Tourism Review

The efficacy of the theory of planned behavior for predicting intentions to choose a travel destination: a
review
Sergey Yuzhanin David Fisher
Article information:
To cite this document:
Sergey Yuzhanin David Fisher , (2016),"The efficacy of the theory of planned behavior for predicting intentions to choose a
travel destination: a review", Tourism Review, Vol. 71 Iss 2 pp. -
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TR-11-2015-0055
Downloaded on: 14 June 2016, At: 20:11 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 15 times since 2016*
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:332610 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The efficacy of the theory of planned behavior for predicting

intentions to choose a travel destination: a review

1 INTRODUCTION

The theory of planned behavior (TPB) is a well-known theoretical model that originates in

the field of social psychology. TPB is based on such psychological concepts as beliefs,

attitudes, norms, perceptions, and behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1975). Generally
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

speaking, the theory explains the relationship between consumers’ beliefs, attitudes,

intentions, and behaviors (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1975, Ajzen, 1991, 2008). It is widely used in

social sciences.

Based on a review of academic sources, this paper analyses the efficacy of the TPB for

predicting intentions to choose a travel destination. The model does not appear to be

particularly helpful in achieving this particular goal. Given that the model is probably the

main theoretical approach for predicting behaviour, it is important that an understanding of

why the model has mixed results in predicting destination choice. It will be argued here that

there may be a factor missing between the intention to travel and actually travelling to a

chosen destination. Tourism is an unusual activity in that the consumer travels to the place

of consumption and there is often a time delay between intending to travel and arriving at

the destination. Additionally, there may be a lack of specificity when just considering a

destination rather than a destination and planned activities at that destination.

In order to provide an analysis of TPB and destination choice, the paper, first, provides an

overview of the TPB, taking into consideration some criticism of the model. Second,
 examples of successful applications of the theory in a variety of studies of social behavior

are provided. Third, having introduced the studies selection criteria for this research, the

paper discusses and evaluates the findings in relation to the usefulness of the TPB as a

theoretical framework in the analysed context. Fourth, the paper suggests ways, in which

the TPB model might be improved to increase its predictive power in analysing travellers’

intentions with regard to a choice of a destination. Next, limitations of the analysed studies,

along with the drawbacks of this paper, are discussed. Finally, the paper outlines directions

for future research.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

2 Overview of the theory of planned behaviour

By way of a brief overview of TPB (see Figure 1), Ajzen (1991, 2006, 2008) argues that this

theory provides a sound foundation for predicting consumers’ intentions and, subsequently,

behaviour by analysing three belief categories: behavioural, normative, and control beliefs.

Behavioural beliefs are about the consequences of the target behavior, as well as

evaluations of those beliefs (outcome evaluations) (Ajzen, 1991, 2006; Francis, Eccles,

Johnston et al., 2004). Second, there are beliefs about the expectations of others (normative

beliefs), such as family or friends, as well as a motivation to comply with the expectations of

those people (Ajzen, 1991, 2006). Finally, there are beliefs about certain factors that might

impede, or otherwise, the target behavior (control beliefs), as well as the ability and desire

to deal with them (Ajzen, 1991, 2006).

Figure 1. About Here

According to Ajzen (2008), each of the above-described categories of beliefs has direct links.

For example, behavioral beliefs largely determine attitudes toward the behavior. Normative
 beliefs give rise to social pressures (subjective norms). Finaly, constraint, or control, beliefs

influence the evaluation of the overall perceived behavioral control. Further, in many TPB

studies, behavioural intention is regarded as an immediate antecedent of likely behaviour

(Ajzen, 1991, 2006, 2008; Sparks & Pan, 2009). There are three direct predictors of

behavioural intention and behaviour: attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural

control. These elements, analysed in more detail next, are often thought of as the nucleus of

the TPB model (see Figure 1) (Ajzen, 1991, 2001, 2008).

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

2.1 Attitude

Contrary to the traditional understanding of attitude as a positive or negative evaluation of

an object, the construct of attitude in TPB refers solely to attitude towards the behavior

(Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). In other words, the attitude is understood as a

positive or negative evaluation of one’s performing of the behaviour in question. For

example, the theory would not assess the attitude towards a Brussels sprout (object).

Rather, it would measure the attitude towards eating a Brussels sprout (behaviour) that may

not be the same as the attitude towards a Brussels sprout. There may be a number of

different positive attitudes to Brussels sprouts, from a source of income for a farmer to a

source of nutrients for a dietician, but neither the farmer nor the dietician may like the taste

and, therefore, both will have a negative attitude to eating them.

