The Moderated Influence of Internal Control: an Examination Across Health Related Behaviors

Citation:

Blair Kidwell and Robert Jewell (2002) ,"The Moderated Influence of Internal Control: an Examination Across Health Related Behaviors", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 29, eds. Susan M. Broniarczyk and Kent Nakamoto, Valdosta, GA : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 277-279.

Advances in Consumer Research Volume 29, 2002     Pages 277-279

THE MODERATED INFLUENCE OF INTERNAL CONTROL: AN EXAMINATION ACROSS HEALTH RELATED BEHAVIORS

Blair Kidwell, Virginia Tech

Robert Jewell, Virginia Tech

The construct of perceived behavioral control in the Theory of Planned Behavior (see Ajzen, 1988; 1991) has attracted considerable attention, eliciting numerous studies evaluating its use as a predictor of intentions and behavior across a variety of domains (e.g., Ajzen & Madden, 1986). Yet, few studies have identified the relationship between perceived control and other TPB variables. In this article, we explore; (a) evidence for a direct and indirect influence of perceived control onto intention, (b) patterns of interactions that may exist relative to behavioral category, and (c) a manipulation of behavioral category to explicate hypothesized patterns of interactions.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Recently, a number of conceptualizations of perceived behavioral control have emerged from the literature (for a review, see Peterson & Stunkard, 1992). One avenue of research is the separation of PBC into internal and external components (Armitage, Connor, Loach, & Willetts 1999). In the current paper, we identified internal control as a moderator across variables within the TPB based on two categories of behavior

Alternative categories can be used to differentiate behavior. One category (i.e., utilitarian) views the behavior as practical and useful, while a second category views the behavior as pleasurable and experiential (i.e., hedonic) (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1986). We anticipate that the relations among the constructs of the model will differ for the two behavioral categories.

Consider a utilitarian behavior (e.g., using sunscreen) that is poorly performed due to a person’s internal ability. This performance might influence thoughts about possible consequences and guide future decision-making (Albarracin & Wyer, 2000). Alternatiely, for a hedonic behavior (e.g., fast food consumption), a person may use past ability as a basis for later actions (Taylor, 1975). For example, a person might simply assume that the conditions that led to an earlier behavior exist in the present situation and repeat the behavior without bothering to verify this assumption.

The former conceptualization implies that the influence of cognitions on future decisions is moderated by perceptions of ability to perform the behavior. For this type of behavior we anticipate that internal control will moderate more cognitively focused determinants of intention (i.e., attitude, subjective norm). The later conceptualization implies very little thought toward the behavior and the consequences of engaging in it, and is moderated by a referral to previous outcomes. For this type of behavior we anticipate internal control will moderate non-cognitive determinants of intention (i.e., affect, past behavior).

STUDY 1

Study one implicates internal control as moderating both cognitive and non-cognitive determinants of intention for utilitarian and hedonic health behaviors, such that a person’s attitude and subjective norm may be influenced for utilitarian behaviors, while affect and past behavior may be influenced for hedonic behaviors.

METHOD

Sample and Procedures

Respondents were 150 students from a large southeastern university, who participated as part of an introductory course requirement. The participants in our study ranged from eighteen to thirty-seven years of age, with a mean age of 19.9 years.

Respondents were administered a questionnaire that operationalized the constructs in the model.

RESULTS

Moderated Influence of Internal Control

Hypothesized components of the model for utilitarian and hedonic behaviors contributed significantly to prediction. Forthe two-way interactions, we treated internal control as a moderator and examined the relationship with cognitive variables: attitude and subjective norm and non-cognitive variables: affect and past behavior across 4 behaviors.

Hypothesized pattern of interactions were supported. For utilitarian behaviors (i.e., using sunscreen and donating blood), respondents at high levels of internal control, subjective norm was more predictive of intention (Hypothesis 3), at lower and moderate levels of internal control, attitude was more predictive of intention (Hypothesis 4). For hedonic behaviors (i.e., drinking and driving and consuming fast food), respondents with low levels of internal control, affect was significantly predictive of intention (Hypothesis 5). Respondents with moderate and high levels of internal control, past behavior significantly influenced intention (Hypothesis 6).

