https://www.hse.ru/data/816/479/1225/Oct%2019%20Cited%20%231%20Manage%20THE%20THEORY%20OF%20PLANNED%20BEHAVIOR.pdf

The theory of planned behavior

Conceptual and methodological ambiguities surrounding the concept of perceived behavioral control are clarified. It is shown that perceived control over performance of a behavior, though comprised of separable components that reflect beliefs about self-efficacy and about controllability, can nevertheless be considered a unitary latent variable in a hierarchical factor model. It is further argued that there is no necessary correspondence between self-efficacy and internal control factors, or between controllability and external control factors. Self-efficacy and controllability can reflect internal as well as external factors and the extent to which they reflect one or the other is an empirical question. Finally, a case is made that measures of perceived behavioral control need to incorporate self-efficacy as well as controllability items that are carefully selected to ensure high internal consistency.

Summary and Conclusions
Perceived control over performance of a behavior can account for consider- able variance in intentions and actions. However, ambiguities surrounding the concept of perceived behavioral control have tended to create uncertainties and to impede progress. The present article attempted to clarify conceptual ambiguities and resolve issues related to the operationalization of perceived behavioral control. Recent research has demonstrated that the overarching concept of perceived behavioral control, as commonly assessed, is comprised of two components: self-efficacy (dealing largely with the ease or difficulty of performing a behavior) and controllability (the extent to which performance is up to the actor). Contrary to a widely accepted view, it was argued that self-efficacy expectations do not necessarily correspond to beliefs about internal control factors, and that controllability expectations have no necessary basis in the perceived operation of external factors. Instead, it was suggested that self-efficacy and controllability may both reflect beliefs about the presence of internal as well as external factors. Rather than making a priori assumptions about the internal or external locus of self-efficacy and controllability, this issue is best treated as an empirical question.

Also of theoretical significance, the present article tried to dispel the notion that self-efficacy and controllability are incompatible with, or independent of, each other. Although factor analyses of perceived behavioral control items provide clear and consistent evidence for the distinction, there is sufficient commonality between self-efficacy and controllability to suggest a two-level hierarchical model. In this model, perceived behavioral control is the overarching, superordinate construct that is comprised of two lower-level components: self-efficacy and controllability. This view of the control component in the theory of planned behavior implies that measures of perceived behavioral control should contain items that assess self-efficacy as well as controllability. Depending on the purpose of the investigation, a decision can be made to aggregate over all items, treating perceived behavioral control as a unitary factor, or to distinguish between self-efficacy and controllability by entering separate indices into the prediction equation.

Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the Theory of Planned Behavior

Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments

This paper describes and reviews the theory of planned behavior (TPB). The focus is on evidence supporting the further extension of the TPB in various ways. Empirical and theoretical evidence to support the addition of 6 variables to the TPB is reviewed: belief salience measures, past behaviodhabit, perceived behavioral control (PBC) vs. selfefficacy, moral norms, self-identity, and affective beliefs. In each case there appears to be growing empirical evidence to support their addition to the TPB and some understanding of the processes by which they may be related to other TPB variables, intentions, and behavior. Two avenues for expansion of the TPB are presented. First, the possibility of incorporating the TPB into a dual-process model of attitude-behavior relationships is reviewed. Second, the expansion of the TPB to include consideration of the volitional processes determining how goal intentions may lead to goal achievement is discussed.

Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review and Avenues for Further Research

The seven articles in this issue, and the accompanying meta-analysis in Health Psychology Review [McEachan, R.R.C., Conner, M., Taylor, N., & Lawton, R.J. (2011). Prospective prediction of health-related behaviors with the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5, 97–144], illustrate the wide application of the theory of planned behaviour [Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211] in the health domain. In this editorial, Ajzen reflects on some of the issues raised by the different authors. Among the topics addressed are the nature of intentions and the limits of predictive validity; rationality, affect and emotions; past behaviour and habit; the prototype/willingness model; and the role of such background factors as the big five personality traits and social comparison tendency.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995

The theory of planned behaviour: reactions and reflections

The theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1985, 1987) is offered as a comprehensive framework for understanding of leisure participation. Salient behavioral, normative, and control beliefs, theoretically the basic determinants of behavior, were assessed with respect to five leisure activities: spending time at the beach, jogging or running, mountain climbing, boating, and biking. College students completed a questionnaire containing measures of these beliefs and of global expressions of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. One year later the participants reported how often they had performed each behavior in the preceding 12 months. Behavioral beliefs were found to partition into beliefs about affective reactions and beliefs about costs and benefits. Participation in leisure activities was influenced by these affective and instrumental beliefs, as well as by normative beliefs about the expectations of important others and by control beliefs about required resources and other f...

Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral, normative, and control beliefs: An application of the theory of planned behavior

One approach to studying the motivations for leisure is to focus on the desired goal States that are attained through participation in leisure. The Recreation Experience Preference (REP) scales wer...

Measuring Leisure Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of the Recreation Experience Preference Scales

The benefits of leisure.

Benefits of leisure.

This paper describes the evolution of the concept of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)—a largely resource‐based approach to providing recreational diversity. It explains the needs of the USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management for a recreation resource planning system and relates those needs to the development of the ROS system to guide recreation planning of large areas. The basic concepts and tenets of the ROS system are explained and needed research is outlined.

B. L. Driver

Papers

Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral, normative, and control beliefs: An application of the theory of planned behavior

Measuring Leisure Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of the Recreation Experience Preference Scales

The benefits of leisure.

Benefits of leisure.

The ROS planning system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed