Evaluation
There
has been a great deal of research on the theory of Reasoned
Action (see, e.g., Ajzen &
Fishbein, 1980; Sheppard,
Hartwick, & Warshaw, 1988). This research is generally
supportive of the predictions it makes: Behavioral intent can
be predicted from attitudes toward behavior and subjective
norms. These predictions hold up in a variety of situations,
like consumer behavior, voting, and others (see O’Keefe,
1990). However, this research shows that, of the two
components, attitude is a better (more accurate) predictor of
behavioral intent than subjective norms. O’Keefe points out
the relationship between the attitudinal component and the
factors that contribute to it (evaluation, belief strength) is
stronger than the relationship between the subject norms and
their components (normative beliefs, motivation to comply).
Thus, I believe it is useful to add the idea of subjective
norms, because sometimes they can influence our behavior, but
in general attitudes are a more important influence. Reasoned
Action complicates our understanding of persuasion (a
drawback), because it inserts another variable into the
process: messages > attitudes > behavioral intent >
behavior (and note that the Elaboration Likelihood Model would
insert cognitive responses between messages and attitudes).
However, Reasoned Action explains some of the reasons why an
attitude (or behavioral intent) will not result in the expect
behavior.
|