STUDY 2

One limitation of study 1 is that the type of behavior is confounded with the specific context of the behavior. We conducted study 2 to address this concern. We created a framing manipulation on which the same behavior (e.g., chocolate consumption) was described as either a utilitarian or a hedonic behavior. We hypothesize the same pattern of interactions as described in study 1.

METHOD

Measures and Procedures

Participants were randomly assigned to four conditions (positive/negative x fat/chocolate consumption. The materials framed a behavior in a positive or negative way. The positive message discussed health reasons why performing this type of behavior is useful. The negative message discussed the reasons why performing this type of behavior is harmful, yet pleasurable.

RESULTS

The hypothesized relationships were supported across positively and negatively framed neutral behaviors. For positively framed behaviors (i.e., utilitarian), respondents with high (and moderate for fat consumption) levels of internal control, subjective norm was predictive of intention, at lower levels of internal control, attitude was more predictive of intention.

For negatively framed behaviors (i.e., hedonic), respondents with low (and moderate for fat consumption) levels of internal control, affect was significantly predictive of intention. Respondents with high levels of internal control, past behavior significantly influenced intention.

THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

Consistent with past research (e.g., Armitage, et. al., 1999), we found that internal and external control are distinct constructs within the theory of planned behavior. Although external control has been shown to have an independent influence on intention (Armitage, et al. 1999), we focus on internal control because it may be more amenable to change in interventions.

We found a shift from attitude to subjective norm for respondents with low to high levels of internal control for utilitarian behaviors (e.g. sunscreen use and donating blood). For hedonic behaviors (e.g., drinking and driving and consuming fast food), we found a shift from affect to past behavior as a determinant of intention for respondents with low to high levels of internal control.

These findings suggest that intentions to perform behaviors may be influenced by both cognitive variables (attitude and subjective norm) and non-cognitive variables (affect and past behavior) depending on the valence of the behavior. Findings imply that the conceptualization of the theory of planned behavior, whether as an expectancy-value model or as an extended model, is incomplete when; 1) internal and external control are treated as a single construct, 2) a moderating influence of internal control is not incorporated, and 3) behaviors are not categorized based on utilitarian or hedonic valences.

REFERENCES

Aarts, H., Verplanken, B., & van Knippenberg, A. (1998). Predicting Behavior from Actions in the Past: Repeated Decision Making or a Matter of Habit. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1355-1374.

Ajzen, I.(1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.

Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of Goal-Directed Behavior: Attitudes, Intentions, and Perceived Behavioral Control," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453-474.

Albarracin, D., & Wyer, R. S. Jr., (2000). The Cognitive Impact of Past Behavior: Influences on Beliefs, Attitudes, and Future Behavioral Decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 5-22.

Allen, C. T., Machleit, K. A., & Schultz-Kleine, S. (1992). A Comparison of Attitudes and Emotions as Predictors of Behavior at Diverse Levels of Behavioral Experience Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 493-504.

Armitage, C. J., Conner, M., Loach, J., & Willetts, D. (1999). Different Perceptions of Control: Applying an Extended Theory of Planned Behavior to Legal and Illegal Drug Use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(4), 301-316.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior: A Test of Some Key Hypotheses. Journal Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 607-627.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Kimmel, S. K. (1995). A comparison of Leading Theories for the Prediction of Goal-Directed Behaviors. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 437-461.

Bagozzi, R. P.& Warshaw, P. R. (1992). An Examination of the Etiology of the Attitude-Behavior Relation for Goal-Directed Behaviors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 601-634.

Bagozzi, R. P., Wong, N., Abe, S., & Bergami, M. (2000). Cultural and Situational Contingencies and the Theory of Reasoned Action: Application to Fast Food Restaurant Consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 97-106.

Bargh, J. A., & Barndollar, K. (1996). Automaticity in Action: The Unconscious as Repository of Chronic Goals and Motives. In P. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Psychology of Action (pp. 457-481). New York, NY: Guilford.

Batra, R. & Holbrook, M. B. (1990). Developing a Typology of Affective Responses to Advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 7, 65-81.

Beale, D. A. & Manstead, A. S. R. (1991). Predicting Mother’s Intentions to Limit Frequency of Infants’ Sugar Intake: Testing the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 409-431.

