Bridging The Intention-Behaviour

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7402884
Bridging the intention-behavior gap: The role

of moral norm
ARTICLE in BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY JANUARY 2006
Impact Factor: 1.76 DOI: 10.1348/014466604X17452 Source: PubMed
CITATIONS
READS
109
1,743
3 AUTHORS:
Gaston Godin
Mark T Conner
Laval University
University of Leeds
275 PUBLICATIONS 8,465 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Paschal Sheeran
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
SEE PROFILE
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.
Available from: Paschal Sheeran

Retrieved on: 12 January 2016
Copyright The British Psychological Society

Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society
497
The
British
Psychological
Society
British Journal of Social Psychology (2005), 44, 497512

q 2005 The British Psychological Society
www.bpsjournals.co.uk
Bridging the intentionbehaviour gap: The role of

moral norm
Gaston Godin1*, Mark Conner2 and Paschal Sheeran3
1
Universite Laval, Canada

University of Leeds, UK
3
University of Sheffield, UK
2
This research examined whether intentions aligned with moral norms better predict
behaviour compared with intentions aligned with attitudes. Six data sets predicting
behaviours in the health domain (smoking, driving over speed limit, applying universal
precautions, exercising) were analysed. Moderated regression analysis indicated that
participants whose intentions were more aligned with their moral norm were more
likely to perform behaviours compared with participants whose intentions were more
aligned with their attitude. However, further analysis indicated that this moderation
effect was only present when participants construed the behaviour in moral terms.
The findings suggest that the theory of planned behaviour should more clearly
acknowledge the importance of internalized norms and self-expectations in the
development of ones motivation to adopt a given behaviour.
Although the perceived moral correctness of a behaviour (or moral norm) has long been
construed as an important direct (unmediated) determinant of behaviour (Schwartz,
1977), empirical support for this claim has been lacking. A great deal of research shows
that moral norm predicts intentions to act; however, relatively few studies have
demonstrated a direct impact of moral norms on behaviour. The present paper argues
that the impact of moral norm on behaviour has been underestimated in past research
because previous studies overlooked the potential moderating effect that moral norms
may have on intentionbehaviour relationships. The hypothesis tested here is that when
intentions are formed on the basis of the perceived moral correctness of a behaviour,
these intentions will better predict behaviour compared with intentions formed on the
basis of consideration of the outcomes of the behaviour. Thus, perceived moral
correctness may indeed have a significant impact on behaviour by rendering it more
likely that intentions are translated successfully into action.
The theory of planned behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) is the dominant model for
predicting and understanding health-related intentions and behaviour (see Abraham,
* Correspondence should be addressed to Gaston Godin, Canada Research Chair on Behaviour and Health, Paul-Comtois
Building, 4110-A, Universite Laval Quebec (Qc), Canada G1K 7P4 (e-mail: gaston.godin@fsi.ulaval.ca).
DOI:10.1348/014466604X17452