2.2 Subjective norms

Further, subjective norms are the person’s perceptions of what others think of a particular

behaviour (Ajzen, 1991, 2008). For example, according to the TPB, a person would be more

likely to start going to the gym, if he or she thought that his or her friends would approve of

it. The important point is that those perceptions may not reflect what others actually think.
 However, a person’s beliefs of what they might think constitute that person’s subjective

norms (Ajzen, 1991; 2008; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Similarly, an individual may forego a

behaviour if there is a belief that that behaviour would be unacceptable, or they may decide

to act in a way that would not be noticed. Travel provides an opportunity for people to

indulge in activities that may not be acceptable at home because of the “anonymous”

nature of being away from friends or family (Mura and Khoo-Lattimore 2013, Yokota 2006).

2.3 Perceived behavioural control

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Another element of the TPB, perceived behavioural control (PBC) acknowledges that one’s

positive attitudes, or intentions, do not necessarily lead to action (Ajzen, 1991, 2006, 2008).

Specifically, PBC indicates people’s perceptions of their abilities to perform a given

behaviour (Ajzen, 2006; Armitage & Conner, 1998, 2001; Bagozzi, 1992). For example, a

person might be determined to stop smoking, but he or she may fear that the cravings will

be unbearable. Thus, this person’s positive attitudes and intentions are hindered by

psychological barriers (Holst & Iversen, 2011). In some cases, where the self-control is very

low, the construct of PBC can be the sole predictor of behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Holst &

Iversen, 2011). In a tourism context it may be that levels of perceived safety prevent action.

2.4 Intention

Central to the TPB model is a construct of intention, which captures all the motivational

factors of the preceding constructs (Ajzen, 1991). Thus, behavioural intention is a person’s

motivation to perform the behavior. It is regarded as the immediate determinant of action

(Ajzen, 1991; Armitage & Conner, 1998). For example, if a person’s attitude, subjective norm

and perceived behavioral control towards going to the gym are positive (the more positive
 the better), it is highly likely that he or she will have a positive and strong intention towards

going to the gym.

2.5 Behaviour

The last element of the TPB model is the actual behaviour, which, according to Ajzen (1991),

can usually be predicted from the behavioural intention. Using the same example, if a

person’s attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control towards going to the

gym are positive, and, subsequently, that person intends to start going to the gym, it is likely
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

that he or she will perform the behaviour. However, as Ajzen & Fishbein (1980) argue, there

may be no perfect correlation between intention and behaviour. Thus, the measure of the

construct of behaviour is necessary (Ajzen, 1991, 2006). Moreover, Ajzen and Fishbein

(1980) insist that it is vital to define the target behaviour precisely, even if the study is

limited to investigating only the intentions. A tourist, for example, may intend to visit a

particular event at a destination rather than the destination itself. Asking about intentions

to visit the destination would not reflect the event. For example, a potential tourist may

wish to go to Rio to see the Olympic Games so asking if they intend to visit Brazil would be

too broad. Added to that is the time delay between intending to go and the Games

beginning. The tourist may alter his or her plans in light of the Zika virus, thus resulting in an

intention not being realised. However, as was noted above, the more positive the intention

the more likely the tourist will travel.

2.6 Criticism of the TPB

Ajzen (1991), and Ajzen and Fishbein (2005), state that TPB is a causal model. More

precisely, the construct of attitude partially determines intention. In turn, intention is a

predictor of actual behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). However, as Armitage and Conner (1998) point
 out, correlational designs are consistently applied in the empirical tests of the model. Yet,

correlations are measures of association and do not imply directionality (Babbie, 2013).

Consequently, it has been argued that the causal assumptions of the theory are not entirely

proven (Armitage & Conner, 1998; Liska, 1984). Furthermore, critics have doubted Ajzen’s

(1991) appraisal of the TPB as a complete theory of behaviour. For example, unconscious

motives and spontaneous decisions are not taken into account (Armitage and Conner,

2001). Moreover, Armitage and Conner (1998), among others, regard TPB as a theory of the

“proximal determinants of behavior” (p. 1432). Several scholars also argue that TPB is
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

ignorant of other influential variables on behaviour (Norman, Conner, & Bell, 1999).

2.7 Applications of the TPB in the social sciences

Despite some criticism of the model, to this date, the TPB, besides extending its framework

to fit different situational contexts, remains almost unaltered (Holst & Iversen, 2011). The

model is accepted as valid in social sciences (Armitage & Conner, 1998, 2001). Indeed, as

several meta-analyses and many studies based on the TPB have confirmed, a person’s

intention and behaviour can be predicted by analysing that person’s attitudes, beliefs,

subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991, 2001, 2006; Ajzen &

Fishbein, 1975, 1980, 2010; Armitage & Conner, 1998, 2001; Bagozzi, 1992; Godin & Kok,

1996; Holst & Iversen, 2011; Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001).

Since 1975, the TPB has been employed in a variety of studies on social behaviour. It has

been applied to predict almost anything. For example, Ajzen’s webpage (Ajzen, n.d.)

contains a bibliography of TPB articles with about 50 theoretical papers and more than 600

empirical ones. To name just a few, the theory was utilised to understand the intentions to

commit driving violations (Parker, Manstead, Stradling, & Reason, 1992) or to vote for
 political parties (Fishbein, Ajzen, & Hinkle, 1980; Montgomery, 1989). The theory also

successfully predicted, for example, retail employees’ intentions to steal (Bailey, 2006) or

even intentions towards voluntary HIV counselling and testing (Abamecha, Godesso, &

Girma, 2013).

