On the relationship between time management and time estimation

TLDR

The study investigates whether individuals who self‑report strong time‑management skills are better at estimating future, past, and ongoing task durations. Results show that self‑identified good time managers are most accurate at estimating future task duration, tend to underestimate time passing during tasks, while those who do not see themselves as good managers exhibit substantial over‑ and under‑estimation, supporting the planning fallacy and suggesting a motivational strategy to enhance perceived control.

Abstract

The study explores the relationship between people's self‐report of the use of time management practices and estimates of task duration. The hypothesis is that those who are good time managers will be good at estimating how long a future task will take (expected); how long a previously executed task has taken (retrospective); and how long a task is taking while in process (prospective). In the expected setting results indicate that those who perceive themselves as good time managers are most accurate at estimating the duration of a future task. Of those who do not perceive themselves as good time managers, some grossly overestimate and many underestimate to quite a considerable extent. The latter finding thus provides support for the ‘planning fallacy’ (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). In the prospective setting results indicate those who perceive themselves as good time managers tend to underestimate time passing. It is suggested that this is a motivational strategy designed to enhance a sense of control over time. Findings are discussed in relation to existing theories of time estimation.