498
Gaston Godin et al.
Sheeran, & Johnson, 1998; Armitage & Conner, 2001; Conner & Sparks, 1996; Godin &
Kok, 1996, for reviews). The TPB is an extension of Fishbeins (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975)
theory of reasoned action (TRA) which proposed that the most immediate and
important predictor of behaviour is the persons decision or intention to perform it.
According to the TRA, intention is determined by attitude and subjective norm. Attitude
(Aact) refers to the persons overall evaluation of performing the behaviour, whereas
subjective norm (SN) refers to perceptions of social pressure from significant others to
perform the behaviour. However, the TRA was designed only to predict volitional
behaviours, that is, behaviours over which the person has a good deal of control.
To overcome this problem, Ajzen (1991) added the construct of perceived behavioural
control to the original TRA to deal with determinants of human behaviour that are not
under complete volitional control. The reformulated model was called the TPB and
proposed that perceived behavioural control constitutes an additional predictor of
intention alongside attitude and subjective norm, and of behaviour alongside intentions.
However, a growing body of research has supported the role of moral norm as a
predictor of intentions (see Manstead, 2000) even when attitude, subjective norm and
perceived behavioural control have been taken into account. For example, Parker,
Manstead, and Stradling (1995) showed that moral norms enhanced the prediction of
intentions to perform various driving behaviours over and above attitudes, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioural control. Similarly, in applications of the TPB to five
ecological behaviours, Harland, Staats, and Wilke (1999) found that the inclusion of
moral norm increased the proportion of explained variance in intention. Studies of
moral norm in the context of the TPB were reviewed by Conner and Armitage (1998)
who estimated that across studies moral norms predicted an additional 4% of the
variance in intentions after controlling for TPB predictors. Similarly, research on the
theory of interpersonal behaviour (TIB; Triandis, 1980) has consistently shown that
moral considerations, here termed personal normative beliefs, are significant
predictors of intentions in the presence of other TIB predictors such as attitude
(instrumental and affect dimensions), and normative and role beliefs. For example,
personal normative beliefs were significant predictors of intentions to smoke only in
designated work-site areas (Boissoneault & Godin, 1990), to use a condom with new
partners among different ethnocultural groups (Godin et al., 1996), to adopt hormone
replacement therapy among premenopausal women (Legare et al., 2003) and to provide
home care (Vermette & Godin, 1996). Thus, support for the idea that moral
considerations are an important determinant of intentions to act appears to be well
established for a range of behaviours.
With respect to the prediction of behaviour, the literature is neither so extensive nor
so consistent. The vast majority of studies that showed an impact of moral norms on
intentions did not show a similar impact on behaviour, at least when intentions were
included in the analyses. Nevertheless, there are occasional studies demonstrating such
a direct impact. For example, Godin, Gagnon, and Lambert (2003) showed that moral
norm was a significant predictor of maintenance of regular condom use over a 2-year
period among single heterosexual adults, along with intention and attitude. However, to
date no research has tested the idea that moral norms affect behaviour by having a
moderating effect on the consistency between intentions and behaviour.
It is important to be clear about how moderation by moral norm is conceptualized in
the present analysis. In a standard moderator analysis, one would examine how the
relationship between intention and behaviour varies as a function of the mean moral
norm score. Thus, one might predict that individuals who have high moral norm scores

Intentionbehaviour and moral norm
499
show a stronger intentionbehaviour relationship compared with those with low moral
norm scores. Our hypothesis differs from this standard view of moderation. Our
contention is that people who based their intentions to act on moral norms should be
especially likely to realize those intentions. It is not the mean moral norm score per se
that is the moderator variable, but rather the extent to which the persons behavioural
decision is based on perceptions of moral correctness of the act. Thus, the hypothesis
tested here is that intentions aligned on moral norm better predict behaviour compared
with intentions aligned on attitude.
The idea that people differ in the extent to which their intentions are based on
different considerations was proposed by Trafimow and Finlay (1996). Trafimow and
Finlay used the strength of within-person correlations between intention and attitude
and intention and subjective norm to designate whether participants were under
attitudinal versus normative control. Findings indicated that the predictive validity of
attitudes and subjective norms in traditional between-participants analyses depended
substantially upon whether the person was attitudinally versus normatively controlled.
Subjective norms had little or no relationship with intentions to perform specific
behaviours when participants were attitudinally controlled, whereas attitudes were
weak predictors of behavioural intentions when participants were normatively
controlled. Thus, person type had an important impact upon whether or not attitudes
and subjective norms influenced intentions.
Sheeran, Norman, and Orbell (1999) tested the implications of attitudinal versus
normative control of intentions for the predictive validity of intentions ( how well
intentions were translated into action). Findings indicated that intentions based on
attitudes better predicted behaviour than did intention based on subjective norms
(see also Sheeran & Abraham, 2003). Sheeran et al. drew upon self-determination theory
(SDT; e.g. Ryan, Sheldon, Kasser, & Deci, 1996) to explain this finding. The argument is
that attitudinally controlled intentions are an expression of oneself and hence have
considerable motivational impact. Normatively controlled intentions, on the other hand,
are derived from the experience of social pressure, and consequently have a poorer
impact on effort and persistence in realizing ones intentions.
It is important to note that normative control was conceptualized solely in terms of
social pressure in Sheeran et al.s (1999) analyses. However, numerous studies reviewed
earlier indicate that moral considerations are an important additional normative
influence on intention and often more influential than subjective norm. Moreover, it is
possible that intentions that are more aligned with ones moral norm are closer to the
core self than intentions which are more aligned with ones attitudes (i.e. attitudinally
controlled in Sheeran et al., 1999). Thus, morally aligned intentions could be associated
with an enhanced intentionbehaviour relationship.
Two theoretical frameworks offer grounds for hypothesizing that intentions based
on moral norm will better predict behaviour than intentions based on attitude, namely,
SDT (e.g. Ryan et al., 1996) and norm-activation theory (NAT; Schwartz, 1977).
According to SDT, two types of motivation termed autonomous and controlled
support behavioural performances. These two sources of influence, however, are not
conceptualized as equally important determinants of behaviour. Individuals with an
autonomous source of motivation that is internally controlled are more likely to achieve
goals than individuals who are motivated by external sources of control (e.g. in response
to approval or punishment from significant others). Until now, to our knowledge,
applications of SDT to the prediction of behaviour by TPB variables has only construed
attitudes as the autonomous motivational source of behaviour. However, we argue that

500
Gaston Godin et al.
moral norm is an expression of the core self more so than is attitude, since the former
refers to an individuals personal standards of conduct whereas the latter simply
involved estimates of the likelihood of particular outcomes of performing the behaviour
(that may have little to do with the self).
An attempt to conceptualize the way in which moral norms impact on behaviour can
also be found in the NAT. Schwartz (1977) argues that it is likely that many individuals
adopt specific behaviours by conviction, that is, because they feel a moral obligation to
adopt them: individuals sometimes act in response to their own self-expectations, their
own personal norms (p. 231). According to NAT, a given behaviour is adopted not
because of the expected outcomes of performance, but for more internalized feelings
that can be captured by the concept of moral norm. Schwartz proposed that these
personal norms are not experienced as intentions, but as feelings of moral obligation,
and so can directly influence behaviour.
However, we would argue that the lack of support for a direct impact of moral norms
on behaviour (in the presence of intentions) points to an alternative view, namely, that
moral norms have an indirect impact on behaviour through strengthening intention.
The idea is that intentions based on the moral correctness of the behaviour (morally
aligned intentions) have greater motivational force than intentions based on the
perceived consequences of acting (attitudinally aligned intentions). This is because
moral considerations are more directly self-related than are considerations of behavioural
outcomes. Whereas attitudes refer to evaluations based on outcome expectations
(e.g. material, social, and/or psychological payoffs), personal norms focus exclusively on
the evaluation of behaviours in terms of their moral worth to the self (Schwartz &
Howard, 1984). According to SDT, intentions based on self-related beliefs will be more
predictive of behaviour. Thus, people whose intentions are based on moral norms should
exhibit increased effort and persistence (cf. Sheldon & Elliot, 1998) and therefore their
intentions should better predict behaviour compared with intentions based on
attitudes.1
Philosophical and empirical analyses of the belief types underpinning attitudes
versus moral norms support the idea that moral considerations are more closely related
to the core self than are attitudinal considerations. According to SDT, the core self is
concerned with the fulfilment of the three basic human needs of autonomy,
competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The two key belief types that
underlie attitudes concern the affective and instrumental consequences of acting
(Abelson, Kinder, Peters, & Fiske, 1982; Breckler, 1984; Breckler & Wiggins, 1989;
Crites, Fabrigar, & Petty, 1994). That is, favourable attitudes should accrue from
believing that the behaviour will give rise to positive feelings and/or believing that the
behaviour will be instrumental in achieving valued outcomes (e.g. money, health).
The key belief types that underlie moral norms, on the other hand, relate to the autonomy,
beneficience (and nonmaleficience), and justice of the action (see Beauchamp &
Childress, 1989, for conceptual derivation of these belief types; see Blondeau, Godin,
1
The present analysis construes intentions aligned with attitude and not intentions aligned with subjective norm as the
salient reference category for people whose intentions are aligned on moral norm, for two reasons. First, it has repeatedly been
demonstrated that people are much more likely to hold intentions aligned with attitude rather than subjective norm
(e.g. Trafimow & Finlay, 1996). Second, it is well established that attitudinally aligned intention is associated with improved
prediction of behaviour by intention compared with intention aligned with subjective norm (e.g. Sheeran & Abraham, 2003).
Thus, it seems safe to assume that if morally aligned intentions are better predictors of behaviour than attitudinally aligned
intentions, these intentions should also outperform intentions aligned with subjective norm.