The importance and popularity of the TPB are probably based on the assumption that by

understanding people’s beliefs, attitudes, subjective norms and constraints towards the

target behaviour, it is possible to influence that target behaviour by altering those beliefs
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

and attitudes through various information sources or reference groups. Similar effect can be

achieved by helping people decrease the perception of difficulties in the performance of the

behaviour (Ajzen, 1991, 2008). According to Ajzen (1991), a change in beliefs will lead to a

modification in attitudes or norms. This chain will further lead to an adjustment in

intentions, and, ultimately, in the target behaviour.

This study is concerned with evaluating the effectiveness of the model for predicting

visitors’ intentions of choosing a travel destination. At the early stages of the research, only

peer-reviewed articles, published in high-quality journals, were analysed. However, to

enhance the knowledge on the topic, a decision has been made to include unpublished

dissertations and theses into the analysis as well. It was also decided to concentrate on

those studies that utilised the TPB for predicting intentions of choosing a travel destination.

In the process, fifteen studies, which applied the TPB in the analysed context, have been

identified. To place these studies in a broader tourism context, examples of several studies

that, among many others, were excluded from the analysis as not satisfying the studies’

selection criteria, are presented below.

 The TPB, has been widely used to explain a range of behaviours in tourism. For example,

Hayes (2008) applied the TPB in the investigation of visitors’ behaviour at the Glaciers,

Westland National Park, New Zealand. In a similar way, Brown, Ham, and Hughes (2010)

utilised the TPB for understanding and influencing tourist behaviour in protected natural

areas. Other studies, by Lepp (2007), and by Nunkoo and Ramkissoon (2010), drew upon the

TPB to predict residents’ attitudes towards tourism. The model was even implemented for

predicting tourists’ intentions to consume genetically modified food (Ramkissoon & Nunkoo,

2010). Recently, Kaplan, Manca, Nielsen, and Prato (2015) have utilised the TPB to explore
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

the behavioural factors underlying travellers’ intentions to use urban bike-sharing for

cycling.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Overview of the analysed studies

As stated earlier, this paper is only concerned with the use of the TPB for predicting

intentions to choose a tourist destination. Fifteen studies have been identified that do this.

Of these, two were related academic investigations by Lam and Hsu (2004, 2006). More

specifically, Lam and Hsu (2006) administered the TPB to understand the intentions of 299

Taiwanese tourists to choose Hong Kong as a travel destination. The researchers

implemented the model in order to enhance general understanding of the factors that

influenced people’s decisions to travel to a destination and, specifically, to Hong Kong.

Among others, Hsu, Kang, and Lam (2006) utilised the TPB to predict people’s propensity to

travel to foreign destinations. Additionally, the researchers were interested in finding out
 about the reference groups’ influence on Chinese travellers’ intentions of choosing a holiday

destination.

Similarly, Phetvaroon’s (2006) Ph.D. thesis empirically tested the applicability of TPB for

predicting tourist intentions towards the destination (Phuket, Thailand) that was recovering

from a devastating tsunami. Further, Sparks (2007) employed the theory for the

examination of people’s intentions towards visiting the wine regions of Australia. The

researcher hypothesised that a person’s positive, or negative, attitudes towards wine

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

tourism in general, and, in particular, towards visiting the wine regions of Australia, affected

that person’s intentions, and subsequently, a visit to the wine areas of the country.

Sparks and Pan (2009) drew upon the TPB to investigate potential Chinese outbound

tourists’ values in terms of destination attributes. Above all, the scholars aimed to

investigate the types of attitudes, influences, constraint and control factors that could

impact potential Chinese travellers’ intentions to visit Australia. Further, Shen,

Schuttemeyer, and Braun (2009) inspected tourists’ intentions to travel to world cultural

heritage sites. Testing the TPB, Quintal, Lee, and Soutar (2010) explored the antecedents of

intentions of South Korean, Chinese and Japanese tourists to visit Australia.

There were several attempts to evaluate travellers’ intentions in the context of medical

tourism. For example, Martin, Ramamonjiarivelo, and Martin (2011) relied upon the TPB to

measure the intentions of 453 undergraduate students in the USA to travel to developing

countries for medical treatment. Similarly, Lee, Han, and Lockyer (2012) examined Japanese

tourists’ plans to go to South Korea for similar purposes.

