You are on page 1of 29

British Journal of Social Psychology (2001), 40, 471–499 2001 The British Psychological Society

Printed in Great Britain


EY cacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review
Christopher J. Armitage*
Department of Psychology, University of SheYeld, UK

Mark Conner
School of Psychology, University of Leeds, UK

The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) has received considerable attention in the literature. The present study is a quantitative integration and review of that research. From a database of 185 independent studies published up to the end of 1997, the TPB accounted for 27% and 39% of the variance in behaviour and intention, respectively. The perceived behavioural control (PBC) construct accounted for signi cant amounts of variance in intention and behaviour, independent of theory of reasoned action variables. When behaviour measures were self-reports, the TPB accounted for 11% more of the variance in behaviour than when behaviour measures were objective or observed (R2s = .31 and .21, respectively). Attitude, subjective norm and PBC account for signi cantly more of the variance in individuals’ desires than intentions or self-predictions, but intentions and self-predictions were better predictors of behaviour. 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. The discussion focuses on ways in which current TPB research can be taken forward in the light of the present review.

Since Wicker’s (1969) review of research examining the relationship between attitudes and behaviour, and his conclusion that attitudes probably do not predict behaviour, social psychologists have sought to improve the predictive power of attitudes. In recent years, the main approach within this area has been to develop integrated models of behaviour, including additional determinants of behaviour such as social norms or intentions (Olson & Zanna, 1993). Arguably the most widely researched of these models are the Theories of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) and Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1988, 1991). The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is essentially an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) that includes measures of control belief and perceived behavioural control (see Fig. 1).
*Request for reprints should be addressed to Chris Armitage, Centre for Research in Social Attitudes, Department of Psychology, University of SheYeld, Western Bank, SheYeld S10 2TP, UK.


Christopher J. Armitage and Mark Conner

Figure 1. The theory of planned behaviour.

Ajzen (e.g. 1991) extended the TRA to include a measure of perceived behavioural control—a variable that had received a great deal of attention in social cognition models designed to predict health behaviours (e.g. health belief model, protection motivation theory; see Armitage & Conner, 2000; Conner & Norman, 1996a). Perceived behavioural control (PBC) is held to in uence both intention and behaviour (see Fig. 1). The rationale behind the addition of PBC was that it would allow prediction of behaviours that were not under complete volitional control. Thus, while the TRA could adequately predict behaviours that were relatively straightforward (i.e. under volitional control), under circumstances where there were constraints on action, the mere formation of an intention was insuYcient to predict behaviour. The inclusion of PBC provides information about the potential constraints on action as perceived by the actor, and is held to explain why intentions do not always predict behaviour.1 With respect to the in uence of PBC on intention, Ajzen (1991, p. 188) states that: ‘The relative importance of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control in the prediction of intention is expected to vary across behaviors and situations’. That is, in situations where (for example) attitudes are strong, or where normative in uences are powerful, PBC may be less predictive of intentions. Thus, Ajzen (1991) argues that the magnitude of the PBC–intention relationship is dependent upon the type of behaviour and the nature of the situation. Indirect evidence for this claim has been demonstrated in studies that have shown that measures of attitude strength (e.g. Sparks, Hedderley, & Shepherd, 1992) and individual diV erences in sociability (e.g. Tra mow & Finlay, 1996) increase the relative predictive power of attitudes and subjective norms, respectively. In general, individuals are more disposed (i.e. intend) to engage in behaviours that are believed to be achievable (cf. Bandura, 1997). PBC is also held to exert both direct and interactive (with behavioural intentions) eV ects on behaviour. This is based on the following rationale: that however strongly held, the implementation of an intention into action is at least partially determined by personal and environmental barriers, thus: ‘The addition of perceived behavioural control should become increasingly useful as volitional control over behavior decreases’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 185). Therefore, in situations where prediction of

The authors wish to thank Russell Spears for his helpful comments with respect to the following section.

where there are problems of volitional control). 1995) have found signi cant PBC– intention interactions. However. 1985) emphasized the fact that the interaction between behavioural intention and PBC should be independently predictive of behaviour. In contrast. exerting additional eV ort to engage in the behaviour will not impact on the actual performance of the behaviour.e. In contrast.g.g.e.2 In conditions of complete volitional control. This is based on the rationale that increased feelings of control will increase the extent to which individuals are willing to exert additional eV ort in order successfully to perform a particular behaviour. . 1986) the relationship between intention and behaviour. we are referring to environmental and personal constraints on behaviour. the intention–behaviour relationship should be optimal. increased PBC should facilitate the implementation of intentions into action. under conditions of very high volitional control. behavioural intention should be the only predictor of behaviour. Terry & O’Leary. In earlier versions of the TPB. Yet. problems of volitional control) conditions.e. Following the lack of evidence for the interactive eV ects of PBC on the intention–behaviour relationship. Ajzen argues that under conditions where behavioural intention alone would account for only small amounts of the variance in behaviour (i. That is. an environmental barrier might be that everyone at work smokes. Ajzen (1991) argued for a direct relationship between PBC and behaviour which more closely tted the available data. volitional) control.e. in his meta-analysis of the TPB. greater PBC should be associated with stronger intention–behaviour relationships. predictions concerning the eV ects of PBC on behaviour are clouded by the explicit assumption that PBC is an accurate representation of actual (volitional) 2 Note that by ‘problems of volitional control’. However. where intention is only weakly related to behaviour). a personal barrier might be the level of craving for cigarettes (for further discussion of these issues see Armitage & Conner. PBC should be independently predictive of behaviour. several. there are no absolutes. PBC should moderate (see Baron & Kenny. Ajzen (1991) reported that only one study had found the (marginally) signi cant (p < . 1999b). For example. complete volitional control) and suboptimal (i. and (2) predict behaviour directly. over and above the eV ects of intention. However. Ajzen (e. consider cigarette smoking: here. where the behaviour is not under complete volitional control. Under such conditions. 1999a. Ajzen (1991) argued that this nding re ected the fact that linear models account well for psychological data—even if interaction terms are known to be present. it is instructive to consider Ajzen’s (1991) predictions by examining the impact of PBC on behaviour under both optimal (i. and the present meta-analysis examines these to test this moderator hypothesis. under conditions where volitional control is relatively low (i.10) intention–PBC interaction that would support this moderator hypothesis. This ceiling eV ect occurs because where the behaviour is relatively straightforward. In the prediction of social behaviours.e. Thus.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 473 behaviour from intention is likely to be hindered by the level of actual (i. more recent studies (e. PBC should (1) facilitate the implementation of behavioural intentions into action. and PBC should not exert any in uence on this relationship.

which are retained from the earlier TRA. and by the beliefs that are salient at the time. Thus. 8 November 1999). Subjective norm is considered to be a function of salient normative beliefs. leaving over 20% of cases unresolved. Sutton. or (2) obtain independent measures of volition (actual control). Madden. personal communication. In general. control beliefs are the antecedents of PBC. 1977). the underlying normative beliefs are concerned with the likelihood that speci c individuals or groups (referents) with whom the individual is motivated to comply will approve or disapprove of the behaviour. Lerner. the eV ect of PBC on behaviour is more problematic. PBC is held to aV ect both intentions and behaviour. Following discussion. or to some other attribute.g. Attitude towards the behaviour re ects the individual’s global positive or negative evaluations of performing a particular behaviour. and cannot be adequately addressed using meta-analysis.g. the equation takes account of the relevance of the belief to the individual. Subjective norm refers to the individual’s perceptions of general social pressure to perform (or not to perform) the behaviour. We therefore attempted to code studies for ‘level of volitional control’.474 Christopher J. If an individual perceives that signi cant others endorse (or disapprove of) the behaviour. 3 4 Note that ‘Ajzen’ recently changed his name to ‘Aizen’. in this case by taking a measure of the frequency of occurrence of the promoting (or inhibitory) factor. Each behavioural belief links a given behaviour to a certain outcome. The antecedents of attitude. within the TPB. Indeed. such as the cost incurred in performing the behaviour.4 As we have already noted. Langer. the more favourable the attitude towards the behaviour. they are more (or less) likely to intend to perform it. raters were asked to judge whether the behaviour in question was under volitional control. which is set out in the Appendix. According to Ajzen (1991). One possibility is that as volitional control decreases. . re ecting the underlying cognitive structure. There are two further antecedents of intention: subjective norm and attitude toward the behaviour. Given the extant literature on ‘illusions of control’ (e. An alternative procedure—suggested by one of our anonymous reviewers—was therefore adopted. although even studies designed to directly test this hypothesis have not produced clear-cut ndings (e. not under volitional control. it seems likely that PBC will rarely re ect actual control in a very accurate way. On 3-point scales.g. In short. where PBC and actual control are discrepant. and no decrement in between-study variance. 1992). and are concerned with the perceived power of speci c factors to facilitate or inhibit performance of the behaviour. & Ajzen. 1975. the stronger should be the individual’s intention to perform it. Initial analysis of coding reliability indicated 68% agreement. Aizen3 states that ‘When PBC is inaccurate all kinds of possibilities open up’ (I. A number of previous meta-analyses have suggested that the TPB adds very little explained variance beyond that which is explained by the TRA (e. subjective norm and PBC are corresponding beliefs. Analyses of the categories revealed no substantive diV erences between groups. adequate tests of predictions concerning the eV ects of PBC on behaviour would either (1) experimentally manipulate individuals’ levels of perceived control. While subjective norm relates to perceptions of general social pressure. These are matters for future research. or whether it was unclear. Like the other beliefs. Armitage and Mark Conner control. this increased to 79%. the in uence of PBC on intention and behaviour increases. Ellen. Aizen. 1998). This works on the principle of Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) Expectancy-value Model: the subjective value of a given outcome a V ects the attitude in direct proportion to the strength of the belief. The attitude towards the behaviour is determined by the strength of these associations.

Van den Putte. 1995. Conner & Sparks. and treated all studies as equivalent. (1997) report a meta-analysis on applications of the TRA and TPB to exercise behaviour. Blue. and were based upon a limited data set.51 (17 correlations) for prediction of behaviour from intention and PBC. 1995. applying the TPB and a Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale 5 Indeed. .g. discussion of issues surrounding this nding was limited because the focus of his study was the TRA.71 (19 correlations). previous meta-analyses of the TRA/TPB have tended to analyse data from participants more than once. However. Beck and Ajzen (1991) provided an exception. The present meta-analysis aims to overcome some of the methodological weaknesses of previous meta-analyses and to focus on several of the issues in current TPB research. 1978). Sparks. More generally. Manstead & Parker. Hausenblas et al. have failed to report reliability statistics. with no attempt to weight their data in favour of studies with more participants. Rosenthal. Godin & Kok. 1979). including studies that have never been published. They conclude that the TPB is more useful than the TRA. this has been ignored in the literature pertaining to the TRA/TPB. as have four previous meta-analyses (Ajzen. To a great extent. However. and an average multiple correlation of R = .g. 1996. these meta-analyses have been limited in scope and sampling. Godin and Kok’s (1996) meta-analysis found that PBC contributed a mean additional 13% of variance to the prediction of intentions and 12% to the prediction of behaviour. However. Kalle. this analysis was presented in the introduction to his meta-analysis of the TRA. Carron. 1991. but base this conclusion solely on the magnitude of correlations between PBC. & Tedeschi. 1997. Finally. in spite of these weaknesses. with intention of R = . Issues surrounding the TPB Self-report Behavioural decision-making models such as the TRA and TPB have tended to rely on self-reports. Gaes. 1996. 1996. However. 1994). 1993.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 475 PBC will therefore be increased by salient beliefs concerning adequate resources and opportunities and fewer anticipated obstacles or impediments. these analyses considered only the direct antecedents of intention and behaviour. For example. despite evidence to suggest the vulnerability of such data to self-presentational biases (e. Hausenblas. Godin. and reported values that were derived only from studies that reported the relevant data. in spite of the threat to the validity and reliability of the models. Godin and Kok considered only health behaviours. 1991). Reviews have provided support for the TPB (e. evidence from narrative and meta-analytic reviews suggests that the TPB is a useful model for predicting a wide range of behaviours and behavioural intentions. & Mack. Jonas & Doll. intention and behaviour.5 Ajzen’s (1991) meta-analysis of the TPB found an average multiple correlation of attitude. although Van den Putte (1991) reported that PBC explained an additional 14% of the variance in intention and 4% in behaviour (over and above attitude and subjective norm). The tendency for authors to report only signi cant ndings may have in ated the reported values (cf. subjective norm and PBC.

