The expectancy‐value muddle in the theory of planned behaviour — and some proposed solutions

Abstract

The authors of the Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behaviour recommended a method for statistically analysing the relationships between beliefs and the Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Perceived Behavioural Control constructs. This method has been used in the overwhelming majority of studies using these theories. However, there is a growing awareness that this method yields statistically uninterpretable results (Evans, 1991). Despite this, the use of this method is continuing, as is uninformed interpretation of this problematic research literature. This is probably due to the lack of a simple account of where the problem lies, and the large number of alternatives available. This paper therefore summarizes the problem as simply as possible, gives consideration to the conclusions that can be validly drawn from studies that contain this problem, and critically reviews the many alternatives that have been proposed to address this problem. Different techniques are identified as being suitable, according to the purpose of the specific research project.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 94 citations exist upstream.