 In other studies, Han, Lee, and Lee (2011) attempted to predict mainland Chinese travellers’

intentions to visit South Korea, while Hsu and Huang (2012) assessed the travel intentions of

the citizens of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. In line with them, Chien, Yen, and Hoang

(2012) tested the predictive power of TPB by analysing tourists’ intentions to choose a

beach-based resort in Vietnam. More recently, Hsu (2013) applied the TPB for predicting

people’s intentions to engage in sport tourism in Taiwan, and Al Ziadat (2014) questioned

the sufficiency of the model by interpreting revisit intentions of 403 international tourists to

Jordan.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

All fifteen studies, outlined above, used quantitative methodology in order to answer

research questions. One of the primary methods of analysis was a multiple regression

(Babbie, 2013), which allowed the researchers to predict a dependent variable (intention)

based on independent variables (attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural

control). Importantly, the results of the studies that implemented the TPB for predicting

travellers’ intentions of choosing a destination, discussed below, were contradictory.

4.1.1 Influence of attitudes on intentions to visit a destination

In some of the studies, confirming the TPB’s assertion, attitude towards taking a vacation at

a destination was found to be an important factor in predicting intentions to take a holiday

at that destination (Al Ziadat, 2014; Hsu, 2013; Chien et al., 2012; Hsu & Huang, 2012;

Martin et al., 2011; Quintal et al., 2010). For example, Al Ziadat (2014) found that the

tourist’s attitude towards visiting and re-visiting the destination (Jordan) had a significant

impact on the intention to revisit the destination.

Similarly, Hsu (2013) identified a significant impact of attitudes towards water recreational

activities on travel intentions to visit rivers and lakes, where it would be possible to engage
 in those activities. Partly confirming those results, Hsu and Huang (2012) reported that the

attitude did play a role in behavioural intention, but the effect could only be regarded as

marginal. Yet, Martin et al. (2011) established that attitudes towards travelling to another

country to receive medical treatment had the highest correlation with the intentions to

engage in medical tourism.

In each of these cases it could be argued that the beliefs were strongest. As Cooke and

Sheeran (2004) observe, experience is a very important factor in confirming beliefs and so
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

one would expect a positive attitude in Al Ziadat’s (2014) study. Similarly, one may assume

that the attitude to medical treatment is based on a strong belief in the need for such

treatment.

The results of other studies have not been so positive to those above. Attitude towards

taking a vacation at a destination was not found to be a significant factor in predicting

intentions to take a holiday at that destination (Lam & Hsu, 2004, 2006; Quintal et al., 2010;

Shen et al., 2009; Sparks, 2007; Sparks & Pan, 2009). For instance, the results of Lam and

Hsu’s (2006) study showed that Taiwanese travellers’ attitude towards Hong Kong, whether

it was favourable or unfavourable, did not influence their intentions to visit the city.

Similarly, Sparks (2007) did not find any relationship between emotional attitudes to

wine/wine holidays and intentions to visit the wine regions of Australia. Contradicting

results were found not only among different studies, but even within the same studies. For

example, Quintal et al. (2010) found that attitudes towards visiting Australia were significant

predictors of intention only in Japanese, but not in the South Korean and Chinese, sample.
 In each of these cases perhaps the questions asked were not specific enough. Attitudes of

Taiwanese to Hong Kong, for example, may be different to attitudes to holidaying in Hong

Kong. Similarly, attitudes to wine/wine holidays does not necessarily represent attitudes to

Australian wine or what other activities were planned for a visit to Australia.

4.1.2 Influence of subjective norms on intentions to visit a destination

With regard to subjective norms, the results were also conflicting. For example, research

conducted by Chien et al. (2012), Hsu and Huang (2012), Lam and Hsu (2006), Martin et al.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

(2011), Quintal et al. (2010), and also by Sparks and Pan (2009) pointed out that subjective

norms, based on social influences, had a strong association with travel intentions. In other

words, the respondents in those studies were more likely to visit the target destination

when other people thought it would be a desirable or/and appropriate thing to do.

The influence of reference groups on travel intentions was further confirmed by Hsu, Kang,

and Lam (2006). The researchers noticed that, first of all, respondents were more likely to

comply with the opinions of family, friends and relatives, and to a lesser degree, with the

views of travel agents and co-workers. And finally, research by Al Ziadat (2014) also

highlighted the direct significant effect of subjective norms on intentions to visit/re-visit a

destination.

In contrast to the above results, Shen et al. (2009) found that, out of all investigated factors,

subjective norms had the least effect on travellers’ intentions. Similarly, in the context of

sports tourism, Hsu (2013) discovered that subjective norms had no significant influences on

travel intentions. Furthermore, results in the Western tourism context did not fully support

the influence of subjective norms on travel intentions either. For example, Sparks (2007),

while applying the TPB to wine tourism in Australia, identified that the relationships
 between subjective norms and behavioural intentions were not well established. More

specifically, one of Sparks’s (2007) hypotheses, predicting that subjective norms had direct

effects on a tourist’s intention to visit a wine region, was only partially supported.