Dzewaltowski. as opposed to PBC in the prediction of intentions and behaviour. providing some evidence to suggest that individuals may provide socially desirable answers in terms of their attitudes and intentions. we expected TPB variables (i. However. Findings indicated that attitudes and subjective norms signi cantly correlated with self-reported behaviour. 1997). In contrast. Bandura (1986. and Hogg (1994) reported that PBC only had an eV ect on a behavioural measure of discussing the use of condoms with any new partner. had a direct impact on behaviour. . Ajzen (1991) argues that the PBC and self-eYcacy constructs are interchangeable. 1998). The implication was that self-reports of behaviour were unreliable. and Shaw (1990). In terms of the present study. rather than PBC. Armitage and Conner (1999c) reported few eV ects of social desirability on relationships between TPB components. ElV ers. 1993) have suggested that self-eYcacy and PBC are not entirely synonymous. in a comparison of the theories of reasoned action. Crowne & Marlowe. this nding must be interpreted with extreme caution. 1993. Hessing. Self-eYcacy is more concerned with cognitive perceptions of control based on internal control factors. SDS scores were entered into a regression equation and accounted for 5% of the variance in intentions. and Weigel (1988) examined the TRA in relation to tax evasion. 1999b.g. several authors (e. while self-eYcacy had a strong eV ect on intentions to discuss and intentions to use condoms. found that self-eYcacy. Terry and O’Leary (1995) found that self-eYcacy only predicted intentions. These studies therefore provide support for a distinction between self-eYcacy and PBC (see also Manstead & van Eekelen. Norwich & Rovoli. intention and PBC) to predict self-reported and observed behaviour. Consonant with White et al. and contrasted self-reports with oYcial documentation. 6 However.e. but that prediction of objective behaviour would be less accurate. in spite of considerable eV ort to maintain the anonymity of respondents. SDS also rely on self-report. 1964) to predicting dishonest intentions and actions (cheating. and Kuhlman (1988) have advocated the use of measures of self-eYcacy.476 Christopher J. Terry. Armitage and Mark Conner (SDS. TPB variables were able to account for between 12% and 55% of the variance in self-reported behaviour. external factors. (1994).6 Six months later. 1992) has argued that control and self-eYcacy are quite diV erent concepts. Noble. Terry. shoplifting and lying). Control It has already been noted that the diV erence between the TRA and TPB lies in the control component of the TPB. Pellino. Further. White. whereas PBC also re ects more general. For safer sex behaviours. as SDS measures were not taken at the same time as the six-month self-report of behaviour. 1999a. Terry and colleagues have closely examined the distinction between PBC and self-eYcacy. planned behaviour and social cognitive theory. For example. however. while PBC predicted exercise behaviour. compared with more objective behaviour measures (see also Armitage & Conner. but did not correlate with documentary evidence. Researchers such as de Vries. More closely related to the concerns of the present study. Dijkstra. Perhaps more importantly.

self-predictions once PBC is taken into account.73) than self-predictions (mean R = . 1999b) also provide evidence to support a distinction between self-eYcacy and ‘perceived control over behaviour’. Armitage and Conner (1999a. In study 2. and distinguished measures of behavioural intentions (e. ‘How likely is it that you will perform behaviour x?’). the relationship between PBC and behaviour . although they found diV erences in the pattern of intercorrelations. More speci cally.g. with no data to test the eV ects on subsequent behaviour. In the TPB. Sparks.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 477 More recently.’s meta-analysis supported this view: measures of self-predictions were found to have stronger relationships with behaviour (mean r = . For example. and Shepherd (1997) have proposed a distinction between ‘perceived diYculty’ and ‘perceived control’ (see also Chan & Fishbein. and Warshaw’s (1988) review of the TRA argued for the need to consider both behavioural intentions and selfpredictions when predicting behaviour. Hartwick. neither ‘perceived diYculty’ nor ‘perceived control’ predicted intention. Sheppard. 1993). Sheppard et al.g. 1999b) have critiqued this approach. Guthrie. the Sparks et al. 1991. Warshaw and Davis (1985) noted a number of diV erent ways in which intentions had been measured.g.g. (1988) went on to argue that self-predictions should provide better predictions of behaviour as they are likely to include a consideration of those factors which may facilitate or inhibit performance of a behaviour. ‘availability’) and internal (e. One might therefore expect little diV erence in the predictive power of intentions vs. utilizing measures that do not rely on perceived ease or diYculty. 181). arguing that asking individuals about the ‘ease’ or ‘diYculty’ of performing a particular behaviour does not allow discrimination between ease or diYculty in relation to external (e. the PBC construct should tap perceptions of the factors that may facilitate or inhibit performance of behaviour. as well as a consideration of the likely choice of other competing behaviours. although attitude and subjective norm accounted for more of the variance in intentions (mean R = . Intentions are assumed to capture the motivational factors that in uence a behaviour and to indicate how hard people are willing to try or how much eV ort they would exert to perform the behaviour (Ajzen. Behavioural intentions The intention construct is central to both the TRA and TPB.57) than did behavioural intentions (mean r = .61). study employed a cross-sectional design. ‘perceived diYculty’ independently predicted intention but ‘perceived control’ did not. In applications of the TRA/TPB. ‘con dence’) factors. Sheppard et al. Sparks et al. Moreover. ‘I intend to perform behaviour x’) from measures of self-predictions (e.49). researchers have not always employed measures that clearly tap the intention construct. Armitage and Conner (1999a. which formed the basis of Terry and colleagues’ distinction. In their study 1. These authors argue that items which tap ‘perceived diYculty’ are both more meaningful to participants and are closer to Ajzen’s (1991) original conceptualization of PBC. The present study sought meta-analytic evidence to support this position. (1997) report two studies to support their position. These ndings were interpreted as evidence to support the use of ‘perceived diYculty’ over ‘perceived control’. p.

one might expect that desires would inform intentions. 1996. Nunnally. (2) to assess the predictive validity of the TPB in relation to observed 7 See also Prislin and Kovrlija (1992) for an application of the TPB to high.g. The present meta-analysis considers the role of intentions. as opposed to more reliable multi-item scales (e. The most likely explanation for poor performance of the subjective norm component lies in its measurement: many authors use single item measures. Shepherd. For example. . Tra mow and Finlay (1996) suggest that this is unlikely. PBC should be more closely associated with self-predictions than with desires. Armitage and Mark Conner should be stronger when intention (as opposed to self-prediction) measures are used. From this perspective. 1998). 1995). 1975). Sheppard et al. upon which behavioural self-predictions are partly based.g.478 Christopher J. Congruent with the view that desires do not take account of facilitating/inhibiting in uences on behaviour. which direct action. descriptive and moral norms) have been found to be independently predictive of intentions (e. ‘I want to perform behaviour x’). Wieringa. & Grogan.g. which then develop into intentions to act. Bagozzi (1992) has suggested that attitudes may rst be translated into desires (e. Sparks. Subjective norms The normative component was the last addition to the TRA (Fishbein & Ajzen. desires and self-predictions in the context of the TPB. Silverdale.g. for a review see Conner & Armitage. Aims The aims of the present meta-analysis were vefold: (1) to test the overall eYcacy of the TPB. they found evidence to suggest a distinction between individuals whose actions are driven primarily by attitudes.g. 1978). (1988) and Van den Putte’s (1991) meta-analyses of the TRA found that the subjective norm component was the weakest predictor of intentions (see also Godin & Kok. The present meta-analysis therefore considered type of measurement as a moderator of subjective norm–intention correlations. PBC should contribute more unique variance to the prediction of behaviour when measures of desires are employed than self-predictions. Across 30 behaviours. Beck & Ajzen. & Zimmermanns. 1991.7 In addition. across several diV erent types of behaviour. and several authors have argued that it is the weakest component. because intention measures do not take facilitating/inhibiting factors into account. As a result. On the other hand. 1996). Martin. several authors have deliberately removed subjective norms from analysis (e. While these ndings could merely re ect the lesser importance of normative factors as determinants of intentions in the behaviours studied. Beyond this. and those whose actions are driven primarily by subjective norms. Conner.and low self-monitors. intentions are held to mediate the relationship between desires and self-predictions. variables thought to tap diV erent facets of normative conduct (e. suggesting that eV ects associated with intentions will fall between the desire and self-prediction ndings. Given that desires take no account of facilitating/inhibiting factors.

