Writing

SOCIAL COGNITIVE MODELS and: THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR Key Concepts in Health Psychology MEANING Many studies have looked at the so-called 'attitude-behaviour relationship'. One approach was Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour (TPB). He was interested in studying how the beliefs held by an individual are important for understanding how they decide to behave toward an attitude object and also how their beliefs predict how they subsequently behave. Ajzen's TPB model was derived from the earlier theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) and differs only in that the TPB is aimed at understanding types of behaviour that are not necessarily under a person's volitional control. Theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) ORIGINS Figure 3.1 shows the structure of the TPB. Basically, beliefs are structured according to an expectancy-value framework. In other words, people hold expectancies about what outcomes they should get if they behave in a particular way. At the same time they also hold beliefs about the value of that outcome for themselves. So, for example, think about taking regular physical exercise. You may think that taking regular physical exercise will result in the outcome of making you feel healthier (outcome expectancy) and that feeling healthier is a good thing (value association) (see Conner and Sparks, 2005 for examples). The TPB argues that the immediate antecedent of actual behaviour is behavioural intention and that if we intend to take regular physical exercise there is an increased likelihood that we will do so. This intention to behave is predicted by three belief-based factors: attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control. Attitude is made up of core beliefs about the outcomes of a behaviour and the value we hold about these outcomes (we've already come across an example of this earlier – taking regular physical exercise). Subjective norm encompasses those beliefs we have about how other people we perceive as being important to us would like us to behave (normative beliefs) and the value we hold about behaving in line with other's wishes (motivation to comply). So in taking regular physical exercise it may be that you perceive that health experts and/or friends want you to take exercise. This is a normative belief. The motivation to comply reflects the beliefs that you want to do what these important others wish you to do. If you believe that, for example, health experts want you to take regular physical exercise and that you like doing what health experts expect of you, you are likely to form the intention to take regular physical exercise and hence behave in this way. The primary difference between the TPB and the TRA lies in the assumption made by the TRA that all behaviour is under volitional control. For many behaviours this may not be the case, such as addictions or other behaviours that have become more habitual over time. The TPB uses the concept of perceived behavioural control (PBC), which are beliefs that relate to how much control a person thinks they have over a certain behaviour, to explain the attitude-behaviour relationship in non-volitional behaviours. For instance, you are likely to form an intention to take regular physical exercise if you believe that it is under your own control, namely that you have the ability to do the behaviour (see also the concept of self-efficacy in social cognition theory and in Chapter 5). We hold many different attitudes, normative beliefs and control beliefs about single behaviours and it is the sum of these expectancy-value relations that predicts a person's intention to behave in a particular way, which subsequently predicts actual behaviour. CURRENT USAGE The TRA/TPB has been used in the prediction of a number of health behaviours including, among others, drug use (e.g. McMillan and Conner, 2003), physical activity (e.g. Hagger et al., 2002), sexually risky behaviours (Godin and Kok, 1996), adherence processes and screening (e.g. Steadman et al., 2002; Hunter et al., 2003), and dietary behaviours (e.g. Armitage and Conner, 1999). Evidence suggests that the TRA and the TPB accurately predict between 40 and 50 per cent of variance in behavioural intention and between 21 and 36 per cent in actual behaviour for either health or non health-related behaviours (e.g. Sutton, 1998; Armitage and Conner, 2001; Trafimow et al., 2002). While some have argued that the model as it is conceptualized provides a 'sufficient' account of factors predicting intention and/or behaviour, there has been some speculation about other factors that may be important as extensions to the TPB/TRA (Ajzen, 2002a). These include more affective factors, moral norms, and self-identity (see Conner and Armitage, 1998; Sheeran, 2002). For instance, rather than being predicted by subjective norms, intentions and behaviours may be predicted by more morally based normative values and beliefs. These are beliefs related to the moral legitimacy or illegitimacy of performing a