4.1.3 Influence of perceived behavioural control on intentions to visit a destination

The majority of the reviewed studies convincingly concluded that perceived behavioural

control over a range of relevant factors largely predicted intentions of travelling to a

particular destination (Hsu & Huang, 2012; Lam & Hsu, 2004, 2006; Quintal et al., 2010;
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Shen et al., 2009; Sparks, 2007; Sparks & Pan, 2009). For example, Sparks and Pan (2009)

found that control over such resources as time and money was a significant predictor of the

intentions to visit a target destination. Similarly, Sparks (2007) specified that perceived

control over time and cost was the major prognosticator of the motives to take a wine

holiday.

Similar to all the discussed results so far, the findings in relation to perceived behavioural

control were not unanimous either. For example, opposing the results of the above studies,

Chien et al. (2012) did not establish any mutual relationship between perceived behavioural

control over a range of travel-related factors and potential travellers’ intentions of choosing

a beach-based resort in Vietnam.

4.1.4 Studies with similar results

In spite of the significant dissimilarities among the findings of the analysed studies, there

were, however, three studies that demonstrated consistent support for the usefulness of

the TPB in predicting intentions of choosing a travel destination. Among them was

Phetvaroon’s (2006) Ph.D. thesis, in which the author, while extensively analysing the

intentions of international visitors to visit Phuket in Thailand after the tsunami, showed that
 attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control were all significantly

correlated to behavioural intentions. Phetvaroon (2006) concluded that the more

favourable the attitudes and the subjective norms of the potential tourists towards

travelling to Phuket were, and the greater the travellers’ perceived control over the barriers

was, the stronger were the intentions of those people to visit Phuket.

Similarly, Han et al. (2011) found that all three antecedent variables of the intentions of

mainland Chinese travellers to visit South Korea statistically significantly predicted those
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

intentions. Equally, supporting the entire hypothesis of their study, Lee et al. (2012) also

established that attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control did

statistically significantly influence Japanese tourists’ intentions to travel to South Korea for

medical treatment.

4.2 Evaluation of the TPB in the context of the research

Overall, the set of three independent variables (attitude, subjective norms and perceived

behavioural control) has explained between 11-45 percent of the variation in the dependent

variable (intention) in the analysed studies. Thus, a significant proportion of the variance in

intention of choosing a travel destination is not explained by the theory. In comparison,

when the TPB is employed in a variety of social settings, the combination of the same

variables, on average, explains about 39 percent of the variance in intention, Armitage and

Conner (2001) concluded that their meta-analysis supported the efficacy of the TPB, though

they did suggest that the “subjective norm construct is generally found to be a weak

predictor of intentions. This is partly attributable to a combination of poor measurement

and the need for expansion of the normative component” (p471).

 Analysis of the studies that applied the TPB for predicting intentions of choosing a travel

destination revealed, with a few exceptions, significant differences in results and a slightly

lower than usual explanation of the intention based on its antecedent variables. Therefore,

whilst this paper challenges the adequacy of the TPB for predicting travellers’ intentions in

the analysed context, as Armitage and Conner (2001) suggest, this may be due to poor

measurement, or it may be because of a lack of precision in defining the behaviour being

investigated.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

However, as Ajzen (2008) explains, the TPB does not insist that all constructs of the model

must contribute equally, largely and simultaneously to behavioural intentions. This means

that, in some cases, only attitudes may be found to have significant influence on intentions.

However, in other applications, subjective norms and behavioural control may explain the

intentions. Yet, in other cases, all three antecedents can make significant contributions to

understanding of the intentions (Ajzen, 2008).

Considering all the above, this research lends partial support for the usefulness of the TPB in

the analysed context. Nevertheless, the model’s predictive power should, and could, be

increased. There are possible ways, identified by researchers in social sciences and by

tourism scholars, which may be beneficial for this model in the context of analysing

travellers’ intentions of choosing a destination.

4.3 Attempts to increase the predictive power of the TPB in the tourism

context

Similar to researchers in the disciplines of marketing, psychology and other social sciences,

tourism scholars have argued that additional constructs to attitude, subjective norm, and

perceived behavioural control may improve the predictive power of the model in the
 tourism context (Conner & Abraham, 2001). For example, in order to enhance the validity of

the TPB, Sparks and Shepherd (1992), in addition to TPB constructs, analysed self-identity

processes, while Perugini and Bagozzi (2001) examined travellers’ personal goals.

Bentler and Speckart (1979), Lam and Hsu (2006), as well as Oh and Hsu (2001), and

Quellette and Wood (1998) have provided evidence that, for example, past behaviour has

direct impact on behavioural (travel) intentions. In addition to concentrating on attitudes,

subjective norms and behavioural control, Sparks and Pan (2009) successfully extended the
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

model of TPB by analysing the influence of information sources on travellers’ choice of a

destination.

Further, Quintal et al. (2010) confirmed the increased predictive power of the TPB by adding

the constructs of perceived uncertainty and perceived risk into the model. Similarly, Hsu and

Huang (2012) explained five percent more of the variation in intention by analysing people’s

motivation to travel. And lastly, Han et al. (2011) advanced the model’s validity in the

context of choosing a travel destination by examining potential travellers’ expectations of

tourist visa exemption.

