Which theory states the ways of process by which the needs can be converted into Behaviour or performance?

3.2 The Theory of Planned Behavior

The TRA assumes that the behavior under investigation is under volitional control, that is, that people believe that they can execute the behavior whenever they are willing to do so. Gradually, the TRA was used more often for the study of behaviors for which control was a variable factor. For that purpose, the TRA was complemented by a component that was named perceived behavioral control. This concept represents the extent to which people believe they are able to perform the behavior because they have adequate capabilities and/or opportunities or are lacking in these. It is very easy to see that this factor can substantially improve the generality of application of the model because there are many behaviors that need specific skills or external facilities. For example, recycling is virtually impossible if no collection system is available, and abandoning private cars is often impractical, at the least, when public transportation functions poorly.

The successor of the TRA that incorporates volitional control is the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Similar to attitude and subjective norm, the joint effects of two subconcepts determine behavioral control. The first subconcept consists of so-called control beliefs, that is, the estimated likelihood that each of a number of specific factors will facilitate or impede execution of the behavior. An example might be the following control belief: “I can go to my office by bus given the distance from the bus stop to my home.” The second factor is called perceived power, that is, a judgment of the degree of facilitation or impediment that each specific control belief represents. An example might be the following: “The distance from the bus stop to my home makes it very easy/very difficult to go to my office by bus.” The formula combining the two subconcepts of likelihood of control and perceived power is identical to that of the attitude and subjective norm concepts: PBC=∑C×P.

Both the TRA and the TPB have been used repeatedly for investigating specific environmental behaviors such as changing travel mode, water conservation, recycling, and green consumerism. In general, the models have proven to be useful in understanding the behavior, with important contributions of perceived behavioral control.

4.2.1 The TRA (Theory of Reasoned Action) model

The TRA model was proposed in 1975 by Fishbein and Azjen [FIS 75]2. It focuses on the construction of a system of observation of two groups of variables, which are:

attitudes defined as a positive or negative feeling in relation to the achievement of an objective;

subjective norms, which are the very representations of the individuals’ perception in relation to the ability of reaching those goals with the product.

These authors have emphasized the importance of intention more than the reality of usage. Actually, people who buy something do it in relation to what they feel like doing and not really because of an actual need related to the model they belong to. In the context of IT, this approach does not work.

We consequently notice the inadequacy of this model in relation to the topic of our study.

Theory of Reasoned Action

The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) suggests that a person’s behavior is determined by their intention to perform the behavior and that this intention is, in turn, a function of their attitude toward the behavior and subjective norms (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The best predictor of behavior is intention or instrumentality (belief that the behavior will lead to the intended outcome). Instrumentality is determined by three things: their attitude toward the specific behavior, their subjective norms, and their perceived behavioral control. The more favorable the attitude and the subjective norms and the greater the perceived control, the stronger the person’s intention to perform the behavior.

The theory of reasoned action

The theory of reasoned action (TRA; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) maintains that volition and intention predict behavior. According to TRA, if people evaluate the suggested behavior as positive (attitude) and if they think others want them to perform the behavior (subjective norm), this results in a higher intention (motivation) and they are more likely to perform the behavior. A high correlation of attitudes and subjective norms to behavioral intention and to behavior has been confirmed in many studies (Sheppard et al., 1998). However, results of some studies gesture to a limitation of this theory: behavioral intention does not always lead to actual behavior. A counter-argument against the strong relationship between behavioral intention and actual behavior led to the evolution of the theory of planned behavior, a model which includes the impact of non-volitional factors on behavior.

Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior

The Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior share an emphasis on perceived subjective (injunctive) norms (i.e. perceptions related to the approval of behavior by a relevant reference group) and personal attitudes about engaging in a behavior as predictors of intentions to engage in the behavior. Several researchers have recommended extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to include perceived objective (descriptive) norms (i.e. perceptions of the degree to which a relevant reference group engages in a specific behavior). Research with college students indicate the greater one’s perception of others’ drinking, the greater the occurrence of drinking and related problems for the individual. Research also reliably indicates that alcohol use is associated with overestimation of how frequently and how much other people drink. This model underlies normative reeducation approaches that juxtapose an individual’s perception of drinking norms and actual drinking norms to highlight this overestimation. Correcting this misperception has been shown to result in reductions in perceived norms and reductions in the individual’s drinking behavior consistent with the revised norm.