501
Gagne, & Martineau, 2004, for evidence regarding discriminant and predictive validity).
That is, moral norms will be stronger the more the action is thought to reflect
individuals liberty and uniqueness (autonomy), the more the action promotes the wellbeing of others and avoids hurt, harm or distress to others (beneficience and
nonmaleficience), and the more the action promotes equal or fair distribution of
resources (justice). Attitudes may sometimes be based on considerations of autonomy,
relatedness, and competence; however, more commonly attitudes will be concerned
with other needs and motives. In contrast, autonomy and relatedness needs are integral
to the development of moral norms (Beauchamp & Childress, 1989). Consequently,
basing ones decisions on moral norms should better reflect the core self compared with
basing ones decisions on attitude.
Thus, the present research investigates a new perspective on how internalized
notions of right and wrong can impact on behaviour. The hypothesis tested here is that
intentions will be significantly stronger predictors of behaviour among individuals who
base their intentions predominantly on moral considerations compared with individuals
who base their intentions on attitudes.
MAIN STUDY
Method
Five studies conducted in recent years were used to test our hypothesis. Each study
concerned the adoption of a given behaviour in the domain of health and was carried
out among different segments of the population and over different time intervals. A brief
description of the sample and focal behaviour in each study is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Focal behaviour and participant characteristics in the five studies
Sex
No.
Behaviour studied
1
2
3
Smoking
Driving over speed limit
Apply universal precautions
for venipunctures
Physical activity
Physical activity
4
5
N in analysis
Subjects
Mean
age (years)
283
76
94
School pupils
General population
Nurses
132
50
0
151
26
94
11.1
35.0
38.2
97
249
University employees
General population
33
101
64
148
41.5
37.9
Study 1: Conner, M., Sandberg, T., Higgins, A., and McMillan, B. (in press). Role of anticipated regret in
adolescent smoking initiation. British Journal of Health Psychology.
Study 2: Chorlton, K., and Conner, M. Using the theory of planned behavior to predict speeding.
Manuscript under review.
Study 3: Godin, G., Naccache, H., Morel, S., and Ebacher, M. F. (2000). Determinants of nurses
compliance to universal precautions. American Journal of Infection Control, 28, 359364.
Study 4: Jackson, K., Smith, A., and Conner, M. (2003). Applying an extended version of the theory of
planned behaviour to physical activity. Journal of Sports Science, 21, 119133.
Study 5: Godin, G., Valois, P., and Lepage, L. (1993). The pattern of influence of perceived behavioral
control upon exercising behavior: An application of Ajzens theory of planned behavior. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 16, 81102.

502
Gaston Godin et al.
Discriminant validity of moral norm versus attitude

All of the studies included standard measures of behaviour, intention, attitude, and
moral norm (see Appendix for items). Principal components analysis (PCA), using
oblimin rotation, was performed on the attitude, moral norm and intention items from
each study to ensure that these three constructs possessed discriminant validity. Where
necessary, items not loading on their respective construct were eliminated until a clear
3-factor solution was found. Table 2 depicts the PCA solution and psychometric qualities
for intention, attitude and moral norm in the five studies.
Classification of respondents: Attitudinally versus morally aligned intentions
Participants were classified as having attitudinally versus morally aligned intentions
based on whether their intention scores more closely matched attitude scores or more
closely matched moral norm scores (cf. Sheeran & Abraham, 2003). More particularly,
we computed the absolute difference between intention and attitude scores and
between intention and moral norm scores for each participant. When moral norm scores
were more discrepant from intention scores than were attitude scores, participants
were deemed to have attitudinally aligned intentions. Conversely, when attitude
scores were more discrepant from intention scores than were moral norm scores,
participants were deemed to have morally aligned intentions. Using this criterion, 63.6%
(N 180), 57.9% (N 44), 65.9% (N 62), 52.6% (N 51), and 77.9% (N 194) of
participants had morally aligned intentions in Studies 15, respectively.
Results
Appropriateness of group classification
Table 3 shows the relative importance of attitude and moral norm for the prediction of
intention among attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups. With the
exception of Study 5, the standardized regression coefficients indicate that moral norm is
the most important determinant of intention among the morally aligned intention group.
In all cases, attitude is the stronger determinant of behavioural intention among the
attitudinally aligned intention group. These findings support the appropriateness of our
classification of participants into attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups.
Moderation of the intentionbehaviour relationship by group classification
The moderator hypothesis was tested by means of moderated regression analysis
(Baron & Kenny, 1986). Group was a dummy variable (1 morally aligned
intentions, 0 attitudinally aligned intentions). Intention scores were standardized
prior to computing the interaction term to reduce potential multicollinearity (Aiken &
West, 1991). Table 4 shows that there was a significant positive interaction between
group and intention for three of the five studies. Group moderated the intention
behaviour relationship in studies of smoking, driving, and use of universal precautions
but did not have a significant moderating effect in the two studies of physical activity.
Simple slopes analyses for intention by group confirm this analysis (see Table 5).
The significant interaction terms indicate that intentions are significantly better
predictors of behaviour in the morally aligned intention group compared with the
attitudinally aligned intention group for all of the behaviours except physical activity.
These findings support our predictions for three out of the four different types of
behaviour examined here.
Attitude
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
Item 4
Moral norm
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
Intention
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
Item 4
Initial eigenvalues
% of variance
Cronbachs a
Correlations
F2
F3
Variables and
statistical indices
.19
.20
.30
.132
.143
.257
.866
.882
.889
0.99
19.7
n/a
.189
.299
2.55
50.9
.86
.998
Factor
2
.200
Factor
1
0.80
15.9
n/a
.293
.230
.268
.999
.191
Factor
3
Study 1 (smoking)
.22
.26
3.62
45.2
.93
.921
.920
.933
.618
.129
.276
.217
.187
Factor
1
Factor
3
.01
2.17
27.2
n/a
.231
.252
.155
.133
0.64
7.9
.82
.335
.227
.199
.807
.834 2.051
.913
.059
.796
.363
.751 2.348
Factor
2
Study 2 (speeding)
Factor
3
.410
.386
.432
2 .266
2 .505
2 .258
2.18
2 .32
.43
1.22
12.2
.87
.881
.908
.831
2 .339
2 .290
2 .197
2 .31
.336
.385
.403
.251
.252
.321
.364
Factor
3
2 .879
2 .855
2 .804
2 .820
Factor
2
2.21
2.45
.863
.917
.171
.182
.459
.492
Factor
1
1.77
17.7
.84
.021
.019
.713
.154
.845 2 .223
.840
.178
.515 2 .052
Factor
2
Study 4 (exercise)
.864
.047
.089
.942
.932
.007
.040
.697
.859 2.046
.081
.916
.854 2.028
.029
5.11
1.66
0.93
4.58
42.9
16.5
12.1
45.8
.76
.94
.92
.86
.170
.077
2.061
.191
2.212
.362
Factor
1
Study 3 (universal
precautions)
Table 2. Principal components analysis (oblimin rotation) and psychometric qualities of the psychosocial variables
Factor
2
2 .41
2 .09
3.09
51.5
n/a
2 .010
.002
2.15
0.97
16.2
n/a
.967
.012
.830
.127
.874
.043
.610
.272
.867 2.198
Factor
1
0.70
11.6
.84
.015
.996
.025
2.033
2.031
.033
Factor
3
Study 5 (exercise)

503
b
r
b
r
20.09
2.41
0.75***
.84***
AI
0.71***
.75***
2 0.24***
2.52***
MI
0.01
.10
0.67***
.66***
AI
MI
0.90***
.90***
2 0.21**
2.17
Study 2
2 0.04
.21
0.75***
.78***
AI
Study 3
MN moral norm; Att attitude; AI attitudeintention; MI moral normintention.

*p , :05 **p , :01 ***p , :001.
Att control
MN control
Group
Study 1
0.73***
.72***
0.05
.61***
MI
0.08
.28
0.56***
.60***
AI
MI
0.78***
.80***
0.32**
.40**
Study 4
0.50***
.57***
0.37***
.47***
AI
MI
0.19**
.37***
2 0.58***
2 .64***
Study 5
504
Table 3. Regression of intention on attitude and moral norm for participants with morally aligned versus attitudinally aligned intentions
Gaston Godin et al.

