Behavioral Intentions, Expectations and Willingness

Download Report

Transcript Behavioral Intentions, Expectations and Willingness

“Behavioral Intentions,
Expectations and
Willingness”
Gibbons and Gerrard, 1997, National Cancer Institute
Justin Roudabush
Oregon State University
Outline
 Definition and Significance of Behavioral Intention
 Causes of Variance
 Moderators
 Alternative Proximal Measurements
 Implementation Intentions
 Behavioral Expectations
 Behavioral Willingness
TRA + TPB
Behavioral
Beliefs
Attitude Towards
the Behavior
Normative
Beliefs
Subjective
Norm
Control
Beliefs
Perceived Behavioral
Control
Intention
Behavior
The TTI Developmental-Ecological System
Levels of
Causation
E
Ultimate
Underlying
Causes
Values
Environment
S
ENVIRONMENT
Situation
Person
E
P
P S
P
Knowledge
Environment
S
E
Distal
Predisposing
Influences
Value
Social SelfCom- Role
Bonds Control petence Models
Eval Mc
Att SNB Self
Proximal
Immediate
Predictors
Exp
NB
Will + Skill
SNB
Know
Att
Efficacy
Intentions
Behavior
DEVELOPMENT & TIME
Lost in Translation
 Most value-expectancy theories contain an Intention element
 Explains some variance between Intention and Behavior (HB)
 Can account for 20-30% of this variance
HB
HB
Intention
HB
HB
HB
Definition
 “amount of effort one is willing to exert to attain a goal”
 “behavioral plans that……enable attainment of a behavioral
goal”
 “proximal goals”
 “intentions can be conceived of as goal states”
Measurement
 Aggregation – include multiple items
 Compatibility – BI and measures should included exactly the
same “action, target, context and time”
 Commitment – more important to the individual
Predictability Concerns
 Stability – consistency over time
 Time Lag – diminishes over time
 Emotion – at the time of execution
Moderators
 Perceived Behavioral Control
 Complexity
 Social Desirability
 Social Involvement
Perceived Behavioral Control
(PBC)
 Perceived control over a behavior
 Actual Ability to control behavior
 When both are high the relationship is more likely to be
positive
 When one or the other is low then outcome is less
predictable
Complexity
 Require a series of actions to complete
 People overestimate likelihood of completing all actions
 Only takes failure on one action to fail completely
“Literal Inconsistency”
 Tendency to not do what you said you would do
 Say you will do the behavior but don’t follow through
 Say you won’t and don’t
 Same issue exists for Socially Undesirable Behaviors
 Health Risks
Social Involvement
 Interventions between BI and HB can be most effective
when:
 Follow up and measurement between BI and HB is earlier
 HB includes significant habitual components
 Perceived and actual control are low
 Health risks are involved under social contexts
Intrapersonal Stream
BIOLOGY/
PERSONALITY
1
2
Sense of
Self/Control
Self
Determination
13
8
Skills:
Social+General
14
SELF-EFFICACY
BEHAVIORAL
CONTROL
Cultural/Attitudinal Stream
SOCIAL
SITUATION
3
Social
Competence
7
Social/Normative Stream
4
Interpersonal
Bonding
Others’
Beh & Atts
9
10
Motivation
to Comply
Perceived
Norms
15
16
SOCIAL
NORMATIVE
BELIEFS
DECISIONS/INTENTIONS
PBC, Complexity, Literal
Inconsistency, Social Involvement
CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENT
5
6
Interactions w/
Social Instit’s
Information/
Opportunities
11
12
Values/
Evaluations
17
Knowledge/
Expectancies
18
ATTITUDES
TOWARD THE
BEHAVIOR
Alternative Proximal Antecedants
 Implementation Intentions
 Behavioral Expectations
 Behavioral Willingness
Implementation Intentions (II)
 Make the abstract more concrete
 Create specific goals related BI to HB
 Ideal for use with complex behaviors
 Good for situational cues/prompts
Behavioral Expectations (BE)
 Subjective probability of performance
 Prediction versus plan (BI)
 Accounts for additional influences: circumstances, past
behaviors, anticipated changes
 Ideal for undesirable and/or difficult behaviors
Behavioral Willingness (BW)
 BI less effective for measuring adolescents and/or behavior
involving health risks
 HB is not intentional, but a reaction to social circumstances
 Openness to risk opportunity
 Survey of capabilities of risky behavior if the opportunity is
encountered
 Ideal for adolescents and risky behaviors
Best Fit
 Health promoting behaviors: use BI combined with II
 Complex behaviors with control aspects: use BI with PBC
 Social Desirability, commitment tenuous, low perceived
control: use BE
 Health risk, adolescents, social reactions: use BW and BE
E
Values
Environment
S
ENVIRONMENT
Situation
Person
P
P
E
P S
Knowledge
Environment
S
E
Value
Social SelfCom- Role
Bonds Control petence Models
Eval Mc
Will + Skill
Att SNB Self
NB
SNB
Know
Exp
Att
Efficacy
Proximal
Antecedants
Intentions
(BI, BE, BW)
Social Context,
Maturity, Anxiety,
Complexity, Level of
Control, etc……..
Behavior