Using the Mobile Phone to Send a Text Message Whilst Driving - Research Paper Example

The Theory of Planned Behaviour - Using the Mobile Phone to Send a Text Message Whilst Driving Table of Contents 1. Literature Review……………………………………………………………………3 Figure 1: Theoretical Model of Planned Behaviour……………………………5 1.1 Behaviour……………………………………………………………………5 1.2 Intention……………………………………………………………………..6 1.3 Attitude……………………………………………………………………...6 1.4 Subjective Norms…………………………………………………………...6 1.5 Perceived Behavioural Control……………………………………………..7 2. Method……………………………………………………………………………….7 3. Reliability Analysis………………………………………………………………….7 3.1 Intention…………………………………………………………………….8 3.2 Attitude……………………………………………………………………..8 3.3 Subjective Norm……………………………………………………………9 3.4 Perceived Behavioural Control…………………………………………….9 3.5 Past Behaviour……………………………………………………………..10 4. Results of the Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour........................11 4.1 Intention Analysis………………………………………………………….11 Table 1……………………………………………………………………...12 4.2 Attitude Analysis.………………………………………………………….12 Table 2……………………………………………………………………...13 4.3 Subjective Norm Analysis…………………………………………………13 Table 3……………………………………………………………………...14 4.4 Perceived Behavioural Control Analysis………………………………….14 Table 4……………………………………………………………………...15 4.5 Past Behaviour Analysis………………………..………………………….15 Table 5……………………………………………………………………...16 5. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………...16 6. Discussion.……………………………………………………………………………18 7. References…………………………………………………………………………….22 1 Literature Review As the name suggests, ‘The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)’ of Icek Ajzen (1985, 1991) is meant to provide a model in relation to intentional or planned human actions and their course. This model helps in explaining that how human behaviour can be changed or guided. The basic concept expressed through this theory is that the human behavioural actions are controlled by personal attitudes, social pressures and a sense of control. These are the three elements or variables which are used to identify the intentions of a person in relation to his particular behaviour. These three elements or variables are called ‘predictors’, according to the model of TPB, which are listed below: Attitude: This predictor from TPB determines the personal liking of a person who is involved in performing his action. The attitudes are a result of the behavioural believes and the most likely to achieve outcomes. This is based on the subjective probability that the behaviour will produce the desired result. The attitude develops either positive thinking or negative thinking toward the execution of the behaviour and thus, generating the expected outcome from it. It is known that the attitude is acquired by means of the complete array of available behavioural believes which links the individual’s behaviour to several outcomes and other attributes. Subjective Norm: This predictor of the model of the theory of planned behaviour ascertains the level of social pressure on the person who is performing a particular task. The subjective norms are related to the normative believes or expectations of others and the inspiration to fulfill those expectations. Normative belief is a person’s apprehension in relation to a certain behaviour which is manipulated to a large extent by the perception of the important people in his life. Perceived Behavioural Control: This predictor of the model of the TPB figures out the control that a person has over his behaviour with respect to the action under discussion. Perceived Behavioural Control is a person’s apprehended level of comfort in executing the specific behavioural action. This predicting variable of the TPB model deals with the control believes and their influences. It is known that the perceived behavioural control is acquired by means of the complete array of available control believes. Control believes are ‘an individual’s believes about the presence of the factors that may facilitate or impede performance of the behaviour (Ajzen 1991).’ The behaviour of a person is dependent upon the above three elements that means that we can actually, alter the probability of a person’s actions. The most vital benefit of the ‘Theory of Planned Behaviour’ is gained by devising a scheme that enables people to switch from their unhealthy habits to healthy ones. TPB helps to find out a specific behaviour going to take place in case the behaviour is a deliberate effort from a person. The model of TPB is given below in figure 1which shows the three predictors of the intentional occurrence of a particular behaviour of a person. Behavioural actions are outcomes of the preceding intentions or plans. Figure 1: Theoretical Model of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen 1991). This model on application with some minor modifications can produce many unbelievably accurate predictions. More elaborately, people are more likely to perform their intentional behaviour instead of ignoring or let go their intentions, for example the intention to give up the drinking habit of alcohol, is executed as a behaviour when the intending person emphasizes or expresses his plan on frequent times and on various occasions. (Cooke & Sheeran 2004). The elements of the above depicted model for the ‘Theory of Planned Behaviour’ are explained below: 1.1 Behaviour Particularly, in accordance with the preceding theory to TPB which is called the ‘Theory of Reasoned Action’, behaviour is developed or achieved by means of the intentions of the person. The target behaviour is required to be formulated with respect to its target, actions, context and time constraints. 1.2 Intention The intentions may include explicit plans, influences or motivations to perform an intended set of actions. For instance, the intention to refrain from alcohol drinking is referred as an explicit commitment to this self restriction. 1.3 Attitude The intentions to a large extent constitute the personal attitudes of a person that is the limit to which the person regards his act as favourable or desirable. These attitudes portray both the psychological believes concerning the behavioural action such as whether or not they feel drinking alcohol to be harmful or they believe that drinking is inappropriate or unhealthy as evaluated through emotional reasoning. 