EDITORIAL COMMENT Questions Raised by a Reasoned Action Approach: Comment on Ogden (2003)

Abstract

In her critique of social cognition or reasoned action models, J. Ogden (2003) claimed that such models are not falsifiable and thus cannot be tested, that the postulated relations among model components are true by definition, and that questionnaires used to test the models may create rather than assess cognitions and thus influence later behavior. The authors of this comment challenge all 3 arguments and contend that the findings Ogden regarded as requiring rejection of the models are, in fact, consistent with them, that there is good evidence for the validity of measures used to assess the models ’ major constructs, and that the effect of completing a questionnaire on cognitions and subsequent behavior is an empirical question. Key words: reasoned action, social cognitions, problems, critique, reply Ogden’s (2003) critique raises serious concerns about the use of social cognition models in health psychology. The critique is based on 47 empirical articles published in four premier health psychol-ogy journals. It is not clear why Ogden limited her review to a 5-year period (1997–2001) when more extensive meta-analyses

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 — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.