but are subject to variability around the mean. In total. require large numbers of additional studies to overturn them). whereas all non-published (i. . introducing a possible confound (for reviews. le drawer) studies are the remaining 95%. Rosenthal. the variability of (in this case) e V ect sizes around the mean presented). Measures of past behaviour have been shown to contribute unique variance to the prediction of future behaviour. Related to this. 1991). Used in conjunction with Rosenthal’s fail-safe number. over and above TPB variables. 1975. ‘How con dent are you 8 Note that only prospective measures of behaviour were included in the present meta-analysis. references to 161 journal articles and book chapters testing the TPB (up to the end of 1997) were found. 1998. perceived control over behaviour was de ned as ‘perceived controllability of behaviour’. 1984.’. . PBC and ‘perceived control over behaviour’. Greenwald. it is possible to assert that the present ndings are robust (i. and also included studies that utilized measures of both self-eYcacy and perceived control over behaviour in multiple-item scales.8 Self-eYcacy. although ndings are inconsistent. Reliability of the data included in the present study is assessed using Rosenthal’s (1984) fail-safe number (the number of studies required to nullify the present ndings). The present meta-analysis distinguishes between three types of PBC measure: self-eYcacy. Several studies have examined this phenomenon (e. PBC and ‘perceived control over behaviour’.g. ‘To what extent do you see yourself as being capable of .e. and to assess the evidence for discriminant validity between the constructs. self-eYcacy was de ned as ‘con dence in one’s own ability to carry out a particular behaviour’. All relationships in the present study exceed this tolerance level. and PBC was de ned as the perceived ease or diYculty of performing behaviour (Ajzen. . abstracting services.e. . 44 contained prospective self-reported behaviour measures and 19 prospective measures of behaviour that were independently rated or were objective (e. Method Selection of studies Mullen (1989) presents several useful strategies for the retrieval of studies for meta-analysis. the ‘ le drawer problem’ (Rosenthal. Sutton. This is because a measure of behaviour taken contemporaneously with intention is actually a measure of past behaviour. . (3) to consider diV erences in the conceptualization of intentions. These allow assessment of betweenstudy variance (i. Tables reporting meta-analytic data also include 2 values. All 2 values in the present study indicate considerable variability around the mean. 1994). White. The decision to include only published articles renders the present meta-analysis susceptible to publication bias. Studies were coded as measuring self-eYcacy if they included items such as: ‘I believe I have the ability to . Congruent with Armitage and Conner (1999a. given that this construct has been found to be the weakest predictor in both the TRA and TPB.’. the main approaches used were: ancestry and descendancy. see Conner & Armitage. taken from records). Of these. Characteristics of studies The 161 articles contained 185 independent empirical tests of the TPB.g. 1979) refers to the possibility that all published articles are the result of Type I errors. and browsing. unless otherwise stated. on-line computer searches. and (5) to consider measurement adequacy as a moderator of the subjective norm– intention relationship. indicating that even moderator analysis failed to reduce between-study variance to non-signi cance. In terms of the present study. (4) to examine the role of PBC as opposed to self-eYcacy or ‘perceived control over behaviour’. The publication bias refers to the assumption that studies with signi cant ndings are more likely to be submitted for publication.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 479 or self-reported behaviour. and consider the proposed intention–PBC interaction.e. 1999b). the ‘invisible college’. 1982).

and six of desire.’ (N of studies = 28). . large eV ect sizes are ‘the same distance above medium 9 By ‘normative beliefs’. and ‘If it were entirely up to me. Desires.’. Finally. . ‘How much personal control do you feel you have over .480 Christopher J. This allowed us to run additional analyses. Studies were also coded for measurements of the subjective norm component. and several have generously supplied copies of their correlation matrices. . single item (N = 52). . Armitage and Mark Conner that you will be able to . Ellen. but not so small as to be trivial’. rs were converted to Fisher z scores. Items that assessed perceived ease or diYculty were not included when coding for self-eYcacy or ‘perceived control over behaviour’. two groups of participants from Warshaw and Davis (1985) were treated as independent tests of the TRA and included 18 times in the analysis. Norman and Smith (1995). The weighted mean Fisher zs were then converted back to rs. (1988) can be criticized for analysing groups of participants more than once. weighted by sample size (N 3). Analyses Analyses are based on bivariate correlations: where the appropriate statistics were not reported in the published article. intentions and self-predictions were coded according to the criteria discussed in Bagozzi (1992). Where studies employed some combination of the above. I am con dent that I would be able to . Small eV ect sizes are ‘noticeably smaller than medium. (1988) and Warshaw and Davis (1985). We were able to locate 88 studies that used mixed measures of behavioural intentions. In the case of the TPB. 1992). ’. . this threatens the validity of meta-analysis. Comparisons between correlation coeYcients were conducted using Cohen’s (1977) qs statistic. & Ajzen. . these were coded as ‘mixed’ measures. Cohen (1992) presents a useful guide to interpreting the magnitude of e V ect sizes: medium eV ect sizes are de ned as those that approximate the average eV ect sizes across a variety of elds of research. however. It has been noted that the meta-analyses of Godin and Kok (1996) and Sheppard et al. the rs were converted to Fisher zs and meta-analysed in their own right before inclusion in the main data set. the authors were contacted.e. any combination of the above or ‘easy–diYcult’ items) these were coded as ‘PBC’ (N = 101). ‘self-prediction’ was coded for measures such as ‘I will perform behaviour x’ or ‘How likely is it that you will perform behaviour x?’. for the purpose of reporting the results. in the Sheppard et al. Where studies employed mixed measures (i. Madden. (1988) meta-analysis. Brie y. . because meta-analytic data tend to be based on large sample sizes. social support (N = 1) and unspeci ed (N = 12). where studies examined more than one behaviour with one group of participants (e. most of the interesting comparisons involve diV erences between correlations that hold intention in common. Desires. which evaluates diV erences in the magnitude of Fisher z. Sheppard et al. Subjective norms. even the smallest correlations are likely to reach statistical signi cance. R2 change values (for e V ects of PBC controlling for TRA variables) were converted to r. Clearly. and combined in the same way as bivariate correlations. In order to avoid this. These fell into six categories: multiple-item scale (N = 32). Fishbein and Stasson (1990). For example. intentions and self-pred ictions. For the purpose of analysis. and ‘How much do you feel that whether you do x is beyond your control?’ were employed (N = 7). 20 with measures of intention. a harmonic mean (n ) was used. that this only provides an estimate of diV erences between magnitude of correlation coeYcients because the technique ignores dependencies between variables. 40 with measures of self-prediction. ‘desire’ was coded if studies employed items such as ‘I want to perform behaviour x’. ‘Perceived control over behaviour’ was coded when items such as ‘Whether or not I do x is entirely up to me’. we are referring to a summed scale derived from the product referent beliefs and motivations to comply. before a mean Fisher z was calculated (see Hedges & Olkin.g. normative beliefs9 as direct predictors of intention (N = 26). 1985). and ‘intention’ was coded for studies that employed only measures such as ‘I intend to perform behaviour x’. general social pressure multiplied by motivation to comply (N = 14). For samples with unequal Ns. Note.

p.18 . PBC adds an average of 2% to prediction of behaviour.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis Table 1.10 (small).974 326.63 .001. BI=behavioural intention. p < . it independently accounts for 6% of the variance. and this nding supports the usefulness of the PBC construct in predicting behaviour. over and above intention.30 (medium). 1992.19.681 89.25 . compared to PBC–intention . For all ndings (unless otherwise stated).52 R2 . PBC=perceived behavioural control.13 .24 . Note.52.43). the average multiple correlation of intention and PBC with behaviour is .52 . & Zimmermanns. all fail-safe numbers far exceed Rosenthal’s (1984) recommended tolerance level.12 .01. as small was below it’ (Cohen. Given that Ajzen (1991) argues that for behaviours where there are no problems of volitional control.g. PBC will contribute nothing to the prediction of behaviour.63. ATT=attitude. Shepherd. Results Overall nd ings Average correlations and multiple correlations (all weighted by sample size.235 27. controlling for attitude and subjective norm.753 34.794 6174 481 2 648*** 396*** 677*** 285*** 3231*** 1050*** 1167*** 2224*** 1086*** 413*** 451*** 269*** ***p<.27 . Overall. N 3) are reported for TPB component relationships in Table 1. SN=subjective norm. .774 378.39 . Sparks.27). accounting for 39% of the variance (R 2 = . and this provides a useful heuristic that acts as a standard of comparison.27 Fail-safe N 65.497 201. Average component relationships for all tests of the TPB Relationship Multiple correlation (BI+PBC) with behaviour BI–behaviour correlation PBC–behaviour correlation % variance added by PBC to behaviour Multiple correlation (ATT+SN +PBC) with BI ATT–BI correlation SN–BI correlation PBC–BI correlation % variance added by PBC to BI Behavioural belief–ATT correlation Normative belief–SN correlation Control belief–PBC correlation N of tests 63 48 60 66 154 115 137 144 136 42 34 18 Ra . 1995). the subjective norm–intention correlation is signi cantly weaker than the other relationships with intention (compared to attitude–intention correlation qs = .22 . Wieringa.14 .24 .347 26.06 . accounting for 27% of the variance (R2 = .39).49 .25 . 156). and .43 . Across all behaviours.201 20. who do not include a subjective norm measure (e. These eV ect size categories equate with correlations of . The averaging multiple correlation of attitude. Congruent with several authors.498 3815 986.34 .02 .50 .50 .47 . subjective norm and PBC with intention is R = . Not only is the PBC–intention correlation strong (r = .50 (large).37 . aWeighted by sample size.

a medium-large eV ect size) and provides further evidence of the eYcacy of the model.50). TPB=multiple correlation of intention and PBC. PBC contributed an additional 7% of variance over and above attitude and subjective norm. p < . Table 1 also displays the correlations between belief-based and direct measures of attitude. Meta-analysis of self-reported vs. Although this does not present suYcient evidence to warrant discarding the construct. Moreover. p < . subjective norm and PBC.01). We return to this issue later. it is encouraging that the TPB can account for considerable proportions of the variance in actual behaviour (i. p < .11.20 2 Table 2.482 Christopher J. The TPB accounts for large.19. self-prediction (qs = . Self-report vs. In addition.e.26. referent beliefs motivations to comply (normative beliefs).001. it does perhaps indicate that it is the part of the TPB that most requires further study.01) or the mixed measure (qs = .05). observed behaviour Relationship TPB TPB Self-reported behaviour Observed behaviour N of tests 44 19 Fail-safe N 37. self-prediction or intention was the dependent variable. and facilitatory/inhibitory beliefs power (control beliefs). observed behaviour Table 2 presents multiple correlations of intention and PBC.05).695 3762 509*** 86*** ***p<. In addition to these ndings. 1992). there was support for Ajzen’s (1991) expectancy-value basis to control beliefs: these correlated r = . intentions and self-predictions (see Method for de nitions). in other words summed scales derived from outcome beliefs evaluations (behavioural beliefs). highly signi cant proportions of the variance in prospective measures of both observed (R2 = . Note. For self-prediction.44 R2 . Although this diV erence is signi cant (qs = .14. 10 Congruent with Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) formulation that behavioural. p < . Behavioural intentions Table 3 contrasts the diV erent measures that have been employed to tap behavioural intentions: desires. all the correlations may be classi ed as representing ‘medium’ to ‘large’ eV ect sizes (Cohen. aWeighted by sample size. The multiple correlation of attitude. p < .20) and self-reported (R2 = . correlation qs = . the role of PBC diV ered depending on whether desire.52 with PBC.55 . Perhaps more importantly. both are strongly correlated with each other (both rs = . Armitage and Mark Conner Ra .27. subjective norm and PBC with desire was signi cantly stronger than with either intention (qs = .and normative-belief measures inform attitude and subjective norms respectively. contrasting selfreported and observed behaviour.01). The 10 All belief-based measures are those which follow the expectancy-value format. .31) behaviour.31 .