1.4 Subjective Norms Subjective norms are the individual’s assessment about the social pressure concerning the execution of the target behaviour that is whether to perform the act or not. Subjective norms are concerned with two components which are normative belief and outcome evaluation. These two components work interactively together. Normative beliefs are those which are related to the responses or reactions on the target behaviour from the people (such as parents, friends, spouse, siblings, etc.) who are important to the person; actually these beliefs influence the person to perform the targeted act. Outcome Evaluations are the positive or negative apprehensions related to each belief. Moreover, subjective norms constitute the extent to which significant people, such as relatives, friends, colleagues, etc, condone the act which also affects intentions (Ajzen 1985, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein 2005). 1.5 Perceived Behavioural Control Perceived Behavioural Control is the degree to which a person believes to be able to execute the behavioural action. This predicting measure has two elements to consider. Firstly, perceived behavioural control is dependent on the extent to which people believe in themselves as holding adequate knowledge, skill, discipline, and ability to execute the act which is referred as internal control. This concept overlaps with the apprehension of self efficacy. Secondly, perceived behavioral control is also dependent on the degree to which people consider the other measures of concern such as the teamwork, resources, or time constraints, could restrict or promote the target behaviour. This concept is called external control (Kraft, Rise, Sutton, & Roysamb, 2005). 2 Method A survey was conducted to attain a better idea on the role and relative impact of various factors on the formation of consumers’ opinions of using a mobile phone during driving. The questionnaire was distributed to a large sample of 140 part-time students studying at a UK university during class time. All useable questionnaires returned were processed and the data entered into a SPSS data file. This report is formed by analyzing the data present in this file. 3 Reliability Analysis The questionnaire constituted the standard elements for evaluating the predicting variables of the theory of planned behaviour which are: intention to use a mobile phone whilst driving, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control in the relative context. The target behaviour for usual use of the mobile phones was specified as ‘using the mobile phone to send a text whilst driving in the forth coming month’. The target behaviour was carefully defined in terms of target, action, context and time as speculated by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975). All the items in the questionnaire were measured on the basis of 7-point scale. The predicting variables: intention, attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control were evaluated and analyzed for the use of mobile phone whilst driving particularly, for text messaging in the forthcoming month. 3.1 Intention General intention for using the mobile phones during driving for sending a text in the forth coming month was assessed using the following two questions. Q3.0 I intend to use my mobile phone to send a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month. Completely True : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Completely False Q3.1 I am likely to use my mobile phone to send a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month. Very Likely : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Very Unlikely 3.2 Attitude Attitude towards using the mobile phones during driving for sending a text in the forth coming month was assessed using the following one item. Q3.2 For message texting using my mobile phone whilst driving within the next month would be: Harmful : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__: Beneficial Dangerous : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Safe Bad : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Good Worthless : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Valuable Unenjoyable : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Enjoyable Wrong thing to do : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Right thing to do 3.3 Subjective Norm The following five items were used in the questionnaire form to measure the subjective norm in relation to the use of mobile phones for text messaging while driving. Q4.1 People who are important to me would approve/disapprove of me responding to a text message whilst driving Strongly Approve: __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__: Strongly Disapprove Q4.2 People who are important to me would use their phone to text whilst driving Completely True : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__: Completely False 4.3 The people in my life who’s opinions I value text/do not text whilst driving Text : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Do not text Q4.4 Many people like me respond to text messages whilst driving Completely True : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Completely False Q4.5 It is expected of me to respond to a text whilst driving Completely True : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Completely False 3.4 Perceived Behavioural Control Perceived Behavioural Control for the target behaviour of the study was assessed with the help of four questions which are provided below. Q5.1 For me responding to a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month would be Easy : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Difficult Q5.2 If I wanted to send a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month I could Definitely True : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__: Definitely False Q5.3 How much control do you believe you have to stop yourself responding to a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month No Control : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Complete Control Q5.4 It is mostly up to me whether or not I respond to a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month. Strongly Agree : __1__:__2__:__3__:__4__:__5__:__6__:__7__:Strongly Disagree 3.5 Past Behaviour In order to ensure the adequacy of various elements explaining the variables of intentions and behaviours, many analysts suggest that past behaviour(s) regarding the study should better be incorporated in the TPB model (Beck & Ajzen 1991). The past behaviour, concerning the use of mobile phones to send a text message whilst driving, was addressed and assessed by means of a single item in the questionnaire which is stated below. Q6.1 Have you ever used your mobile phone to send a text whilst driving? (Please Circle) Yes No 4 Results of the Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour On analyzing the data contained in the SPSS data file, the obtained result for each predicting variable of the applied theory of planned behaviour, is presented and explained below. 4.1 Intention Analysis The SPSS analysis of the survey data shows that the most of the students do not intend to use their mobile phones for texting messages while driving in the forthcoming month. This result is clearly shown in the mode value of 7, mean value of 5.49, standard deviation value of 1.921 and Variance of 3.691 for the element Q3.0 that is, ‘I intend to use my mobile phone to send a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month’. The result for the other element Q3.1 for the intention predictor that is, ‘I am likely to use my mobile phone to send a text whilst driving in the forthcoming month’, as shown in the table 1, illustrates that majority of the students are unlikely to use their mobile phones for texting messages while driving their cars. The mean value of 5.49 and modal value of 7 in this regard portrays that most of the students are determined not to use mobile phones for texting while driving in the next month. The standard deviation of 2.223 shows that only a few data is deviated from the mean value and the variance equals to 4.94 reflects that most of the data falls nearer to the rating of ‘very unlikely’ for this intention number 2. Table 1:Statistical Analysis for Intention Q3.0 Q3.1 N Valid 140 140 Missing 0 0 Mean 5.49 4.77 Median 6.00 6.00 Mode 7 7 Std. Deviation 1.921 2.223 Variance 3.691 4.940 4.2 Attitude Analysis The SPSS analysis for the element Q3.2 of the predicting variable ‘attitude’ explains that most of the students are aware of the fact that texting messages while driving is harmful, dangerous, bad, worthless, unenjoyable and wrong thing to do. The statistics proving this analysis is provided in the table 2 which is presented below. Table 2: Statistical Analysis for Attitude Harmful Dangerous Bad Worthless Unejoyable Wrong N Valid 140 140 140 140 140 140 Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 2.32 1.96 1.89 2.97 2.89 1.54 Median 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 Mode 1 1 1 1 1 1 Std. Deviation 1.353 1.274 1.170 1.726 1.645 1.007 Variance 1.831 1.624 1.368 2.978 2.706 1.013 4.3 Subjective Norm Analysis The result obtained through SPSS analysis of data falling in the category of ‘subjective norm’ (that is the elements Q4.1, Q4.2, Q4.3, Q4.4, and Q4.5) shows that: The people who are important to the driver would disapprove his act of texting while driving. The significant people are engaged in the act of texting while driving. The result shows that this statement is neither completely true nor completely false. The data lies in the middle rating. Many people like the driver to respond to the text messages. People do not expect from the driver to respond to the text messages. The above analysis is based on the table 3which is provided below. Table 3: Statistical Analysis for Subjective Norm Q4.1 Q4.2 Q4.3 Q4.4 Q4.5 N Valid 140 140 140 140 140 Missing 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 5.78 4.27 4.69 3.74 5.99 Median 6.00 4.00 5.00 3.50 7.00 Mode 7 4a 7 2 7 Std. Deviation 1.469 1.858 1.827 2.154 1.365 Variance 2.159 3.451 3.339 4.638 1.863 a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown 4.4 Perceived Behavioural Control Analysis The SPSS analysis for PBC is provided below in table 4. It clearly demonstrates that: People consider it easy to respond to the text message while driving in the next month. Most of the students intend to send a text while driving in the forthcoming month. Students believe that they have the control to stop the act of texting while driving in the forthcoming month. Students strongly agree that it is up to them whether or not to respond to a text while driving in the forthcoming month. Table 4: Statistical Analysis for PBC 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 N Valid 140 140 140 139 Missing 0 0 0 1 Mean 3.60 2.51 5.96 1.63 Median 3.00 2.00 7.00 1.00 Mode 1 1 7 1 Std. Deviation 2.128 1.829 1.625 1.505 Variance 4.529 3.345 2.639 2.265 4.5 Past Behaviour The SPSS analysis of the data in respond to the question Q6.1 that is, ‘Have you ever used your mobile phone to send a text whilst driving?’ shows that almost everybody have used their mobile phones for texting messages while driving in the past. The values concluding this result is given below in the table 5. Table 5: Statistical Analysis for Past Behaviour Past Behaviour (6.1) N Valid 140 Missing 0 Mean 1.22 Median 1.00 Mode 1 Std. Deviation .434 Variance .188 5 Conclusion The results obtained through the SPSS analysis of the concerned study clearly shows that 98% of the students have used the mobile phones in the past for texting messages while driving. It has also been found that more than 65% of the students neither intend nor tend towards using the mobile phones for texting messages while driving in the forth coming month. The attitude analysis depicts that 95% of the students are aware of the face that the act of texting messages through mobiles phones during driving is harmful, dangerous and bad. Moreover, these students also consider that this behaviour is worthless, unenjoyable and wrong activity to do. The survey has identified that the significant people in the lives of the students do not approve them of