1.4 The Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior

The theory of reasoned action (TRA; Ajzen and Fishbein 1980) developed out of social–psychological research on attitudes and the attitude–behavior relationship. The model assumes that most behaviors of social relevance (including health behaviors) are under volitional control, and that a person's intention to perform a behavior is both the immediate determinant and the single best predictor of that behavior. Intention in turn is held to be a function of two basic determinants: attitude towards the behavior (the person's overall evaluation of performing the behavior) and subjective norm (the perceived expectations of important others with regard to the individual performing the behavior in question). Generally speaking, people will have strong intentions to perform a given action if they evaluate it positively and if they believe that important others think they should perform it. The relative importance of the two factors may vary across behaviors and populations.

Although not shown in Fig. 1, the TRA also specifies the determinants of attitude and subjective norm. Attitude is held to reflect the person's salient behavioral beliefs concerning the possible personal consequences of the action. For example, a person who believes that performing a given behavior will lead to mostly positive personal consequences will hold a favorable attitude towards the behavior. Specifically, attitude is held to be a function of the sum of the person's salient behavioral beliefs concerning the outcome of the action each weighted by their evaluation of that outcome. An indirect, belief-based, measure of attitude can be created by multiplying each behavioral belief by its corresponding outcome evaluation and then summing over outcomes. In a similar way, subjective norm is a function of the person's beliefs that specific individuals or groups think he or she should, or should not, perform the behavior. A person who believes that most significant referents think he or she should perform the behavior will perceive social pressure to do so. Specifically, subjective norm is held to be a function of the person's salient normative beliefs with respect to each referent, each weighted by their motivation to comply with that referent. An indirect measure of subjective norm can be created by multiplying each normative belief by its corresponding motivation to comply and then summing over referents.

Many behaviors cannot simply be performed at will; they require skills, opportunities, resources, or cooperation for their successful execution. The theory of planned behavior (TPB; Ajzen 1991) was an attempt to extend the TRA to include behaviors that are not entirely under volitional control, for example giving up smoking or using a condom. To accommodate such behaviors, Ajzen added a variable called perceived behavioral control to the TRA. This refers to the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior, and is assumed to reflect past experience as well as anticipated obstacles. According to Ajzen, perceived behavioral control is a function of control beliefs in just the same way as subjective norm is a function of normative beliefs. It is assumed to have a direct influence on intention. For desirable behaviors, greater perceived behavioral control should lead to stronger intentions. Perceived behavioral control may also have a direct predictive effect on behavior, through two different mechanisms. First, holding intention constant, an individual with higher perceived behavioral control is likely to try harder and to persevere for longer than an individual who has lower perceived control. Second, people may have accurate perceptions of the amount of actual control they have over the behavior.

A number of meta-analyses of the TRA/TPB have been conducted. The findings show that when intention is predicted from attitude and subjective norm, or from attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control, between 40 and 50 percent of the variance is explained, on average. When behavior is predicted from intention alone or from intention and perceived behavioral control, between 19 and 38 percent of the variance is explained (Sutton 1998).

Prototype/Willingness Model

Prototype/Willingness Model is an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action and posits two paths, a reasoned path and a social reaction path, to engaging in risky behaviors such as substance use. The reasoned path represents an intentional style of processing whereby actions are premeditated and are a function of behavioral intentions. In turn, intentions to engage in a behavior are influenced by one's attitudes and perceptions of other's attitudes toward the behavior (i.e. subjective norms). In contrast, the social reaction path represents a heuristic-based style of processing suggesting that there are times when behavior is unintended and occurs in situations that facilitate risky behaviors such as substance use. The theory suggests that in some risky situations, it is not reasoned decision making (behavioral intentions), but behavioral willingness that determines decisions to engage in substance use. For example, an adolescent may have no predetermined intentions to smoke marijuana but may be perfectly willing to, should an opportunity or situation arise. Similarly, an individual may have no intentions of using a hard drug (e.g. crack cocaine or methamphetamine) but be willing to try it if the occasion arises. Risk prototypes refer to our impressions of individuals who engage in particular behaviors and are presumed to predict behavioral willingness. For example, an individual with a favorable prototype of recreational cocaine users would presumably be more willing to try cocaine in a situation where it becomes available than someone with a less-favorable prototype.