06) than when either intention (R2change = . PBC is a less important determinant of behaviour when measures of intention or self-prediction are employed.34 . Consistent with this position. both ps < .54 Fail-safe N 28.24. TPB=multiple correlation of attitude.54 .334 17.57 . subjective norm and PBC.12. self-eYcacy and PBC contribute an additional 2% to explained variance in behaviour.29 . Furthermore. although this must be interpreted with caution. Consonant with predictions.44) and behaviour (rs = .73 R2 . PBC contributed more unique variance to prediction of behaviour when a measure of desire was used (R2change = .003%. it failed . The corresponding correlations for perceived control over behaviour were signi cantly weaker. ps < .42 . Thus. Control Findings relating to the impact of diV erent conceptualizations of control on intention and behaviour are presented in Table 4.57 .01 for comparisons with self-eYcacy and PBC. respectively) and intention (qss = . Note. The corresponding value for perceived control over behaviour was .001. intentions and self-predictions were stronger predictors of behaviour than desires (qs = . PBC Behaviour Self-predictions. respectively). Self-eYcacy and PBC have a comparable level of correlation with both intention (both rs = .262 1201 2 % variance added by PBC 3 1 2 7 6 8 7 2 390*** 58*** 246*** 7* 2688*** 246*** 401*** 21*** *p<.35 and . PBC Behaviour Desire. Meta-analysis of intention vs. the implication is that the formation of intentions and self-predictions are relatively more contingent on an assessment of perceived behavioural control than are desires.05.47 . ps < . respectively. aWeighted by sample size.05) when PBC was included as a predictor. PBC Behaviour TPB ‘Mixed’ TPB Intention TPB Self-predictions TPB Desires N of tests 36 8 16 3 88 20 40 6 Ra .665 914 5750 105 486.18 and .58 .64 .Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis Table 3. for both behaviour (qss = .22 .01 for both comparisons). ***p<.01) or self-prediction (R2change = .52 .e. Controlling for intention. desire or self-prediction 483 Relationship ‘Mixed’.27 .33 . as only two additional studies reporting null results would overturn this nding (i. self-eYcacy and PBC correlate with intention and behaviour signi cantly more strongly than perceived control over behaviour. corresponding values for desires and intentions were 2% and 8%. Thus. respectively.32 . . PBC Behaviour Intention.40.239 was included.

904 69 17. the extent to which perceived control would moderate intention–behaviour relationships or show a direct link to behaviour is unclear. self-eYcacy explains an additional 7%. We were able to locate 19 studies that appropriately tested the intention perceived control (i. intention for prediction of behaviour). 19 out of 63). Armitage and Mark Conner Table 4.01. Of these studies. controlling for other TPB variables (i. self-eYcacy.44 . of explained variance.40 . However.e.e.18 .23 Fail-safe N 1092 13. attitude and subjective norm for prediction of intention. Perceived control over behaviour contributed an additional 1%. aWeighted by sample size. Ajzen (1991. although only eight additional studies reporting null results would be required to render this nding non-signi cant. PBC. For prediction of intention. PBC. note that perceived control over behaviour relationships with intention and behaviour fail to exceed Rosenthal’s (1984) acceptable tolerance level.484 Christopher J.05. perceived control over behaviour) is unrelated to actual control. Average control–intention and control–behaviour relationships Relationship Self eYcacy Behaviour PBC Behaviour Perceived control over Behaviour Behaviour Self-eYcacy Intention PBC Intention Perceived control over Behaviour Intention N of tests 13 40 6 28 101 7 ra .35 . Subjective norms The measurement explanation of the weak predictive power of subjective norms relates to the fact that norms are typically measured by a single item. it is diYcult to draw rm conclusions from such empirical data because relatively few of the studies employing the TPB actually reported tests of the interaction eV ect (30%. In each case. higher levels of PBC were associated with stronger intention–behaviour relationships. and PBC an additional 5%. p. PBC or perceived control over behaviour) to the prediction of intention or behaviour.e. if perceived control (i.44 . b% Variance refers to the percentage variance added by the perceived control construct (i.869 174 2 % variance addedb 2 2 <1 7 5 1 25* 582*** 19*** 365*** 1697*** 18** *p<. Fail-safe values are calculated separately for these values. to achieve Rosenthal’s (1984) tolerance level).e. despite the . self-eYcacy or perceived control over behaviour) interaction hypothesis. self-eYcacy.001. ***p<. Also.113 198. **p<. 188) suggests that failure to nd an eV ect may be attributable to the fact that linear models provide good accounts of psychological data even when interaction eV ects are known to be present. nine (47%) reported evidence of a signi cant interaction eV ect. Note.

38 .15. multiple-item measures of subjective norm and normative beliefs had signi cantly stronger correlations with intention than any of the other measures (qs = . Although it is perhaps unsurprising that multiple measures of subjective norms are more strongly related to intentions.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 485 Table 5.30 .936 1195 [–] 9987 4095 2 237*** 270*** 45*** [–] 213*** 188*** potentially low reliability of such measures. although the prediction of self-reported behaviour is superior to observed behaviour. there is some evidence for discriminant validity between desire. The present study found R = . the impact of normative beliefs on intention should be mediated through the subjective norm component.52 (R 2 = . intention and self-prediction. That the two correlate strongly implies that the operationalization of normative beliefs represents an accurate analysis of the process underlying the formation of global perceptions of subjective norm.45 Fail-safe N 11. aWeighted by sample size. all ps < . The weak predictive power of the subjective norm component within the TPB may therefore be partially accounted for by weaknesses in measurement. Equivalent subjective norm–intention and normative belief–intention correlations of . N of tests 32 52 14 1 26 12 ra . Note.38 and a normative belief–subjective norm correlation of . Overall nd ings The present meta-analysis of the TPB compares favourably with previous metaanalyses.403 17. Meta-analysis of single vs. Subjective norms are posited as global perceptions of social pressure that derive from judgments of social pressure from salient others weighted by the motivation to comply with these groups or individuals. From Table 5. Discussion The present meta-analysis provides evidence supporting the use of the TPB for predicting intention and behaviour.50 (cf.09–.27) for the multiple correlation of .28 . Moreover.001.38 .05). and for a distinction between self-eYcacy and perceived control over behaviour. Table 1) suggest that the two measures closely map onto one another. subjective norm shows a reasonably strong relationship with intention when appropriately measured with multiple-item scales. multiple-item measures of subjective norms in regression with intentions Measure Multiple items Single item Subjective norm Motivation to comply Social support Normative beliefs Unspeci ed ***p<. Finally.25 .

(1988). Armitage and Mark Conner intention and PBC with behaviour. intention and self-pred iction The present study provides some support for work proposing a distinction between intention. although PBC contributed relatively little additional . Therefore. ‘I ate a low-fat diet’) and a more objective assessment of behaviour (validated measure of percentage of calories derived from fat). Sutton (1998) has suggested that showing participants the measure of behaviour on which they will later be assessed is one way of circumventing such problems. Similarly. intention and PBC were better predictors of self-reported behaviour than observed behaviour.64–. Randall and WolV (1994) report a corresponding relationship of . from the present meta-analysis. TPB variables were most closely associated with desires. the intention–behaviour correlation from the present meta-analysis is comparable with those of recent meta-analyses devoted to intention–behaviour relations. For example. Researchers should be cognizant of the problems of self-report data and. while Sheeran and Orbell (1998) reported a mean correlation of . over and above attitude and subjective norm. 1992).46–. Clearly this is not a problem speci c to the TRA/TPB. it would appear that PBC in uences behaviour directly and indirectly. demonstrating the eYcacy of the PBC construct.44 (28 studies of condom use). however. desire and self-prediction (e.58). Further support for the eYcacy of the TPB over the TRA is provided by the multiple correlation of attitude. While the diV erence between the two may represent a subjective–objective distinction. wherever possible.g. but provides indication of the wider debate within social psychology. it may also re ect the fact that the subjective measure of behaviour directly mapped onto the prior measure of intention. in a study of low-fat diet consumption. Potentially. The intention–behaviour correlation in the present meta-analysis is r = .71). take accurate multiple measures of actual behaviour. previous meta-analyses have reported similar ndings (range of R = . this may simply re ect the fact that measurement correspondence is typically maximized where subjective measures of behaviour are used (cf. PBC adds—on average—6% to the prediction of intention.486 Christopher J. congruent with these studies. Armitage and Conner (1999a) reported a comparable discrepancy between self-reported behaviour (e.45 (98 studies). The ndings of the present meta-analysis are comparable with those of previous studies (Rs = . Fishbein. Where behaviour is measured. objective behaviour It is clear that many TPB studies do not employ prospective designs or measure behaviour. More importantly.47. Self-report vs. it is typically through self-report. 1980). Bagozzi. PBC was found to contribute uniquely to the prediction of behaviour. and therefore represents a useful addition to the TRA. independent of TRA variables. Further.g. Desire. subjective norm and PBC with intention. whereas the objective measure could not. Congruent with Hessing et al.

Overall. In general. subjective norm and perceived control (i. taking perceptions of social pressure and (to a lesser extent) control into account. and both PBC and self-eYcacy accounted for equivalent proportions of variance in behaviour. Moreover. perceived control over behaviour was signi cantly more weakly related to intention and behaviour. Thus. with PBC contributing the most additional variance. self-eYcacy. but may instead be mediated by intentions or selfpredictions. or may co-determine behaviour with perceived control. While there is no clear evidence for which is to be preferred. The implication is that individuals form intentions that they are con dent they can enact (i. Self-eYcacy and PBC were signi cantly more strongly correlated with both intention and behaviour than was perceived control over behaviour. Perceptions of control The present meta-analysis found diV erences between measures of PBC. The ndings also suggest that self-eYcacy and PBC are both useful predictors of intention and behaviour. Congruent with this. these desires are weak direct predictors of behaviour. PBC or perceived control over behaviour) were the best predictors of desires. and contributed least to prediction of behaviour when intention and self-prediction were statistically controlled. who showed that the impact of attitudes on intention was almost entirely mediated by desires. 1999a. PBC contributed most additional variance to the explanation of intention and self-prediction. the present ndings provide some support for Bagozzi’s (1992) position: intentions and self-predictions were superior predictors of behaviour than desires. individuals may rst translate their attitudes into desires. self-eYcacy accounted for the most additional variance in intention. attitudes. desires were the weakest predictors of behaviour. under such circumstances.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 487 variance. self-eYcacy and perceived control over behaviour. 1998). The implication is that . Future work is required to test the proposed causal relationships between these variables. The analyses concerning the proportion of additional explained variance contributed by perceived control over behaviour were shown to be unreliable: more studies are required that more fully investigate this construct.e. self-eYcacy explains somewhat more of the variance in intention than does PBC. which consists of ‘mixed measures’ (see Method). one would expect little diV erence between intention and self-prediction. and that translation of intention into action may be facilitated both by self-eYcacy and an assessment of more external factors tapped by PBC. In turn. analysis of the proportion of additional variance explained indicated that the ndings for perceived control over behaviour were both weak and unreliable. the possibility exists that the predicted diV erential eV ects of self-eYcacy and perceived control over behaviour may vary as a function of behaviour studied (see Armitage & Conner. 1997). Indeed. while self-eYcacy and PBC account for equivalent proportions of the variance in behaviour. Manstead & van Eekelen. However. 1999b. However. those they perceive self-eYcacy over). Bandura. self-eYcacy is more clearly de ned and operationalized than is PBC (cf. where the data were reliable. Further evidence for this is reported in Bagozzi and Kimmel (1995).e. These ndings can be accounted for by the fact that PBC takes account of factors that may facilitate or inhibit behaviour.

