The Theory of Reasoned Action
The Theory of Reasoned Action is a tool used in predicting intentions in individuals. It defines the connections between beliefs, attitudes, norms, intentions, and behaviors of individuals. This theory intends to explain volitional, or voluntary actions and doesn’t include actions that can be labeled impulsive or habitual, among other actions since they don’t involve a conscious decision.
Behavioral intention is a strong factor for the TRA as they tend to be the result of an individual influence as well as a normative one.
The TRA formula is defined as: [pic]
B is behavior, BI is behavioral intention, AB is attitude toward behavior, SN is subjective norm, and W1 and W2 are weights representing the importance. Subjective norm is what a person believes the important people in their life think they should do. This factor is weighted according to the importance to the person.
The TRA was developed out of frustration with traditional attitude-behavior research and it appears simple and straightforward at its surface, it has limitations and can also present more questions and issues.
Intentions can vary and are provisional within a certain time frame or situation so results in the formula can be watered down if the time gap between the intention being measured and the actual performance of the behavior is too large which can lead to compatibility issues between intention and behavior and lead to measurement errors. Although the theory raises questions, there clearly is truth in the statement that behavioral intentions are heavily influenced by volitional behavior.
Criticism of the TRA focus on three issues, the relationship between attitudes and normative beliefs, if TRA components are enough to predict intentions and behaviors as well as the restricted range of meaning in the theory.
Attitudes can often be expressed as norms and norms can also be stated as attitudes. TRA components may also not be sufficient predictors of behavior based on the
Behavioral intention is a strong factor for the TRA as they tend to be the result of an individual influence as well as a normative one.
The TRA formula is defined as: [pic]
B is behavior, BI is behavioral intention, AB is attitude toward behavior, SN is subjective norm, and W1 and W2 are weights representing the importance. Subjective norm is what a person believes the important people in their life think they should do. This factor is weighted according to the importance to the person.
The TRA was developed out of frustration with traditional attitude-behavior research and it appears simple and straightforward at its surface, it has limitations and can also present more questions and issues.
Intentions can vary and are provisional within a certain time frame or situation so results in the formula can be watered down if the time gap between the intention being measured and the actual performance of the behavior is too large which can lead to compatibility issues between intention and behavior and lead to measurement errors. Although the theory raises questions, there clearly is truth in the statement that behavioral intentions are heavily influenced by volitional behavior.
Criticism of the TRA focus on three issues, the relationship between attitudes and normative beliefs, if TRA components are enough to predict intentions and behaviors as well as the restricted range of meaning in the theory.
Attitudes can often be expressed as norms and norms can also be stated as attitudes. TRA components may also not be sufficient predictors of behavior based on the