behaviour (Evans and Norman, 2002). In addition, people's perception of the likelihood of regretting undertaking a behaviour in the future – anticipated regret – has been shown to contribute significant variance to the prediction of an intention to act (Richard et al., 1996). Another factor that has been the focus of some considerable research interest is the role of habit or past behaviour on future behaviour. It is hypothesized that the effect of past behaviour on future behaviour is direct and that this relationship is not necessarily dependent upon the working of other TPB components, namely subjective norms, attitude or perceived behavioural control (Sutton, 1994; Conner and Armitage, 1998; see the habit concept in Chapter 5). It has been argued that past behaviour affects future behaviour because well-learned behaviours may occur repeatedly in the same context (e.g. wearing a seat-belt) such that cognitive control over this behaviour eventually becomes automatic and unconsciously activated (Ouellette and Wood, 1998; Verplanken, 2005). Behaviours that are not so well-learned, or those that occur in more unstable contexts, remain under conscious control. The effects of past behaviour are challenged if the predicted behaviour is realistic and precise implemental plans for translating intentions into behaviour have been developed (Ajzen, 2002b) (see implementation intentions). Relatedly, Fazio's (1990) MODE model (MODE stands for 'Motivation and Opportunities as Determinants') studied the conditions under which attitudes towards an object predicts behaviour automatically. Fazio proposes that when motivation and the opportunity to think consciously about a potential behaviour are low, attitudes towards the target will activate behaviour immediately and automatically, as long as these attitudes are accessible and easily retrievable from memory. When people can consciously deliberate about a behaviour and motivation is high, the automatic attitude-behaviour relationship will be overridden. In other words, the more we think about it, the more our behaviour will be characterized by deliberative processing. To date, little work has been undertaken in health psychology to assess implicit cognition – as opposed to explicit cognition as used in the operationalization of TRA/TPB constructs – involved in the generation and guidance of health behaviours (although see Stacy et al., 2000; Sheeran, Aarts et al., 2005). These processes emphasize the operation of automatic memory associations rather than the rational and explicit processing of behavioural beliefs for the prediction of health behaviours. SIGNIFICANCE TO HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY The TPB has identified a number of key factors that may be important for understanding how and why an individual makes a health-related decision. This model emphasized the role of expectancy-value judgments in the formation of a behavioural intention (or goal) for both general beliefs related to outcomes associated with adaptive or maladaptive behaviour, beliefs related to how social influence from important others is important for behavioural conformity, and how perceptions of control may be significant in forming an intention or decision to act. Where the model has been less successful is in explaining why the attitude-behaviour relationship is not perfectly correlated or predictive and as such how intentions are translated into actual behaviour (see implementation intentions key concept). Further reading The original conceptualization of the theory of planned behaviour, including a discussion of the development of its key concepts and predictions for decision making. An interesting review based on statistical inference of the effectiveness and efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour in predicting behavioural intention and actual behaviour. An extremely useful review of the key components of the theory of planned behaviour and how such components have been used in the exploration of health-related behaviour and decision making. Ajzen, I. (1991) The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. Armitage, C. J. and Conner, M. (2001) Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499. Conner, M. and Sparks, P. (2005) Theory of planned behaviour and health behaviour. In Conner, M. and Norman, P. (eds), Predicting Health Behaviour (2nd edition). Buckingham: Open University Press. pp. 170-222. See also social cognitive models and social cognitive theory; individual differences and habit and locus of control; individual differences and habit and self-efficacy © Ian P. Albery and Marcus Munafo 2008 APA citation: SOCIAL COGNITIVE MODELS and: THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR. (2008). In I. P. Albery, & M. Munafo, Key concepts in health psychology. Sage UK. Credo Reference: https://ezproxy.gardner-webb.edu/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukhp/social_cognitive_models_and_theory_of_planned_behaviour/0?institutionId=5562 Need a different citation style? Find it on Credo Online Reference Service