1995). For example. 1998. the poor performance of the subjective norm component was shown to be a function of measurement. Armitage and Mark Conner self-eYcacy should be the preferred measure of ‘perceived control’ within the TPB. given that the majority of TPB studies have used single-item measures. 2000. but further research is required that more fully evaluates the impact of diV erent operationalizations of perceived control on intention and behaviour. Given the role of PBC as a powerful determinant of both intention and behaviour. Terry and colleagues (e. Beyond this. Some researchers have suggested a reconceptualization of the mechanism by which normative pressure is exerted. and the present study points to measurement as its principal weakness. Terry et al. it seems unlikely that the majority of people’s behaviour is una V ected by social pressure. White et al. & White.. Terry. further exploration of both the nature and antecedents of the PBC construct is clearly required. Tra mow and Finlay (1996) have argued that the weakness in the subjective norm component stems from a minority of individuals whose actions are driven primarily by perceived social pressure. 1999). and so have removed it from analysis (e.488 Christopher J.. when type of measure was used as a moderator. 1996). Terry and colleagues have shown that identi cation with a behaviourally relevant group moderates the eV ects of group norm on intention (Terry & Hogg.g. 1991). Deutsch and Gerard’s (1995) distinction between informational and normative in uence). The present meta-analysis provides some support for this view: subjective norm was the TPB component most weakly related to intention. 1994) have drawn on Self-categorization and Social Identity Theories (see Hogg & Abrams. 1985). However. However. but correlate only weakly with perceived control over behaviour. 1995). Terry & Hogg. Subjective norm is operationalized as a global perception of social pressure either to comply with the wishes of others or not (Ajzen. only 18 published studies reported control belief–PBC relationships. Shepherd. Wieringa. social pressure is rarely so direct or explicit. they present some evidence to support a distinction between group. researchers have paid relatively little attention to precisely what PBC is tapping: up to the end of 1997. In addition. For example. cf. . 1999. There is also evidence to suggest that alternative conceptualizations of norms exert independent eV ects on intentions. In addition.and subjective-norms (Terry et al. Clearly. Turner. Conner & Armitage. a recent study by Armitage and Conner (1999a) provides some evidence to suggest that control beliefs (as conceptualized by Ajzen. 1988. a number of authors have argued that the way in which norms are conceptualized within the TRA/TPB framework fails to tap important facets of social in uence (e. Subjective norms Several researchers have argued that the subjective norm component of the TPB is inadequate and rarely predicts intention. & White. leading a number of researchers to suggest alternative conceptualizations. controlling for subjective norms.g. Speci cally. Although they provide some evidence to support this view (see also DeBono & Snyder. Hogg. Hogg. Sparks. Terry. this component requires further empirical attention.g. 1996.. 1999. 1991) are the antecedents of self-eYcacy. & Zimmermanns.

. Conner et al. (1992). Although prediction is superior for self-reported than observed behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology. I. (1991). (1988). J. M. There is also evidence to support the inclusion of moral (e.g.g. moral or descriptive norms) may increase the predictive power of the normative component of the model. Armitage. & Conner.. J. B. 179–211. 72–90. The theory of planned behavior. 453–474. A number of studies have shown that self-identity explains additional proportions of the variance in intentions over and above TPB variables (e.g. Cialdini. 22. 24. Attitudes. Conner & Armitage.e. Und erstand ing attitudes and pred icting social behavior. There was also evidence to suggest that measures of intention. 1998). work on additional normative variables (e. 1996) norms within the TPB. 29. I. self-prediction and desires possess discriminant validity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Prediction of goal directed behavior: Attitudes. 1998). Ajzen. Action control: From cognitions to behaviors (pp. 35–54. personality and behavior. (1980). Beck & Ajzen. Personal norms have been operationalized as either self-identity or moral norms (see Conner & Armitage. L. 11–39). as well as expanding on some of the theoretical debate surrounding the model. . The present ndings therefore corroborate those of previous TPB meta-analyses. a medium to large eV ect size). 1998) and descriptive (e. intentions and perceived behavioral control. In J. & Madden. 1999b. Armitage. 38. T.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 489 Related work has investigated a number of diV erent types of norm. Journal of Leisure Research. M. Sparks & Shepherd. Finally. & Driver. Further research is required to test the suYciency of such additional variables by testing them against adequate measures of subjective norm. 1991. The present study showed that PBC independently predicted intentions and behaviour in a wide number of domains. I. *Ajzen. the TPB is still capable of explaining 20% of the variance in prospective measures of actual behaviour (i.. References Note: References marked with * indicate TPB studies used in the meta-analysis Ajzen. The theory of planned behaviour: Assessment of predictive validity and ‘perceived control’. & Fishbein. descriptive and injunctive norms. Conclusions The present meta-analysis provides support for the eYcacy of the TPB as a predictor of intentions and behaviour. Distinguishing perceptions of control from self-eYcacy: Predicting consumption of a low fat diet using the theory of planned behavior. Ajzen. and Reno (1991) distinguish between personal. Armitage & Conner. (1999b). C. 1992. Kallgren. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. (1985). Beckman (Eds. Englewood CliV s.g. NJ: Prentice-Hall. (1999a).. 1999a. see Conner & Armitage. although only relatively weak evidence for the proposed self-eYcacy–perceived control over behaviour distinction. 207–224... *Ajzen. for a review. (1986). Kuhl & J. Ajzen. J. I.). From intentions to action: A theory of planned behavior. Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure choice. Injunctive norms map onto subjective norms. C. & Conner. I. 50. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. M. I. New York: Springer.

32–46. M. D. & Babrow. (1993). *Biddle. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 27. . (1991). B. I.. R. Choosing between means of transportation—an application of the theory of planned behavior. A. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie.. S.. Ged rag and Gezondheid Tijdschrift voor Psychologie and Gezondheid. ¨ *Bamberg. (1992). ¨ *Atsalakis. & Siero. 437–461. *Bagozzi. (1996). Bandura. A. Goudas. Predicting mothers’ intentions to limit frequency of infants’ sugar intake: Testing the theory of planned behavior. (1997). 409–431. M. 25. Health Ed ucation Quarterly. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual. 21. S. *Basen-Engquist.. S. 27.. P. *Black. and a smoking-cessation program: A planned behavior analysis of communication campaign development. & Schmidt. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie. 19. M. Armitage. (1992). 28. Ped iatric Exercise Science. Self-eYcacy: The exercise of control. A. Social-psychological predictors of self-reported actual and intended physical activity in a university workforce sample. Registration of children in a physical activity program: An application of the theory of planned behavior. R. ¨ *Bamberg. D. (1993). 121–126. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie.. S. British Journal of Sports Med icine. *Arnscheid. 263–277. Identi cation of campaign recruitment strategies for a stepped smoking cessation intervention for a college campus. *Beale. S. The self-regulation of attitudes. A. & Ajzen. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2. and statistical considerations. 1173–1182. S. (1999c). Attitude and performance in groups: A test of the theory of planned behavior on basketball players. C. Een vergelijking van de theorie van gepland gedrag. Journal of Research in Personality. 8. 9.. & Kimmel. & Conner. & Schomers. & Manstead. (1997). Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie. and self-eYcacy: A model of adolescents’ HIV-related sexual risk behavior. & Ludemann. (1995). 47–60. Applied and Preventive Psychology. Health Communication. 15. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. ¨ Bandura. S. A. B. (1992). 280–297. 25–37. Beliefs. 55. ¨ *Bamberg. Englewood CliV s. 26.. 178–204. norms. F. M. M. het health belief model en de protectie-motivatie theorie [Condom use among heterosexuals: A comparison of the theory of planned behaviour. & Sleap. New York: W. & Conner.. A. K. S. (1991). P. intentions and behavior. 160–163. 238–254. Armitage and Mark Conner Armitage. A. (1996). attitudes. P. *Beck. A comparison of leading theories for the prediction of goal-directed behaviours. A. L. (1986). 21. On rectifying the comparative anatomy of perceived control: Comments on ‘Cognates of personal control’.. NJ: Prentice-Hall. Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Health Ed ucation Quarterly. P. 24. J. D. (1994). (1991). W. the health belief model and protection motivation theory]. 27. 1.490 Christopher J. 261–272. 285–301. P. C. R. D. T. Attitudes. (1996).. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie. Baron. S. & Kenny.. Social found ations of thought and action. H.. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology. S. Buunk. Freeman & Co.. An empirical test of the theory of planned behavior in two ¨ choice situations with two behavioral alternatives: Bike versus car and container versus garbage can. Black. Theory-driven evaluation of an environmental policy measure: Using the theory of planned behavior. 18. G. Condoomgebruik door heteroseksuelen. 235–247. (1995). (1986). 243–262. C. P. Bandura.. Social cognition models and health behaviour: A structured review. ¨ *Bamberg. R. Bagozzi. S. *Bakker. *Babrow. & Schmidt. Psychology and Health. R. J. 166–176. 34. General or speci c attitudes in explaining ecological responsible behavior? An enlargement of the theory of planned behavior by the concept ‘attitudes towards objects’. R.. & Page. 28. S. 173–189. When does the car-user change to the bus? Problems and results of an application of the theory of planned behavior in the context of practical traYc planning. 61–69. R. A. strategic.. K. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie. intentions. A.. Predictive validity of the theory of planned behaviour: The role of questionnaire format and social desirability. & Parcel. (1996). Social Psychology Quarterly. 145–163. (1990). *Bamberg. 51. (2000). & TiV any. M.

Kallgren. 315–325. Attitudes and ecstasy use. The prediction of household recycling of newspapers: The role of attitudes. 10. M. & Graham. Aldershot: Avebury. 1. 1617–1628. & Fowler. & Godin. Psychosocial determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption. M. 20. Conner. C.. Health Psychology... *Chan. Zanna (Ed.. Appetite. Owen. *Borland. D. 112. & Manteufel. L. 24. C. M. R. 418–421. intentions. J. Johnston. Conner. M.. Schroder. & Sherlock. Appetite.. J.-K. *Brubaker. D. & Scho eld. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Psychological Bulletin. *Boldero.. Cialdini. 18–19. G. & Wickersham. 1–24). 440–462. (1990). G. 105–121. (1995). *Boissoneault. & Norman.. 201–234). N. Predicting health behaviour. P. 23. P.. Silverdale. L. R. *Borgida. M. E. K. 32. J. 27. J. C. Determinants of college women’s intentions to tell their partners to use condoms. *Conner. S. I. & Gionet. S.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 491 Blue. (1994). 25. Conner. Social psychology and health: European perspectives (pp. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Hill. E.. B. (1992). 85. & de Vries. 310–321. 1455–1470. Health psychology: Potential in d iversity (pp. R. Comparing the health belief model and the theory of planned behaviour in health screening. E. J. 91–100). In S. Health Psychology. Helping and being helped : Naturalistic stud ies (pp. A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical re nement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. & Grogan. Godin. & Fishbein. 285–296. A. R. *Conner. & Bradet. Relating a social in uence model to the role of acculturation in substance use among latino adolescents. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Med icine. Bradet. P. (1993). 1145–1150. Buckingham: Open University Press.. Research in Nursing and Health. CA: Sage. Cohen. Ad vances in experimental social psychology (Vol. P.). Photiades.. Situational and attitudinal in uences upon students’ intentions to use condoms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. *Brug. Rutter & L. (1994). *Conner. Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Stud ies. J. K. British Journal of Health Psychology.. G.. & Nash. The prediction of intention to smoke only in designated work site areas. M. N. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. G. L. Regensberg: Verlag. and situational factors. P. A power primer. 1429–1464. (1995). pp. Spacapan & S.. R. F.. 4. Examination and prediction of elementary school teachers’ intentions to teach HIV/AIDS education.). *Brubaker. Dieting in adolescence: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. 1411–1422. R. R. L. New York: Academic Press.. Evans. R.. D. C. & Reno. 183–211).. The predictive capacity of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior in exercise research: An integrated literature review. R. In H. (1997). Lechner. G. S.. Cohen. Encouraging the practice of testicular self-examination: A eld application of the theory of reasoned action. Quine (Eds.. 18. Pineau. Canad ian Journal of Public Health. 155–159. 37. G. 154–163. New York: Academic Press. 135–150. In M. *Collette. M. 9. (1995). (1996b). Newbury Park. Martin. 27. Body weight and shape control: Examining component behaviours. (1998). & Armitage. N... (1994). Active living in communities: Understanding the intention to take up physical activity as an everyday way of life. S. (1990). C. *Boudreau. Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research. R. Journal of Occupational Med icine. M. (1991). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Reschke. R. (1995).. 6. (1977). Health risk appraisal in an occupational setting and its impact on exercise behavior.). 28. (1994).. & Norman. & S. Encouraging college males to perform testicular selfexamination: Evaluation of a persuasive message based on the revised theory of reasoned action.. (1990).). Oskamp (Eds. *Conner. *Burak. (Eds. (1992). *Conner. 25.. & Norman. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. (1996).) (1996a). H. M. C. J. 621–624. R. Predicting attempts and sustained cessation of smoking after the introduction of workplace smoking bans. Godin. *Carvajal.. In D. M.. 336–342. AIDS Ed ucation and Prevention. Understanding living kidney donation: A behavioural decision perspective. (1994). .. J.. (1991). Maes (Eds.