However, it is possible to include all these additional variables in the original model. Self-

identity and personal goals are often exhibited in behavioural and/or normative beliefs and

past behaviour reinforces these, as do additional information sources. What is clear is that

particular aspects of a belief can have varying degrees of importance. This does not mean

that an additional variable is required.

As Ajzen (1991), and Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) have argued, simplicity is the key attribute of

TPB. Consequently, it is probably not efficient to integrate multiple variables into the
 framework simultaneously as this would make the model more complicated, especially

when the additional variables can be incorporated into the existing model. Taking this into

account, it seems logical, as suggested by Holst & Iversen (2011), that researchers should

“adopt a sceptical perspective” (p. 15) when undertaking a study based on the TPB. It is,

therefore, advised to add only those variables to the basic framework that are perceived as

contributing to specific research questions (Ajzen, 1991; Holst & Iversen, 2011). The real

need is for specificity in the questions being asked. Acknowledgement of cultural

differences should also be incorporated, particularly when considering subjective norms.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

One would expect that more collectivist societies will result in individuals placing more

weight on the attitudes of others to planned behaviour.

4.4 Main limitation of the analysed studies

One striking limitation of almost all the reviewed studies is that they mainly concentrated

on the relationship between travellers’ attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural

control and travel intentions. In other words, those studies attempted to predict a person’s

intention to perform particular travel behaviour, but not the actual performance of the

behaviour. Even though the TPB regards the intention as an immediate antecedent of

behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), it is not always confirmed (Armitage & Conner, 2001). Therefore, it

is surprising that, both in the analysed context and other tourism settings, little research has

been found that examined the direct effect of intentions on the actual behaviour.

It should be noted that, for example, Kaplanidou and Vogt (2007), and McKercher and Tse

(2012) did analyse the influence of intentions on actual behaviour in the tourism settings.

However, the results of their research majorly contradicted each other. While Kaplanidou

and Vogt (2007) established that intentions were a significant predictor of actual behaviour,
 McKercher and Tse (2012) found that no statistically significant correlation existed between

intention and actual visitation rates. Adding to this argument, Hsu and Huang (2012)

identified the existence of only a marginal relationship between behavioural intention and

actual tourist behaviour. There could be a number of reasons for this, related to the unusual

nature of the level of planning required to undertake touristic behaviour. For most tourists

there is a delay before putting intentions into practice and that delay can allow some of the

variables to change. Thus, the existence of a direct link between intentions and actual

behaviour in the tourism context is not yet established and needs further confirmation.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

4.5 Limitations of this paper

One of the main limitations is that no studies in the analysed context, conducted earlier

than 2004, have been identified. Moreover, the majority of the studies, with a few

exceptions, have been implemented in Asian countries. The latter finding is rather surprising

because more than half of the studies that recognise the TPB in social sciences have, in fact,

been administered in Western countries. While there are no obvious explanations to these

findings, a few things may be considered.

First, travel decision-making is regarded as a very complex and a hard to predict

phenomenon (Chien et al., 2012; Lam & Hsu, 2006). As such, it is possible that more than

ten years ago, researchers did not feel it would be appropriate to use the TPB for predicting

intentions of choosing a travel destination.

Second, even though the overwhelming majority of the studies, that have applied the TPB in

choosing a destination, appear to be from Asian countries, a wider review of the efficacy of

the TPB in broader tourism settings reveals that a variety of studies, which have employed

the TPB in the Western tourism contexts, do exist.

 Finally, it must be recognised that while every effort has been made to identify all the

relevant studies, some of them still might have been unintentionally overlooked, especially

if authors did not explicitly emphasise a link between the TPB and the traveller’s choice of a

destination in either the title or abstract of their published research.

6 CONCLUSION

This paper set out to analyse the academic literature on the applicability of the TPB for

predicting intentions of choosing a travel destination. What has been revealed are
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

differences among the studies as to whether, and which of, the main elements of the TPB

(attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control) can explain the intentions of

travellers better. What has also emerged is that a significant proportion of the variance in

intention of choosing a travel destination is still not accounted for by the theory. However,

as Ajzen (2008) explains, the TPB does not insist that all constructs of the model must

contribute equally, largely and simultaneously to behavioural intentions.

Having analysed the theoretical basis of the model and a variety of publications based on

this theory, the overall conclusion is that, despite obvious differences in the results of the

studies, and notwithstanding other identified limitations, the TPB may still be regarded as “a

useful theoretical approach” (Sparks & Pan, 2009, p. 492) for predicting travellers’ intention

of choosing a holiday (travel) destination.