505
Table 4. Attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups as a moderator of the intention
behaviour relationship
Variable
Intention (b)
Group: MNATT (b)
Interaction: GRI (b)
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
Study 5
0.51***
0.28**
0 2 .49
p , .001
0.63***
0.57*
0 2 .54
p , .04
0.20
0.19*
0.30
p , .02
0.18
0 2 .02
0.11
p .53
0.76***
0.21*
0 2 .12
p .46
GRMNATT attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups.

*P , :05, **P , :01, ***P , :001
Table 5. Simple slopes for intention by attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups
Variable
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
Study 5
Morally aligned intentions (b)

Attitudinally aligned intentions (b)
0.36***
0.19
0.61***
0.18
0.54***
0.26
0.37**
0.17
0.55***
0.47***
*P , :05, **P , :01, ***P , :001
SUPPLEMENTARY STUDY AND ANALYSES

Notwithstanding the significant difference in the predictive validity of intentions in the
two groups (i.e. morally aligned intentions versus attitudinally aligned intentions), it was
notable that the interaction was not significant for physical activity. In order to
understand these non-significant effects, and to delineate more precisely when group is
likely to moderate intentionbehaviour relations, we conducted supplementary
analyses with a new data set.
The new analyses were based on the idea that morally versus attitudinally aligned
intentions can only be expected to exert moderator effects when participants view
performance of the focal behaviour as a moral issue. We suspect that for certain
behaviours (such as exercise) most people will not construe the behaviour as a moral
issue, and consequently it will be difficult to observe a significant interaction between
group and intentions among the sample as a whole. However, among participants who
view exercise as a moral issue, we anticipate that the interaction term will be significant.
The present study concerns physical activity. Thus, we predict that the interaction
between group and intention will not be associated with behaviour when participants
do not think of physical activity as a moral issue; conversely, we predict that the
interaction will be significantly associated with behaviour when participants see
physical activity in moral terms.
Method
Participants were 56 undergraduates at the University of Sheffield who voluntarily
completed two questionnaires about their physical activity over a 2-week period.
The first questionnaire measured intention, moral norm, attitude, and perceived
morality of the behaviour. Two weeks later, participants reported their behaviour.
Unless otherwise stated, all items were measured on 7-point scales. Intention was
measured by two items (e.g. I intend to exercise at least six times in the next 2
weeks, definitely dodefinitely dont) and proved reliable (a :75). Attitude was
measured by responses to the item, For me, exercising at least six times in the next

506
Gaston Godin et al.
2 weeks would be: : : on six bipolar scales (wisefoolish, enjoyableunenjoyable,

beneficialharmful, intelligentstupid, nicenasty, pleasantunpleasant) (a :83).
Moral norm was measured by two items: It would be against my moral principles not
to exercise at least six times in the next 2 weeks (definitely nodefinitely, yes) and
I have a moral obligation to exercise at least six times in the next 2 weeks
(definitely nodefinitely yes) (a :70). Perception of the behaviour as a moral issue
was indexed by a single item: Do you believe that exercising at least six times in the
next 2 weeks is a moral issue? (5-point scale, definitely nodefinitely yes). Behaviour
at 2-week follow-up was measured by a single item: How many times have you
engaged in exercise over the last 2 weeks?
Results
Intention group classification was computed in the same manner as for the main
analyses. Thirty-seven percent of the sample (N 20) were in the morally aligned
intention group. To verify the appropriateness of this characterization, regressions of
intention on moral norm and attitude were conducted separately for the two groups.
Consistent with expectations, attitude was a very good predictor of intention (b 0:77,
p , :001) but moral norm was not (b 0:14, ns) among the attitudinally aligned
intention group (R :85), whereas moral norm was a better predictor of intention
(b 0:61, p , :001) than was attitude (b 0:33, p , :06) among the morally aligned
intention group (R :81). These findings suggest that the present classification of
participants into attitudinally versus morally aligned intention groups is appropriate.
The next set of analyses examined intention group as a moderator of the intention
behaviour relationship. Behaviour was regressed on intentions, group, and their
interaction in a three-step hierarchy. Findings indicated that intentions were a significant
predictor of behaviour on the first step (b 0:41, p , :02). However, neither group nor
the interaction term enhanced the prediction of behaviour at steps two and three.
The interaction between intention and group did not capture a significant increment in
the variance (DF 1:83, ns) nor significantly predicted behaviour (b 0:29, p . :18)
in the final equation. These findings are consistent with those obtained for physical
activity in the main analyses group does not moderate the intentionbehaviour
relationship among the sample as a whole.
The main hypothesis being tested here is that moderation by intention group will
only occur when participants perceive the behaviour as a moral issue. To test this
hypothesis, we followed the procedure recommended by Baron and Kenny (1986), and
tested the significance of the interaction (between group and behavioural intention) at
each level of the proposed moderator (perceived morality of the behaviour). That is, we
divided participants above and below the median according to their perceptions of
exercise as a moral issue (N 18 and 38, respectively), and then tested the significance
of the interaction term separately for the two groups.
As predicted, the intention by group interaction was reliably associated with
behaviour when participants perceived the behaviour as a moral issue (b 0:67,
p , :004) but not when the behaviour was perceived otherwise (b 0:22, p . :20) and
this difference was significant (Z 1:90, p :028, one-tailed). Thus, moderation of the
intentionbehaviour relationship by group depends upon whether participants
perceive the focal behaviour as a moral issue. To corroborate this analysis, we
computed simple slopes for the regression of behaviour on intention for the morally
aligned intention group who either perceived the behaviour in moral terms or did not
perceive the behaviour in moral terms. Findings indicated that intentions were not a