(1955). M. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 469–486. Intentions of science teachers to use investigative teaching methods: A test of the theory of planned behavior. 25. S. J. (1988). *Dennison.. J. Journal of Neuroscience Nursing. J. *Crawley. In M. Neuroscience nurses’ intentions to care for persons with HIV/AIDS. 639–660. Self-eYcacy: The third factor besides attitude and subjective norm as a predictor of behavioural intentions.. S. Psychosocial correlates of physical activity among fth and eighth graders. Oncology Nursing Forum. P.. Revue Canad ienne d es Sciences d e l’Ad ministration. D. 84 90. & Sandler. J. (1996). 52–75. 51. R.. *de Vries. 14. Conner & P. *East. E. Norman (Eds. & Shaw. The approval motive. *Craig. K. The theory of planned behaviour and health behaviours. J. Schneider Jamner. [The production of goal-directed behaviour: Attitude. 14. Accessibility and stability of predictors in the theory of planned behavior. (1991). Kok. B. E. *Desroches. M. *de Vries. & Orth. 337–375.. *Corby. E. *Dzewaltowski.). & Chebat. & Friedenreich. (1995). 80–87. Adolescent food choice: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. M. J. 121–162). Determinants of exercise during colorectal cancer treatment: An application of the theory of planned behavior. 754–765. Are there diV erent determinants of the frequency. E. & Koballa. 63. E. D. *Crawley. 12. M. Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle und ¨ Angewand te Psychologie. S. self-eYcacy. (1992). R. 21. E. & Dietz.. (1964). 14. *Courneya. Zur vorhersage zielgerichteten handelns: Einstellung. and duration of physical activity? Behavioral Med icine. (1995). M. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics. (1995). (1990). *de Vellis. Causal modeling of secondary science students’ intentions to enrol in physics. *Doll. G. 29. C. M. & Gerard. *Courneya. *Doll.. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 27. Noble. (1994). Pourquoi les entrepreneurs que becois vont sur le marche ´ ´ ´ boursier: Attitudes et facteurs de decision. H.. & Ajzen. (1993). & Snyder. & Sparks. (1995). W. 27–37. subjective estimations of competence.-Y. B. Predicting participation in cancer screening: The role of perceived behavioral control.. R. H. T. . *Crawley. Mentz. A study of normative and informational social in uences upon individual judgment. K. 12. 24. F. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 9–23. (1997). New York: Wiley. G. intention and previous behavior as predictors of smoking onset.. Health Psychology. Journal of Economic Psychology. Investment decisions and the theory of planned behaviour. F. 25. Deutsch. (1990). Backbier. (1995). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. (1995). 499–515. C. P. B. H. 20. Journal of Behavioral Med icine. 38. Preventive Med icine.492 Christopher J. Buckingham: Open University Press.. K. M. M. Goldberg.. 539–559. Dijkstra. 3.. H. S.. & Black. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Using the theory of planned behavior to predict intention to use condoms among male and female injecting drug users.. & McAuley. and emotions]. R.. Cognitive mediators of the social in uence–exercise adherence relationship: A test of the theory of planned behavior. M. 29. S. R. (1990). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Understanding readiness for regular physical activity in older individuals: An application of the theory of planned behavior. I. DeBono. 20. 18. J. N. Acting on one’s attitudes: The role of history of choosing situations. & Wolitski. Blalock. (1997). intensity. Physical activity participation—social cognitive theory versus the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. 685–697. (1992). [Why Quebec businesses go public: Attitudes and the ´ decision-making process]. (1996). 388–405. J. (1996). subjektive handlungskompetenz und emotionen.. M. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. M.. Health Ed ucation Research. S. *Courneya. & McAuley. K. The impact of social in uences in the context of attitude. & Kuhlman. Armitage and Mark Conner Conner. 273–282. Hispanic-American students’ attitudes toward enrolling in high school chemistry—a study of planned behavior and belief-based change.-C.. Crowne. 629–636. Predicting health behaviour (pp.. (1992).. K. & Dijkstra. D. & Shepherd. F. 629–636. C. J. 50–55. H. 237–257. 506–513.. B. 26. 8. 585–599. J.. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. S. *Courneya. M. *Dilorio... C. A. 1715–1723.. & Marlowe.

P. (1990). Page (Eds. *Giles. M. K. Predicting intentions and behaviour of Swedish 10–16-year olds at breakfast. Valois. A. 61.. R. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. Environment and Behavior. R.. C. & Lepage. 5. Adrien. *Godin. R. O. *Godin. A. & Stasson. Bauman. The theories of reasoned action and planned behavior: Overview of ndings. & Cairns. Journal of Behavioral Med icine. E. A theory of reasoned action: Some applications and implications.. 1–20. *Godin. British Journal of Ad d iction. Health Ed ucation Research. Redress seeking as planned behavior.).. Predictors of smoking behaviour—an application of Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour. P. and perceived control in the prediction of training session attendance. self-predictions. 173–198. S. D. Use of condoms: Intention and behaviour of adolescents living in juvenile rehabilitation centres.. The role of desires. & Cappon.. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. The pattern of in uence of perceived behavioral control upon exercising behavior—an application of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. *Godin. 1335–1343.. (1992). intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. E. Prediction of intention to exercise of individuals who have su V ered from coronary heart disease. Duval. L. I. & Tedeschi. 87–98. L. (1996). G. Journal of Drug Education.. Alcoologie. (1993). G. J. M. G. 1221–1230. G. *Gummeson. P. I. 173–188. J. Godin. 47. Valois. Michaud.. 27–34. Vezina. B.-T. & Conner. Impression management in the forced compliance situation: Two studies using the bogus pipeline. Greenwald. 237–242. Gaes. E. 9. Journal of Applied Social Psychology... P. emerging research problems and usefulness for exercise promotion. attitude. (1996). 27. & Munger. M. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction. *Fishbein. (1997). (1978). J. past behavior. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. P. F. G. 679–698. M. (1995). Factors in uencing intentions of pregnant women to exercise after giving birth.. Manson-Singer... & Ajzen. I. 16. G. G. & Kendzierski. Nadeau. Savard. (1996). (1997). 8.. Psychological Bulletin. (1990).. Blood donation and Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour: An examination of perceived behavioural control. & M.. Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. *Godin. 34. G. G. Valois. J. (1980). B. 11. O. 9. 26. Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. G... (1996). (1991). 20. 188–195. *Godin. 16.. G. American Journal of Health Promotion. British Journal of Social Psychology. D. Fortin.. The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to health-related behaviors.. (1989). L.. R. *Godin.. M. A. & Kok. 529–545. S. L. 104. S. Boyer. Godin. G. 12. Gottlieb. C. & Desharnais. . E. 297–306. MA: Addison-Wesley. M.. (1995). Determinants of an intention to exercise of an electric power commission’s employees. A. (1993) University students’ intention to seek medical care promptly if symptoms of sexually transmitted diseases were suspected.. (1975). 1556–1586. Fortin. 289–300.. & Ross. 81–102. *Godin. Goldstein.. Food Quality and Preference. G. The role of molar behavioral intentions.. 34.. Health Psychology. Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 493 *East. Jobin. L. Reading. N. 87. H. A. 8.. N. 401–404. J. N. 18. pp. *Godin. Fishbein. Predicting antipollution behavior. Fortin. Fishbein. C. & Hounsa. Cross-cultural testing of three social cognitive theories: An application to condom use. 18.. *Gatch. G. G. *Godin. R. Willms. Maticka-Tyndale. & Gionet. R. 20.. State legislators’ intentions to vote and subsequent votes on tobacco control legislation. J. *Hamid. G. E. Dana. C. & Lepage. G... Cohen. Howe Jr. (1991). C. G. & Cheng. (1993).. Understanding the intentions of pregnant nullipara to not smoke cigarettes after child birth. & Kok. (1975). S. Belief.. and locus of control. *Flynn. Predicting exercise intentions: The theory of planned behavior. M. Lepage. Le non-usage du tabac (Non-use of tobacco). Bradet. *Godin. D.. Ergonomics. Public Health Reports.. G. R. In H. 65–116).. 27. Kalle. (1988). J. Jonsson. M.. Kok. L. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. L.. Bradet. 491–501. & Boyer. 115–124.. (1997). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.. 762–772. (1996). 141–157. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Journal of Clinical Psychology.. Mahnes... HIV seropositive gay men: Understanding adoption of safe sexual practices. G.. G. 82. & Leclerc. AIDS Ed ucation and Prevention.. Solomon. 100–104. 100–102.

