Using normative beliefs in the context of the theory of reasoned action
Historically, there has been a strong tendency for health
researchers to use normative beliefs in the context of the
theory of reasoned action to predict and influence health
behaviors. One strategy has been as follows. Because the measurement
of behavioral intentions, attitudes, and subjective norms
does not require any preliminary research and can be done
with a simple questionnaire (see Ajzen
& Fishbein, 1980
xClose
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes
and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall and Trafimow,
2004
xClose
Trafimow, D. (2004). Attitude measurement. In Ronald Lee (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, Vol 1 (pp. 233-244).
Academic Press. for details), a resource-saving
first step is to measure these variables in a sample that
represents the population of interest. After performing a
multiple regression analysis, and obtaining beta weights indicating
the relative contributions of attitudes and subjective norms
to predict behavioral intentions, one can easily determine
which of the two variables contributes most to this prediction.
If attitudes are a good predictor and subjective norms are
not, then there is no point in wasting resources on the normative
pathway (which means there is no point in performing elicitation
studies to find out about relevant normative beliefs because
they do not matter anyway). Instead, the focus should be on
the attitudinal pathway. On the other hand, if subjective
norms are a good predictor of behavioral intentions, then
this is a strong indication that it is worthwhile to take
the normative pathway seriously. In this case, the next step
would be to perform an elicitation study
to find out the relevant normative beliefs. This can be done
by simply asking participants to list others who are important
to them in deciding whether or not to perform the behavior
of interest. Once the relevant normative beliefs have been
elicited, they can be measured in the main study (see below
for a description).
A second strategy is to perform elicitation studies right away, to find out the relevant normative and behavioral beliefs. Then, using the data
from the elicitation study as a basis, a questionnaire is constructed that includes all of the theory of reasoned action variables for use in the
main study. The advantage of the second strategy is that it requires fewer steps (two steps instead of three). A disadvantage is that, because
there is no a priori way to know whether both the attitudinal and normative pathways are relevant to the behavior of interest in the particular
population of concern, both the elicitation and main studies have to include both pathways, and are consequently more complex.
Regardless of which strategy is used, at least two types of useful information can be gleaned. In the first place, multiple regression analysis can
be used to determine whether the attitudinal or normative pathway is most important for the behavior or population of interest. Secondly, for the purposes of
intervention, those normative beliefs (or motivations to comply) that are most predictive of subjective norms (or behavioral intentions or
behaviors) can be determined so that they can be the focus of an intervention.
Using normative beliefs in the context of the theory of planned behavior
Ajzen's
(1988)
xClose
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior.
Chicago: The Dorsey Press. theory of
planned behavior is similar to Fishbein's theory
of reasoned action, but with the addition of perceived behavioral
control-the extent to which a behavior is believed to be under
the person's control. Therefore, instead of there being two
causal pathways to behavior as in the theory of reasoned action,
there are three. These are the attitudinal, normative, and
control pathways. However, the way normative beliefs are used
in the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior are
similar.
Using normative beliefs in the context of within-participants research paradigms
Trafimow
(1994)
xClose
Confirm Trafimow, D. (1994). Predicting
intentions to use a condom from perceptions of normative pressure
and confidence in those perceptions. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 24, 2151-2163. pointed
out that there might be different causal pathways to behaviors
for different persons. For example, some people might be more
prone to perform behaviors on the basis of the attitudinal
pathway whereas the normative pathway might be more important
for other people. Consequently, intervention strategies should
be focused not only on the behavior of interest, but also
on the specific persons of interest. To do this, however,
it is necessary to have a method of determining, for every
person, whether his or her behaviors tend to be caused by
attitudinal or normative factors. Trafimow and his colleagues
(Trafimow
& Finlay, 1996
xClose
Trafimow, D., & Finlay, K. A. (1996). The importance of subjective
norms for a minority of people: Between-subjects and within-subjects
analyses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
22, 820-828. ; Trafimow,
Kiekel, & Clason, 2004
xClose
Trafimow, D., Kiekel, P. A., & Clason, D. (2004). The simultaneous
consideration of between-participants and within-participants
analyses in research on predictors of behaviors: The issue
of dependence. European Journal of Social Psychology,
34, 703-711. ) showed that there is such a method.
The idea is to consider a large set of behaviors
in a particular domain of interest rather than a single behavior.
For example, the domain could be cancer prevention behaviors,
exercise behaviors, safety behaviors, dietary behaviors, and
so on. Instead of measuring variables (e.g., theory of reasoned
action variables) for only one behavior, the researcher measures
these variables for the whole set of behaviors. This research
design makes it possible to conduct traditional between-persons
analyses (these are analyses within a single behavior and
across persons), but it is also possible to perform within-persons
analyses (these are analyses within a single person and across
behaviors). Thus, it is possible to determine, for each person,
whether his or her behaviors are more controlled by the attitudinal
or normative pathway. Finlay and her colleagues (Finlay,
Trafimow, & Moroi, 1999
xClose
Finlay, K. A., Trafimow, D., & Moroi, E. (1999). The importance
of subjective norms on intentions to perform health behaviors.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29,
2381-2393. ; Finlay,
Trafimow, & Villarreal, 2002
xClose
Finlay, K. A., Trafimow, D., & Villarreal, A. (2002). Predicting
exercise and health behavioral intentions: Attitudes, subjective
norms, and other behavioral determinants. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 32, 342-358. ) have demonstrated
the usefulness of this approach in a variety of health domains,
and Sheeran,
Trafimow, Finlay, and Norman (2002)
xClose
Sheeran, P., Trafimow, D., Finlay, K. A., & Norman, P. (2002).
Evidence that the type of person affects the strength of the
perceived behavioural control-intention relationship. British
Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 253-270.
have demonstrated that the approach can be extended to include
additional variables such as perceived behavioral control.
|