
The study does not provide a list of techniques. It provides a mechanism. And this mechanism suggests a principle of action: when you want to reduce procrastination, it is often more relevant to reduce the effort perceived now than to try to increase motivation through injunctions.
This can take several forms, all consistent with the model.
First, reduce the entry cost of the task. If your brain overestimates immediate effort, then making the entry lighter directly changes the “now vs later” comparison.
Second, make decisions more frequent and more explicit. The study explains that real-life procrastination functions as a series of repeated decisions; this highlights the value of increasing the occasions on which you reconsider the task, rather than letting it disappear from your mental field.
Finally, clarify a deadline. The deadline modifies the dynamics because it gradually reduces the options for postponement.
In summary, you do not fight procrastination by criticizing yourself but by changing the structure of the decision.
Operational advice: reducing the gap between imagined effort and real effort
The goal of this operational advice is simple: reduce the gap between the effort your brain imagines for “later” and the effort you actually have to provide “now.”
Prepare a table with four columns.
In the first, write down the task you are postponing.
In the second, write down what feels burdensome if you had to do it now, staying factual: an unclear step, a difficult start, a lack of materials, uncertainty, an initial action that feels too large.
In the third, write down what you can do to reduce only the entry effort, without trying to complete the task: prepare a document, open the file, gather the elements, clarify the first step, define a starting action.
In the fourth, schedule the precise moment when you will perform this entry action.
You will notice something important: when the entry into the task is simpler, your brain has fewer reasons to consider that “tomorrow” will be more comfortable than today.
Now that you understand that procrastination is strongly linked to the attenuation of future effort, you can revisit your recent postponements with a different perspective: not as a moral flaw, but as a decision bias that you can correct by modifying the perception of immediate effort.
If you are interested in the topic of productivity, I invite you to explore all my articles on productivity.
If you would like to benefit from the expertise of a time management coach from our coaching firm, write to us now using our contact form or call us by phone or WhatsApp at +33 6 69 46 03 79.
Find this article in other languages
French : Pourquoi procrastinons-nous vraiment ?
Italiano: Perché procrastiniamo davvero?