L. Predicting intentions to use condoms among African-American adolescents: The theory of planned behavior as a model of HIV risk-associated behavior.. B. Social identi cations: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. (1996). H. (1995). K. & Weigel.. E. A. V. El V ers. *Hillhouse. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. R.. J.. & Olkin. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. S. Beyond information quality: Fitness for purpose and electronic information resource use. 187–195. (1988). A. Puerto Rican. Application of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior to predict sunbathing. Correlates of intention to use condoms among auto mechanic students. (1997). Journal of Research in Science Teaching. (1997). M. Attitudes. V. 54. Predicting vigorous physical activity of corporate employees: Comparing the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. (1988)... 365–378. N. Testing models of turnover intentions with university faculty. 47–57. P.. A. Ethnicity and Disease. Armitage and Mark Conner *Haney. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.. T. Drinnon. & Nelson. Health Ed ucation Research. (1995). 311–328. tanning salon use. *Lavoie. ¨ *Kelly. Langer. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie. J. D. J. J. 68–84. 27. and sunscreen use intentions and behaviors. S. M. *Kolvereid. Czerniak. L. 33. E. 36–51. J. *Jemmott. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 253–261. Jonas. & Breinlinger. J. Mann. D. Patient education by general practitioners: Application of the theory of planned behavior. H. S. 132–135. 155–162. E. (1994). *Hill. intentions and behavior: A study of women’s participation in collective action. Nursing Research. & Wearing. T. 49. J. Journal of Behavioral Med icine. 17. 37. Hedges.. *Harrison. 14. Journal of Information Science. *Hounsa.. The eV ects of attitude.. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Godin. (1996). An application of Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour to predict mothers’ intention to use oral rehydration therapy in a rural area of Benin. Exploring the limits of self-reports and reasoned action: An investigation of the psychology of tax evasion behavior... Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 371–380. Canad ian Journal of Public Health. (1992). & Verplanken. 95–114. 20. B. L. I. Sales agents and clients: Ethics. C. The theory of planned behavior applied to cigarette smoking in African-American.. & Godin. & Turrist. 313–316. Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. CA: Academic Press. & Doll. A. A. Ethical intentions and the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. J. & Mack. Alihonou. 20. (1995). D. R. G. (1996). (1990). H. B. M. 19. M. 6. Jemmott. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. London: Routledge. L. A critical evaluation of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. (1991). M. The illusion of control. 80. L. *Hanson. (1996). E. J. Predictors of physical activity intentions and behavior for rural homemakers.. San Diego. (1992). & Lumpe. Paans. (1995).. J. Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 971–993.. Volunteer motivation and attendance decisions: Competitive theory testing in multiple samples from a homeless shelter. . (1975). Hausenblas. *Horne. 192–206. *Kurland. & Abrams. (1993). *Klobas. *Kimiecik. Prediction of employment status choice intentions. Carron. C. 371–385. D. 1431–1446.. Hogg.. A. & Valois. 21. 20. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Human Relations. M. and a modi ed theory of planned behavior. J. C. I. subjective norm and self-eYcacy on intention to benchmark: A comparison between managers with experience and no experience in benchmarking... 51–74. C. *Hinsz. 85.494 Christopher J. (1992). C. J. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2. 32. incentives. *Kurland. Ged rag and Gezondheid Tijdschrift voor Psychologie and Gezondheid. 25. *Kinket. 21. 46. 313–327. & Hacker. B. (1996). V. B. J. Social Science and Med icine.. 25. G. Application of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior to exercise behavior: A meta-analysis. and non-Hispanic white teenage females. B.. E.. M. A. 297–313. Adler. 405–413. L. Hessing. (1985). 18–31. (1997). N.

D.. Information Systems Research. Intentions and behavior in studying for an examination: The role of trait procrastination and its interaction with optimism. (1991). Aldershot: Avebury. V. N. E. K. *Nguyen.. M. (1994). (1993). (1993). S. Addictive behaviours: Predictors of abstinence intentions and expectations in the theory of planned behaviour. Determinants of condom use among high-risk heterosexual adults: A test of the theory of reasoned action. (1997). pp. *McCaul. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. G. (1998).. 20. J. K.. Chichester: Wiley. (1996). I. The value of the theory of planned behavior. Lerner. Determinants of intention to adopt a low-fat diet in men 30 to 60 years old: Implications for heart health promotions. S. Journal of School Health. Rogers-Gillmore... S. Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. *Mathieson. *McCaul. .. T. perceived control. & Rickwood. A. S. social in uence and self-eYcacy.. S. H. C. 14. 661–680. Journal of Ad vanced Nursing. L. NJ: Erlbaum.. Manstead. C. *Madden. 941–947. 10. 201–207. G. A comparison of two models for the prediction of volitional and goal-directed behaviors: A con rmatory analysis approach. C. L. 173–191.. O’Neill.. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. *Millstein. P. A. subjective norms and perceived control on nurses’ intention to assess patients’ pain. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Ad vances in Consumer Research. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. & Baker. Social Science and Med icine. Health Ed ucation Research. 231–252. R. (1993). Predicting the performance of dental hygiene behaviors: An examination of the Fishbein and Ajzen model and self-eYcacy expectations.. & Burton.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 495 *Lay. (1997). D. R... Quine (Eds. 361–373. Evaluating and extending the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Personality. 627–633. 733–741. A.. 47. Hewstone (Eds. M.. (1989). M.. (1990). 1375–1392. P. J. J. A. Utility of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior for predicting physician behavior: A prospective analysis. Otis..). (1991). M.. (1991). & Durvasula. (1990). and self-eYcacy expectations for predicting health-protective behaviors. D... European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. (1995). 605–617. & Nebauer. S. Changing to a low fat diet: Attitudes and beliefs of UK consumers. H. K. Examining the relationship between voting behavior. S. 47–70). G. G. O’Neill. Ellen. The justice motive: Some hypotheses as to its origins and forms. D. A test of an expanded theory of reasoned action to predict mammography participation.. T. G. Distinguishing between perceived behavioral control and self-eYcacy in the domain of academic achievement intentions and behavior. M. A. Starting participation in an employee tness program: Attitudes. Paisley. W. *Lechner. 87–100. R. D. 6. *Marcoux. K. M. A comparison of three behavioral intention models: The case of Valentine’s day gift-giving. & Shope. *Netemeyer. Social psychology and health: European perspectives (pp. M. 6. E V ects of a brief theory-based intervention on the practice of testicular self-examination by high school males. S. 20. 114–128. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. G. B. *Murphy. & Stephenson. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. & Johnston. 45. 28. G. M. R. & Ajzen. K. perceived behavioral control and expectation.). R. Application of the theory of planned behavior to adolescent use and misuse of alcohol. (1977). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. (1991). & Taplin. Edwards. 57–76. & Mela. Manstead. The theory of planned behavior. Mullen. In D. H. 60.. K. *Montano. & Burns. & de Vries. In W. & Brubaker. B. J. R. & Parker. *Lloyd. intention. 18. (1993). Hillsdale. R. 18. R... 651–676. (1988). E. *Nash. A. & Glasgow. *Morojele. 54. 2. H. (1995). (1996). S. EV ects of attitudes. D. S. Sandgren. Rutter & L. 18. 135–141. *Netemeyer. Health Psychology. 69–95). 398–402. *Morrison. 6. domain speci c self-eYcacy and adolescent smoking. 323–331. Social Psychology Quarterly. Preventive Med icine. Journal of Child and Substance Abuse. 1–52. American Journal of Health Promotion.. 12. D. 32. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 3–9. M. 15. Burton.. K.. N. H. R. & van Eekelen. M. B. *Maher. & Hinsz. Andrews. C. J.. 24. Ad vanced BASIC meta-analysis. Stroebe & M. J. *Netemeyer. 459–462. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. H. R. & Potvin. 25. (1995). H.

M. Predicting the intention to eat healthier food among young adults. *Norwich. 63. *Quine. 308–321. British Journal of Social Psychology. British Journal of Ed ucational Psychology. & Schmidt. Armitage and Mark Conner *Nguyen. L. (1993). 25.. D. Modes of alcohol use by young adults: An examination of various attitude-behavior theories. ¨ *Prislin.. B. C. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpyschologie. Extending the theory of planned behaviour: The role of personal norm. behavioural intentions and attitude variability. (1995). (1992). Journal of Business Ethics. R. J. Intention = behavior? A representative panel-study to test the theory of planned behavior in the context of AIDS prevention. Including moral dimensions of choice within the structure of the theory of planned behavior. N. D. C. (1995). perceived control. In uences on condom use among undergraduates: Testing the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour. 10. (1993). Psychology. 199–216. & Kashima. & Sheeran. B. The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS-preventive behaviour (pp. Oxford: Pergamon. Social Behavior and Personality. 2. J. Y. F. A. perceived preventive factors. 44.. (1997). M. V. J.. intentions and learning science: Testing a modi ed theory of reasoned action. 23. *Pellino... 51–58. & Smith. S. 117–154. McCamish (Eds. & Baxter. *Parker. Managers’ intentions to be assessed for national vocational quali cations: An application of the theory of planned behavior. P. (1993). *Norwich. I. 20.. (1995). C. J. and analgesic use following elective orthopedic surgery. & Rubin. Health Ed ucation Research. 403–415. 60. K. A... 27. & WolV . Terry. *Prislin. S. J. Implementation intentions and the theory of planned behavior.. Nunnally. Attitudes and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology. R. & Gibson. P. 111–122. A. Psychometric theory.. (1995). R. C. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. P. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 22. Attitude.. & Zanna. Intention to commit driving violations—an application of the theory of planned behavior. Psychological Reports. *Norman.496 Christopher J. J. British Journal of Ed ucational Psychology.. S. Hodgkins. & Otis.. *Norman. (1994). Chant. Manstead. J. 94–101. Manstead. (1992).. (1997). Annual Review of Psychology. Predicting health-check attendance among prior attenders and non-attenders: The role of prior behavior in the theory of planned behavior. 59–68. British Journal of Social Psychology. 502–507. S..). Reason. (1978).. . 312–321. & M. A. R. M. & Rise. The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: An investigation into the role of prior behaviour. 233–246. J. Predicting behavior of high and low self-monitors—an application of the theory of planned behavior. Stradling. Callan. P. & Duncan. subjective norms. 60-year-old men: Combining the stages-of-change model and the theory of planned behaviour to identify determinants for targeting heart health interventions. 11. 58. 47–64). Ethical decision making in the medical profession—an application of the theory of planned behavior. Relationships between patient attitudes. 484–494. & Bonnett. J. 34. P. M. (1997). *Nucifora. M. G. & Conner.. R. 127–137. British Journal of Health Psychology. T.. 1010–1026. S. E V ect of direct experience on the relative importance of attitudes. (1997). (1996). M. T. 23. P. V. *Raats. 30. 26. *Parker. Gallois. & Sparks.. M. (1990). & Kovrlija. 945–954. *Øygard.. Attitudes.. Journal of Community Health. L. *Randall. 70–80.. A. (1991). *Norman.. Shepherd. J. A. D. Regular exercise in 30. S. subjective norm and perceived behavioural control as predictors of women’s intentions to take hormone replacement therapy.. 1131–1138. Journal of Applied Psychology. & Baglioni. & Stradling. 453–461... C. Randall. N. *Orbell. L. Olson. 70. The time interval in the intention–behaviour relationship: Meta-analysis. Research in Nursing and Health. R. 33. P. Journal of Stud ies of Alcohol. (1997). J. *O’Callaghan. *Plies. (1996). (1996). & Rovoli. M. Potvin.. In D. D. D. subjective norms and perceived behavioral control for the prediction of intentions and behavior. 97–105. S.. (1993). Gallois. M. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 25. L. 77. New York: McGraw-Hill. subjective norm. AV ective factors and learning behaviour in secondary school mathematics and English lessons for average and low attainers. 405–418.