One way to improve the model that has been suggested is to modify it by integrating new

constructs. However, this may possibly be avoided if the proposed new constructs are

integrated into those originally suggested. This is particularly true when considering

normative beliefs and subjective norms. There is also need to understand, more fully, the

link between intentions and behaviour, particularly in a tourism context. Intentions may
 change before they have been actualised. Why this could occur, and if it is more likely to

occur in a tourism context, needs further research. Finally, the decision-making process of

choosing a travel destination is a very complicated one (Lam & Hsu, 2006). That is why it is

also recommended that future studies, unlike much of the analysed academic research, pay

particular attention not only to travellers’ intentions of choosing a destination, but also to

the planned and actual behaviour of travellers when they reach the destination. A tourist

destination is the place where behaviour occurs. What that behaviour is can vary greatly

from one tourist to another.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

This study has shown that, for the TPB to be of value, first the definitions of behaviour have

to be specific. A destination on its own is not sufficient. What the prospective tourist

intends to do at the destination is important, as is the tourists perception of the value or

quality of that behaviour at that destination. Wine tourists, for example, may value wine

tours more highly in France than in Australia. Second, the strength of the beliefs needs to be

incorporated into any study. Third, the cultural background of the subjects may alter the

strength of a norm. There is no need to create new contructs. Instead, an understanding of

the compexity of the currrent constructs is required. Finaly, the temporal aspect of planned

destination choices needs further study to fully understand the links between intention and

behaviour, and how time may impact on changing attitudes that go to predicting intentions.
 References

Abamecha, F., Godesso, A., & Girma, E. (2013). Intention to voluntary HIV counselling and

testing (VCT) among health professionals in Jimma zone, Ethiopia: The theory of planned

behaviour perspective. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 140-153.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organisational Behaviour and Human

Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Ajzen, I. (2001). Construction of a standard questionnaire for the theory of planned

behaviour. Retrieved from http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf

Ajzen, I. (2006). The TPB constructs. Retrieved from

http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/index.html

Ajzen, I. (2008). Consumer attitudes and behaviour. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr, & F. R.

Cardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 525-548). New York: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Ajzen, I. (n.d.). TPB bibliography. Retrieved July 22, 2014, from

http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/index.html

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to

the theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.

Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracin, B.

T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp.173-221). Mahwah, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2010). Predicting and changing behaviour: The reasoned action approach.

New York: Psychology Press (Taylor and Francis).

Al Ziadat, M. T. (2014). Application of planned behavior theory in Jordanian tourism. International

Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(2), 105-116.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review

and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1429-1469.

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-

analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.

Babbie, E. (2013) The Practice of social research (13th ed.). Belmont, CA, USA: Wadsworth, Cengage

Learning.

Bailey, A. A. (2006). Retail employee theft: A theory of planned behavior perspective. International

Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(11), 802-816.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1992). The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Social Psychology

Quarterly, 178-204.

Bentler, P., & Speckart, G. (1979). Models of attitude-behaviour relations.

Psychological Review, 86(4), 452-464.

 Brown, T., Ham, S., & Hughes, M. (2010). Picking up litter: An application of theory-based

communication to influence tourist behaviour in protected areas. Journal of Sustainable

Tourism, 18(7), 879-900.

Chien, G. C. L., Yen, I-Y., & Hoang, P-Q. (2012). Combination of theory of planned behaviour

and motivation: An exploratory study of potential beach-based resorts in Vietnam. Asia

Pacific Journal of Tourism, 17(5), 489-508.

Conner, M., & Abraham, C. (2001). Conscientiousness and the theory of planned behavior:
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Towards a more complete model of the antecedents of intentions and behavior. Personality

and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(11), 1547-1561.

Cooke, R. & Sheeran, P. (2004). Moderation of cognition-intention and cognition-behaviour

relations: A meta-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behaviour.

The British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 159-186.

Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., & Hinkle, R. (1980). Predicting and understanding voting in American

elections: Effects of external variables. In I. Ajzen, & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Understanding

attitudes and predicting social behaviour (pp. 173-192). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-

Hall.

Francis, J. J., Eccles, M. P., Johnston, M., Walker, A., Grimshaw, J., Foy, R., et al. (2004).

Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health

services researchers. The University of Newcastle, Centre for Health Services Research,

Newcastle.
 Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to

health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11(2), 87-98.

Han, H., Lee, S., & Lee, C-K. (2011). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: Visa

exemptions and the traveller decision-making process. Tourism Geographies, 13(1), 45-74.

Hayes, D. G. (2008). An investigation of visitor behavior in recreation and tourism settings: A

case study of natural hazard management at the Glaciers, Westland National Park, New

Zealand. Unpublished master’s thesis, Lincoln University, Lincoln, New Zealand.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Holst, A., & Iversen, J. M. (2011). An application of a revised theory of planned behavior:

Predicting the intentions to use personal care products without endocrine disrupting

chemicals. Unpublished master’s thesis, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen,

Denmark.

Hsu, M-C. (2013). The management of sports tourism: A causal modelling test of the theory

of planned behaviour. International Journal of Management, 30(2), 474-496.