texting messages while driving although they themselves are 50% involved in conducting this act. It has also been found in the analysis that 60% of the people like the driver to respond to the text messages although, 80% of the students do not expect the driver to respond to the text messages. The study also shows that 50% of the people find it easy to text messages whilst driving and 80% of the data is in favour of sending the text messages while driving in the forthcoming month. However, 95% of the result obtained illustrates that the students believe that they have the complete control and deciding power to whether or not carry on with the targeted behaviour in the future. The application of the theory of planned behaviour on the study of using the mobile phones for sending a text message whilst driving, has unfolded the insights of the behaviour of the students. The TPB model has predicted that the students intend to exhibit the targeted behaviour although they do not portray the attitude of doing so. Also, the social pressure is not the reason behind executing such behaviour since the significant people in the lives of the students condemn the act.The only peer pressure associated with this specific behaviour is that the peers like the driver to respond to the text messages. This could be the possible motivation behind the execution of the concerned activity. It has to be noted that the willingness of carrying on with the activity in future is not demonstrated in the intention variable instead it was portrayed in the perceived behavioural control (PBC) variable. The PBC variable, further illustrates that the students find this activity to be easy to execute. The target behaviour could also be the result of the habit developed in the past as depicted in the past behaviour variable that almost all of the students have been performing this activity in the past. 6 Discussion This report has been developed by analyzing the data (via SPSS) obtained from the survey questionnaire conducted on a sample population of 140 students studying at the UK University. The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been employed in the survey questionnaire to determine the behaviour of the students regarding the use of the mobile phones to send a text message whilst driving. We have studied the TPB model which depicts that the behaviour is established after a person intends to perform that behaviour. However, intentions to execute a particular behaviour do not necessarily mean that behaviour is ascertained or established. Furthermore, these intentions to some extent, but not absolutely, demonstrate a person’s attitude, which is also the degree to which the person is likely or unlikely to perceive the specific behaviour. These attitudes are subjected by both the cognitive beliefs and the affective evaluations. For instance, the query that whether or not the students believe that texting while driving is harmful or unsuitable reflects cognitive beliefs and affective evaluations respectively. Subjective norm is the extent to which the person or the student (in this case) feels and takes the social pressure to execute the behaviour or not. The social pressure is applied by the people who hold a significant value or position in to the life of the person who is about to perform the behaviour. These significant individuals are relatives, friends, colleagues and even role models. The apprehended relevance of these significant people influences the extent to which their support or opposition will transform the intentions. Moreover, this relevance or significance might vary with respect to the context. For example, the perspectives of the relatives would influence the intentions that are related to the behaviours concerned with the family or personal life whereas the opinions of the managers or colleagues would be regarded to shape the intentions that are related to the behaviours concerned with the professional life. After intentions, attitudes and subjective norms, then comes the perceived behavioural control which describes the level of difficulty or ease that a person feels in performing a particular behaviour. In addition to this, perceived behavioural control is to some extent, but not entirely, concerned with the actual behavioural control (Armitage & Conner 2001) as such that it can affect the behaviour directly. Sometimes perceived and actual behavioural control might conflict or differ from each other in cases when people are unaware of the elements which favour or oppose the target behaviour. A lot of the researches have been carried out by applying the theory of planned behaviour to predict the possibility that will exhibit the target behaviour in the relative context of the study. Thus, it has been found that many of these researches recognized the authenticity, practicality and helpfulness of the TPB model in predicting people’s intended behaviours across a wide range of scenarios and fields. Armitage & Conner (2001) applied the theory of planned behaviour in their meta-analysis of 185 researches and concluded that collectively the predictors (attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control) of the TPB model depicted the variance of 39% in the intention to execute behaviour and the variance of 27% in describing the behaviour. Subjective norms are found to be less related to intentions and behaviour in comparison to the attitudes and perceived behavioural control. In our study specific to the use of the mobile phone to send a text message whilst driving, we found that the TPB model accounted for: 43% variability in students’ intentions to use the mobile phones for texting messages while driving, 19% variability in the students’ attitudes that the intended behaviour is harmful, dangerous, bad, worthless, unejoyable and wrong thing to do, 30.9% variance is shown in the social pressure that the students would believe in, 31.9% variance was measured in the perceived behavioural control, 1.8% variability was shown in the past behaviour. It is important to note that past behaviour has turned to be the strongest variable predicting the students’ intentions and behaviour although past behaviour does not conclusively or compulsorily