One of the assumptions underlying this theory is that while a person chooses to engage in substance use, substance use often is not planned or even intended. A second assumption is that individuals have distinct social images/representations (prototypes) of the type of person their age who engages in substance use (typology of a person rather than description). These prototypes are associated with behavioral willingness such that the more favorable the image of a substance user, the more likely they are to engage in substance use and to accept the social consequences of being seen as a substance user. An additional assumption of the Prototype/Willingness Model is that the relationship between intentions and behavior becomes stronger than the relationship between willingness and behavior over time.

Personal Choice as Constraint Satisfaction

A limiting factor of all cognitive theories, including the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA: Fishbein, & Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein, 2000), is that they do not provide mechanism information regarding how personal decisions are made or how decisions once made influence behavior. Decisions appear to be the product of ‘free will’, but that is not an acceptable scientific explanation. Orr et al. (2013) re-conceptualized intention formation and change in terms of a dynamic constraint satisfaction mechanism where prior beliefs interact with present social context to generate decisions. They provided a connectionist mechanism that makes personal decision-making understandable in natural science terms. This form of explanation has been recommended by Read et al. (1997). It has been used by Conrey and Smith (2007) and Monroe and Read (2008) to explain attitudes. Each element relevant to the decision process is represented by one or more processing nodes. If two nodes need to be active at the same time then their connection weight becomes positive. If one node needs to be active and another node needs to be inactive then their connection weight becomes negative. Connection weights of exactly zero probably never exist. Relevant features of a specific problem are represented by activating the nodes associated with these features. The system then seeks to satisfy all constraints as far as it possibly can using what are essentially multivariate statistical methods. The final solution constitutes the networks decision.7 This approach to decision-making has proved successful in cognitive and social psychology (Read & Miller, 1998; Thomas & McClelland, 2008).

At least three conceptual advantages flow from this reconsideration. First, it re-conceptualizes intention as a dynamic rather than a static state that arises from a highly non-linear constraint satisfaction process involving internal and external factors. Intention formation results from the interaction of current social situations with past learning. Second, learning modifies the constraints. This means that intention formation is influenced by new learning. This new learning can derive from a social change, such as when a child moves from elementary to middle to high school to college to adult life. These and related factors enable the constraint satisfaction model to effectively model developmental processes. Third, the effects of the past constitute separate constraints from the effects of direct social influence.

THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR

The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975, Ajzen & Fishbein 1980). Both models are based on the premise that individuals make logical, reasoned decisions to engage in specific behaviours by evaluating the information available to them. The performance of a behaviour is determined by the individual’s intention to engage in it (influenced by the value the individual places on the behaviour, the ease with which it can be performed and the views of significant others) and the perception that the behaviour is within his/her control. In RA a TPB model based on attitudes, social support, self efficacy and intention was moderately successful in predicting and explaining self management of arthritis (Strating et al 2006). Whilst no validated questionnaires are available, a comprehensive guide to developing measures of TPB components is given in Ajzen (1991). A challenge in TPB measurement is the difficulty in conceptualising and capturing attitudes.

6.3.5 I-Change Model (Integrated Change Model)

The I-Change Model integrates several models of behavior change (such as the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior) and defends that the primary determinant of behavior is a person’s intention to carry out that behavior [14]. In this stage-based model, behavior is defined as having two categories (“trial” and “maintenance”) and intention as having three different states (“precontemplation,” “contemplation,” and “preparation”). According to this model, intentions may not always transfer into behavior, depending on ability factors and barriers to action. The primary determinant of intentions is motivation, which in turn is determined by three factors: attitudes, social influences, and self-efficacy. Social influences encompass others’ perceptions of the behavior (social norms), observation of others carrying out the behavior (social modeling), and the pressures or support from others to execute the behavior (pressure/support).

As is the case with Social Cognitive Theory, the I-Change Model is particularly well suited for social media interventions, which may contribute to facilitate the effects of social influence.