Hsu, C. H. C., & Huang S. (2012). An extension of the theory of planned behavior model for

tourists. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 36(3), 390-417.

Hsu, C. H. C., Kang, S. K., & Lam, T. (2006). Reference group influence among Chinese

travellers. Journal of Travel Research, 44, 474-484.

Kaplan, S., Manca, F., Nielsen, T. A. S., & Prato, C. G. (2015). Intentions to use the bike-

sharing for holiday cycling: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Tourism

Management, 47(4), 34-46.

 Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2007). The interrelationship between sport event and destination

image and sport tourists’ behaviours. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12(3/4), 183-206.

Lam, T., & Hsu, C H.C. (2004). Theory of planned behaviour: Potential travellers from China.

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 28(4), 463-482.

Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. C. (2006). Predicting behavioural intention of choosing a travel

destination. Tourism Management, 27, 589-599.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Lee, M., Han, H., & Lockyer, T. (2012). Attracting Japanese tourists for medical tourism

experience. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(1), 69-86.

Lepp, A. (2007). Residents’ attitudes towards tourism in Bigodi village, Uganda. Tourism

Management, 28(3), 876-885.

Liska, A. E. (1984). A critical examination of causal structure of the Fishbein/Ajzen attitude-

behaviour model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 61-74.

Martin, D. S., Ramamonjiarivelo, Z., & Martin, W. S. (2011). Medtour: A scale for measuring

medical tourism intentions. Tourism Review, 66(1/2), 45-56.

McKercher, B., & Tse, T. S. (2012). Is intention to return a valild proxy for actual repeat

visitation? Journal of Travel Research, 51(6), 671-686.

Montgomery, B. (1989). The influence of attitudes and normative pressures on voting

decisions in a union certification election. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 42(2),

262-279.
 Mura, P. & Khoo-Lattimore, C. (2013) The young tourist guide to paradise: Understanding

behavioural patterns of young beach-oriented tourists. Tourismos: An International multidisciplinary

journal of tourism, 8(1), 1-18.

Norman, P., Conner, M., & Bell, R. (1999). The theory of planned behavior and smoking

cessation. Health Psychology, 18, 89-94.

Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2010). Gendered theory of planned behavior and residents’

support for tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 13(6), 525-540.

Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Oh, H., Hsu, C. H. C. (2001). Volitional degrees of gambling behaviors. Annals of Tourism

Research, 28(3), 618-637.

Parker, D., Manstead, A. S., Stradling, S. G., & Reason, J. T. (1992). Intention to commit

driving violations: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 77(1), 94-101.

Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-

directed behaviors: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behavior. British

Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 79-98.

Phetvaroon, K. (2006). Application of the theory of planned behaviour to select a

destination after a crisis: A case study of Phuket, Thailand. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,

Oklahoma State University, USA.

Quellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple

processes by which past behaviour predicts future behaviour. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1),

54-74.
 Quintal, V. A., Lee, J. A., & Soutar, G. N. (2010). Risk, uncertainty, and the theory of planned

behavior: A tourism example. Tourism Management, 31, 797-805.

Ramkissoon, H., & Nunkoo, R. (2010). Predicting tourists’ intention to consume genetically

modified food. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 20(1), 60-75.

Shen, S., Schuttemeyer, A., & Braun, B. (2009). Visitors’ intention to visit world cultural

heritage sites: An empirical study of Suzhou, China. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing,

26(7), 722-734.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Sparks, B. A. (2007). Planning a wine tourism vacation? Factors that help to predict tourist

behavioral intentions. Tourism Management, 28, 1180-1192.

Sparks, B. A., & Pan, G. W. (2009). Chinese outbound tourists: Understanding their attitudes,

constraints and use of information sources. Tourism Management, 30, 483-494.

Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior:

Assessing the role of identification with “green consumerism”. Social Psychology Quarterly,

55(4), 388-399.

Yokota, F. (2006). Sex behaviour of male Japanese tourists in Bangkok, Thailand. Culture,

Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 8, 115-131.
 Attitude
Behavioural
towards the
Beliefs Behaviour

Normative Subjective
Intention Behaviour
Beliefs norms

Perceived
Control
Behavioural
Beliefs Control
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)

Fig. 1 Schematic representation of TPB (adapted from Ajzen, 2006).

 About the authors
Sergey Yuzhanin is qualified as an English-Russian interpreter/translator. His current
research interests include tourist behaviour, motivation and decision-making, as well as
outbound tourism, and in particular, Russian outbound tourism. He has a First Class Honours
degree in Tourism Management from Lincoln University, New Zealand. He also holds a
bachelor’s degree in Philology, Linguistics, and Teaching of Literature and English as a
secondary language from Perm State University, Russia.
David Fisher is a Senior Lecturer in Tourism at Lincoln University, New Zealand. His research
interests include tourism theory, tourism as a means to development particularly in Pacific
Islands and South East Asia, and heritage tourism.
Downloaded by La Trobe University At 20:11 14 June 2016 (PT)