A facet approach to extending the normative component of the theory of reasoned action

Abstract

Using facet theory, this study addresses the weak explanatory power of normative influence in theories of reasoned action or planned behaviour. A broad normative construct is hypothesized as being characterized by two facets--social unit and behavioural modality--each of which is examined in relation to recreational drug use. A questionnaire was developed from the facets and administered to undergraduate students. Data (N = 181) were analysed using Smallest Space Analysis (SSA). The results suggest that the facets provide an adequate description of the normative construct and that personal and social normative beliefs, behavioural norms and behavioural intentions can be distinguished empirically. The results also lend partial support to Ajzen's (1988; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977) principle of compatibility. Implications for how social influence is operationalized and conceptualized are also discussed.

The effect of norms, attitudes and habits on speeding behavior: Scale development and model building and estimation

“…the observation and imitation of the behavior of other people on the road (normative norm) and the subjective norm appear to have a significant influence on attitudes and, through attitudes, on self-reported behavior. This confirms the findings of Rothengatter (1991), Connolly and Aberg (1993), Manstead and Parker (1995), Groeger and Chapman (1997), Aberg (1997), Elliot (2001), Donald and Cooper (2001), Connor and Abraham (2001) and Newman and Di Pietro (2001). The fact that impact of subjective norms is less outspoken than that of personal norms also confirms the findings of Manstead and Parker (1995) and Aberg (1999), and the prominent role of personal norms was also highlighted by Elliot (2001).…”

“…Various studies show that behavior of others on the road is imitated (Rothengatter, 1991;Connolly and Aberg, 1993;Groeger and Chapman, 1997). This factor is called the descriptive norm (Elliot, 2001;Donald and Cooper, 2001). For instance, Aberg (1999) concludes that, depending on the speed, in Sweden 10-30% of behavior is explained by the normative and descriptive norm and only 6-10% by the subjective norm.…”

Exploring seafood socialization in the kindergarten: an intervention’s influence on children’s attitudes

“…This study uses attitude theory (Ajzen, 2001), norm-theory (Cialdini et al, 1990;Donald and Cooper, 2001) and theories about mere exposure (Zajonc, 1968) to explain the intervention as a social learning process.…”

“…The increased availability of seafood in kindergartens may stimulate caregivers to both communicate its advantages and act as role models. We suggest expanding role modelling by introducing subjective and descriptive norms (Berg et al, 2000;Donald and Cooper, 2001). These concepts are further described.…”

‘Searching for a “generalized social agent” to predict Namibians’ intentions to prevent sexual transmission of HIV

“…They defined subjective norms as 'the person's perception that important others desire the performance or nonperformance of a specific behaviour' (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980, p. 57). In studies using TRA to reduce HIV transmission with condom use (Barker et al, 1998;Bosompra, 2001;Donald & Cooper, 2001;Fazekas et al, 2001;Koniak-Griffin et al, 2003;Serovich & Greene, 1997), the definition of social norms exhibit marked consistency to each other and the original definition.…”