18. L. R. 55–71. Do intentions predict condom use? Meta-analysis and examination of six moderator variables. *Taylor. Public Health Nursing 14. N. (1992).. M. 185–196. 843–851. (1984). *Sahni. Adolescent females’ attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology. Journal of Behavioral Med icine. K. The Canad ian Journal of Human Sexuality.. Aldershot: Avebury. P. & Frewer. British Journal of Social Psychology.. *Tedesco. D. P.. Shepperd. Incorporating perceptions of nancial control in purchase prediction: An empirical examination of the theory of planned behavior. R. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 24. R. H. R. D’Avernas. J. van der Pligt. Quine (Eds. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. *Richardson. (1996). & Langille. 243–255.. Predicting child restraint device use: A comparison of two models. (1994). The dimensional structure of the ‘perceived behavioral control’ construct. (1995). R. An integrated model of waste management behavior: A test of household recycling and composting intentions.. (1997). A. R. Problem drinking: A problem for the theory of reasoned action? Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1318–1339. & Orbell. R.. 86. Wieringa. Anticipated aV ective reactions and prevention of AIDS. 111–129. D. J..).. *Schaalma. A. R. P.. attitude variability and the consumption of two common foods. & Todd. & Shepherd. L. 49. *Richard. Delaney. M.. 37. & Zimmermans.). N. R. & Ajzen. E.. P. 55.. & de Vries.. G. The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modi cations and future research.. 51–57. L. *Schlegel. & Shepherd. Zanna. In D. Shepherd. 22. and intentions to use latex condoms.. R.. perceived control. 9–21. 21. B. R. H. Beverly Hill. 24.. C. R. The past predicts the future: Interpreting behaviour–behaviour relationships in social psychological models of health behaviour. KeV er. (1997). and weight loss: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Health Ed ucation Research 8. Social psychology and health: European perspectives (pp. *Sparks. Attitudes towards food: Applying. reasoned action. Sparks. 638–641. Guthrie. P. and oral health behavior reports: A social cognitive approach to compliance. Sutton.. Sparks. & Manske. (1992). & de Vries. 15. Perceived behavioural control. & Shepherd. Dedobbeleer. D. Shepherd.. H. 16. R. D. Psychological Bulletin. Champagne. Intention. H. J. B. P. P. Social Psychology Quarterly. Application of the theory of planned behavior to adolescents’ condom use: A panel study. . Rosenthal. CA: Sage. A. J. DeCourville. 388–399.. R. M. European Journal of Social Psychology. Factors in uencing condom use among students attending high school in Nova Scotia. Journal of Applied Psychology. P. van der Pligt. 27. Beazley.. S. 28. N. (1995). *Sparks. 418–438. Rutter & L. N. In D. Rutter & L. L.. L.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 497 *Rannie. The ‘ le drawer problem’ and tolerance for null results.. 358–385. C. Meta-analytic proced ures for social research. Anticipated aV ect and behavioral choice. 22. Environment and Behavior. M.. 255–269. 71–88).. 325–343. L. S. (1996). R. Schmidt. J.. Hedderley. Assessing and structuring attitudes toward the use of gene technology in food production: The role of perceived ethical obligation. Appetite. perceived behavioral control. 267–285. N. (1992). P.. R. *Schifter. Determinants of consistent condom use by adolescents: The impact of experience of sexual intercourse. (1993). 341–355. 231–250. 6. (1988). R. 25–46). F.. (1998). P. Ad vances in Consumer Research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. J. A. Quine (Eds. 603–630. *Richard.. Sutton. Rosenthal. & Craig. P. I. & Ajzen. S. (1979). (1995). *Sparks. Social psychology and health: European perspectives (pp. 1837–1847. N. *Sparks. Journal of Consumer Research. I. assessing and extending the ‘theory of planned behaviour’. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. (1995). 442–448. Hartwick. 26. P. (1997). 27... Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Sheeran. B... *Richard. Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior—assessing the role of identi cation with green consumerism. (1994). & Potvin. 34. Explaining and predicting intentions and behavior: How well are we doing? Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Self-eYcacy. & Fleck-Kandath. *Reinecke. (1991). (1985). 14. (1994).. An investigation into the relationship between perceived control. (1994). (1998). S. P. 749–772. S. Kok.. & Warshaw. & Peters. Aldershot: Avebury Press. subjective norms. unrealistic optimism and dietary change: An exploratory study.

L. *Towler. 225–244. Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behaviour. K. 24. (1999).. *Wiesner. Modi cation of Fishbein and Ajzen’s theory of reasoned action to predict chip consumption. 8.. & Hogg. Terry. D. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Oxford: Pergamon. & Mummery. M. P. J. Edleson. Journal of Social Issues. Perceptual and Motor Skills.. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology. AIDS Care. How did it work? An examination of the mechanisms through which an intervention for the unemployed promoted job-search behavior. Greenwich. attitude strength. 67–93). J. Breastfeeding intention and outcome: A test of the theory of planned behavior. *Terry. 213–228. M. (1996). and control factors. J. & M. 577–597. 20. Y. Safer sex behavior: The role of attitudes. L. K. & Vinokur. role identity. J. (1994). (1994). Attitude–behavior relations: Social identity and group membership. 776–793. G. In D.. *Theodorakis. 51–59. A. Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Turner. D. D. J. K. 2164–2192. W. Nurses’ intentions to provide home care: The impact of AIDS and homosexuality. CT: JAI Press.). A. Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie. Ad apted Physical Activity Quarterly. J. Wicker. The importance of subjective norms for a minority of people: Between subjects and within-subjects analyses. (1969). Group norms and the attitude–behavior relationship: A role for group identi cation. & Fendrich. The applicability of the theory of planned behavior to abusive men’s cessation of violent behavior. L. D. Psychological Bulletin. 22. 37–45. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. and group norms. and the prediction of exercise behavior. A. K.. (1992). (1985). Hogg. Terry. Ad d iction.. 871–883. A. J. & Finlay. Bagiatis. K. 77–122). *Vermette. British Journal of Social Psychology. Lawler (Ed. (1995). 5. Disentangling behavioral intentions and behavioral expectations. W. The relation between socio-economic status and academic achievement. The Sport Psychologist. (1996). Armitage and Mark Conner *Terry. Gallois.498 Christopher J. M. & Tesch-Romer. Food Quality and Preference. Attitudes. R. (1997). (1982). C. A. (Vol. *Van Ryn. (1995). & White.. M.. A.. D. D. D. 20. 41–47. (1985). C.. (1993).. *Træn. B. The theory of planned behaviour: Self-identity. F. (1993). Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2. E.. R. 74. J. 149–165.. Attitudes toward teaching individuals with disabilities: Application of planned behavior theory. British Journal of Social Psychology. In E. Terry. M.. London: Erlbaum. K. 135–151). (1996). (1996). 199–220. 273–279. & Nordlund. J. 158–177. University of Amsterdam. A. A. behavior and social context: The role of norms and group membership (pp. 20 years of the theory of reasoned action of Fishbein and Ajzen: A meta-analysis. 820–828. M. 22. Hogg (Eds. (1991). 25. 26. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 29. Y. P. *Wambach. A. R. A. ¨ . G. M. 341–354. (1996). & Godin.. 34. Warshaw.. Unpublished manuscript. M. In D. Use of hearing aids by the elderly: Correlation between intention and behavior. 91. & Goudas. & Hogg. Prediction of athletic participation—a test of planned behavior theory. 12. Lytle. D. Visiting public drinking places in Oslo: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. *Theodorakis. Van den Putte. K. Research in Nursing and Health. R. Self-eYcacy expectancies and the theory of reasoned action.. & Kirscht. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.). The theory of planned behaviour: The eV ects of perceived behavioural control and self-eYcacy. M. Using national survey data incorporating the theory of planned behavior: Implications for social marketing strategies in physical activity. *Theodorakis. *Tolman. Violence and Victims. 38. 21.. Terry.. The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDs-preventive behaviour (pp. K. 479–488. (1996). J. M.. pp. & Davis. 461–481. B. (1991). M.). J. 11. & Shepherd. Planned behavior. *White. C. S. (2000). (1993). M. *Van Ryn. White. 1215–1224. norms. McCamish (Eds. M. 151–160. 371–379. *Wankel. Terry. L. A test of the theory of planned behavior for two health-related practices. Hogg. 88. Y. social identity. Tra mow. J. M. Ad vances in group process: Theory and research.. D. White. 3. J. (1992). Terry & M. & O’Leary.. 8.

G. 99–114. + 8% intention over and above TRA variables) than under conditions of less volitional control ( + 2% behaviour. the correlation for behaviour is suggestive of the fact that lower volitional control is associated with a greater impact of PBC on behaviour.. H. The latter analyses allowed us to control for the fact that participants generally report control over behaviour. & Lent. Psychology and Health. 1992). The equivalent correlation for behaviour was r = . D.... First. a categorical ‘volition’ variable was created based on a mean split.Theory of Planned Behaviour: Meta-analysis 499 *Willemson. M. *Wilson. J. & Oldenburg. These yielded data that failed to exceed Rosenthal’s (1984) tolerance level (i. *Yordy. C. revised version received 25 February 2000 Appendix Coding of volition was based on participants’ mean PBC responses (i. W. Note that this nding contradicts the results of the rst analyses. This produced only eight studies with PBC scores below the mid-point for the prediction of intention. These data were subjected to two forms of analyses. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. McMaster. (1992). 15. (1993). 1999a. A. Secondly. 7. only two further studies would have been required to overturn the ndings). G. 25. 195–202.e. Factors predicting Zimbabwean students’ intention to use condoms. the mean scores were transformed to a common metric (unipolar + 1 (low control) to + 7 (high control) scales). R. A third form of analysis analysed responses above and below the mid-point (i.96 (SD = 1. de Vries. . S.. in attempting to code for ‘volition’. 4) of the standardized PBC scale. mean PBC scores were plotted against proportion of variance contributed (to either intention or behaviour) by PBC. and planned behavior models. Preventive Med icine. and four studies below the mid-point for the prediction of behaviour.e. the degree to which they rated behaviours as controllable or uncontrollable). & Lavelle. Zenda. This might explain why ‘perceived control over behaviour’ has rarely directly contributed to the prediction of intention or behaviour (see Armitage & Conner. reasoned action. These analyses revealed that—under conditions of greater volitional control—PBC accounted for more of the variance ( + 3% behaviour. One possibility is that ‘perceived control over behaviour’ might actually tap the extent to which individuals believe that a behaviour is within their volitional control. This resulted in a correlation of . Predicting aerobic exercise participation—social cognitive.02)..16. Overall. Whilst the correlation of . Received 20 January 1998.. From these 62 studies.05 between mean PBC rating and the proportion of additional variance in intention explained by PBC. A. might be the only way to untangle such an issue. Mean values of PBC (including self-eYcacy and ‘perceived control over behaviour’) measures were taken from all papers where the appropriate statistics were reported or obtained.e. meaning that participants generally reported perceiving control over the behaviours in question. This discriminated behaviours that were rated as being relatively volitional from those rated as being less volitional. 363–374. Across all these studies.05 should be regarded as ‘trivial’ (see Cohen. 1999b). Determinants of intention to quit smoking among Dutch employees: The in uence of social environment. B. or studies that appropriately measure volitional variables. the mean value of control was 4. van Breukelen. and these are not presented. (1996). we found contradictory results and can only conclude—in line with the Introduction—that experimental studies. + 5% intention).