Bodur, O., Brinberg, D., & Coupey E. (2000). Belief, Affect, and Attitude: Alternative Models of the Determinants of Attitude. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(1), 17-28.

Brinberg, D., & Durand, J. (1983). Eating at Fast-Food Restaurants: An Analysis Using Two Behavioral Intention Models. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 459-472.

Conner, M. & Armitage, C. J., (1998). Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review for Further Research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429-1464.

Edwards, K., & von Hippel, W. (1995). Hearts and Minds. The Priority of Affective and Cognitive Factors in Person Perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 996-1011.

Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row-Peterson.

Godin, Valois, & Lepage, (1993). The Pattern of Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control Upon Exercising BehaviorCan Application of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 16, 81-102.

Goldberg, M. E. (1995). Social Marketing: Are We Fiddling While Rome Burns? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4, 347-370.

Hirschman, E. C. & Holbrook, M. B.(1986). Expanding the Ontology and Methodology of Research on the Consumption Experience. In Brinberg, D. and Lutz (Eds.) Perspectives on Methodology in Consumer Research. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Hirschman, E. C. & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods and Propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-101.

Izard, C. E. (1977). Human Emotions. New York: Plenum.

Janis, I. L., & King, B. T., (1954). The Influence of Role Playing on Opinion Change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 211-218.

J÷reskog, K. G. (1971). Statistical Analysis of Sets of Congeneric Tests. Psychometrika, 36, 109-133.

Lavine, H., Thomsen, C. J., Zanna, M. P., & Borgida, E. (1998). On the Primacy of Affect in the Determination of Attitudes and Behavior: The Moderating Role of Affective-Cognitive Ambivalence. Journal of Experimental Socal Psychology, 34(4), 398-421.

Leary, M. R., & Jones, J. L. (1993). The Social Psychology of Tanning and Sunscreen Use: Self-presentation Motives as a Predictor of Health Risk. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1390-1406.

Mano, H. (1991). The Structure and Intensity of Emotional Experiences: Method and Context Convergence. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, (3), 389-411.

Norman, P., & Smith, L. (1995). The Theory of Planned Behavior and Exercise: An Investigation into the Role of Prior Behavior, Behavioral Intentions and Attitude Variability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 403-415.

Notani, A. S. (1998). Moderators of Perceived Behavioral Control’s Predictiveness in the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(3), 247-271.

Parker, D., Manstead, A. S., Stradling, R. Reason, H., & Baxter, J. S., (1992). Intention to Commit Driving Violations: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 94-101.

Peterson, C. & Stunkard, A. J. (1992). Cognates of Personal Control: Locus of Control, Self-efficacy, and Explanatory Style. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 1, 111-117.

Priester, J. R. & Petty, R., (1996). The Gradual Threshold Model of Ambivalence: Relating the Positive and Negative Bases of Attitudes to Subjective Ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 431-449.

Russell, J. A. (1980). A Circumplex Model of Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(12), 1161-1178.

Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R., (1992). Self-identity and the Theory of Planned Behavior: Assessing the Role of Identification with "Green Consumerism." Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 388-399.

Stacy, A. W., Bentler, P. M. & Flay, B. R. (1994). Attitudes and Health Behavior in Diverse Populations: Drunk Driving, Alcohol Use, Binge Eating, Marijuana Use, and Cigarette Use. Health Psychology, 13, 73-85.

Taylor, S. E. (1975). On Inferring One’s Attitudes from One’s Behavior: Some Delimiting Conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 126-131.

Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal Behavior, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Turrisi, R. & Jaccard, J. (1992). Cognitive and Attitudinal Factors in the Analysis of Alternatives to Drunk Driving. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 53, 405-414.

van der Pligt, J., & de Vries, N. (1998b). Expectancy-value Models of Health Behaviors: The Role of Salience and Anticipated Affect. Psychology and Health, 13, 289-305.

Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., & van Knippenberg, A. (1997). Habit, Information Acquisition, and the Process of Making Travel Tode Choices. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 539-560.

Watson, D. & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a Consensual Structure of Mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235.

Wicklund, R. A., & Brehm, J. W. (1976). Perceptions of Cognitive Dissonance. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zajonc, R. B. (1984). On the Primacy of Affect. American Psychologist, 39, 117-123.

----------------------------------------