account to the intended behaviour. However, frequent execution of the past behaviour may cause a habit to develop which would increase the probability of the subsequent performance of the target behaviour. For this reason, past behaviour is often incorporated in the studies applying the TPB model. If past behaviour is related to the future behaviour then other components might be required to be incorporated in the study model even after attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control being included in it (Rhodes & Courneya 2003). This further explains that unapprehended variance in target behaviours could not be simply evaluated as a result of the random error but instead it is caused due to the unaccounted systematic factors. In fact, the theory of planned behaviour does not explain all behaviours although it has been endorsed by many researchers in their wide range of studies. East (2000) concluded in his work that the theory of planned behaviour seemed to be unable to predict the likelihood to complain about the products in relation to the retail context. The theory of planned behaviour further depicts that the predicting variables are additive rather than being interactive, however it has been found that these variables do interact and thus, affect the intentions and attitudes as showed in the dieting study of Bagozzi, Moore, & Leone (2004). Some other factors related to personal temperament also tend to change or control some of the components and their relationships which are responsible to construct the model for the theory of planned behaviour. In this respect, Armitage, Conner and Norman (1999) carried out a research that aimed towards finding out that whether or not mood influences the attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control to the level at which intentions are affected. It was found that attitudes were more related to intentions than to subjective norms in case of negative mood whereas for positive mood, the subjective norms were more related to intentions. Stress is also found to be the trait that alters the dependency of intentions and behaviour over each other. References Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior. Berlin, Heidelber, New York: Springer-Verlag. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 179- 211. Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarrac, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173-221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta- analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499. Armitage, C. J., Conner, M., & Norman, P. (1999). Differential effects of mood on information processing: Evidence from the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 419-433. Bagozzi, R. P., Moore, D. J., & Leone, L. (2004). Self-control and the self-regulation of dieting decisions: The role of prefactual attitudes, subjective norms, and resistance to temptation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 199-213. Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal in Research in Personality, 25, 285-301. Budden, J. S., & Sagarin, B. (2008). Implementation intentions, occupational stress, and the exercise intention-behavior relationship. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 391-401. Cooke, R., & Sheeran, P. (2004). Moderation of cognition-intention and cognition-behaviour relations: A meta-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 159-186 Davidson, A. R., & Jaccard, J. J. (1979). Variables that moderate the attitude-behavior relation: Results of a longitudinal survey. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1364- 1376. Dawkins, C. E., & Frass, J. W. (2005). Decision of union workers to participate in employee. involvement: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Employee Relations, 27, 511-531 East, R. (2000). Complaining as planned behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 17, 1077-1095. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. French, D. P., Cooke, R., McLean, N., Williams, M., & Sutton, S. (2007). What do people think about when they answer theory of planned behaviour questionnaires?: A "think aloud" study. Journal of Health Psychology, 12, 672-687. Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behaviour: A review of its applications to health-related behaviours. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11, 87-98. Kraft, P., Rise, J., Sutton, S., & Roysamb, E. (2005). Perceived difficulty in the theory of planned behaviour: Perceived behavioural control or affective attitude. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 479-496. Norman, P., & Smith, L. (1995). The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: An investigation into the role of prior behaviour, behavioural intentions and attitude variability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 403-415. Parker, D., Manstead, A. S. R., & Stradling, S. G. (1995). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: The role of personal norm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 127- 137. Pieters, R. G. M., & Verplanken, B. (1995). Intention-behaviour consistency: Effects of consideration set size, involvement and need for cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 531-543. Rhodes, R. E., Blanchard, C. M., & Matheson, D. H. (2006). A multicomponent model of the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11, 119-137. Rhodes, R. E., & Courneya, K. S. (2003). Modelling the theory of planned behaviour and past behaviour. Psychology. Health and Medicine, 8, 57-68. Schwartz, S. H. (1978). Temporal instability as a moderator of the attitude-behaviour relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 715-724. Sheeran, P. (2002). Intention-behaviour relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology, 12, 1-36. Sheeran, P., & Abraham, C. (2003). Mediator of moderators: Temporal stability of intention and the intention-behaviour relation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 205- 215. Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (2000). Self-schemas and the theory of planned behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 533-550. Read More