507
significant predictor of exercise behaviour in the morally aligned intention group among
participants who perceived exercise as having little to do with personal morality
(b 0:40, p :17). However, when participants in the morally aligned intention group
perceived the behaviour as a moral issue, then intentions were a highly significant
predictor of behaviour (b 0:92, p , :003). In sum, intention group is an important
determinant of consistency between peoples intentions and their behaviour, provided
people perceive performance of the focal behaviour in moral terms.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
The present research provides the first demonstration that moral norms have an
important impact upon whether people enact their intentions. We reasoned that
peoples sense of personal obligation to perform a behaviour would influence the
motivational force of intention in terms of the likelihood that decision would be
translated into action. Findings from studies of three different behaviours among
different samples over different time intervals supported this prediction. Participants
whose intentions were predominantly based on moral norm were more likely to
perform respective health behaviours than were participants whose intentions were
predominantly based on attitude.
However, we also obtained an unexpected finding, namely, that intention group
(morally aligned intentions versus attitudinally aligned intentions) did not moderate the
intentionbehaviour relationship in the case of exercise. To understand this finding, we
conducted an additional study that assessed perceived morality of the behaviour as a
factor influencing our moderator hypothesis. Findings support the view that intention
group moderates intentionbehaviour consistency but only when people construe the
behaviour in moral terms. Thus, the present research indicates that intention group is
especially likely to influence decision enactment among people in the subsample who
view a focal behaviour as having moral relevance.
It is worth noting that this finding is congruent with Schwartzs (1977) analysis of
circumstances when norms are likely to especially influence behaviour: Feelings of
moral obligation are generated in particular situations by the activation of the
individuals cognitive structure of norms and values (p. 277). Our findings showed that
physical activity is a context in which moral normative considerations feelings are not
activated for most people, and consequently moderation of the intentionbehaviour
relationship was not obtained among the sample as a whole. Of course, the present
research does not indicate why some participants view exercise in moral terms whereas
others do not. One possibility that could be derived from Verplanken and Hollands
(2002) research on values is that behaviours are most likely to be construed in moral
terms when the respective actions both activate central values and direct attention
towards the self. Thus, an important avenue for future studies will be to establish a more
fine-grained analysis of the contexts where moral norms are activated. In addition it
would be valuable to examine what factors explain individual differences in the
perceived morality of behaviours in order to understand when moral norm is most likely
to influence intentionbehaviour relationships.
The findings also suggest questions of theoretical interest for both the TRA/TPB and
SDT. First, the TRA/TPB should more clearly acknowledge the importance of
internalized norms and self-expectations in the development of ones motivation to
adopt a given behaviour. In the same way that Sheeran et al. (1999) showed that people
differ in the tendency to have attitudinally aligned intentions versus (subjective)

508
Gaston Godin et al.
normatively aligned intentions, the present results indicate that intentions can also be
aligned with moral norms. Importantly, morally aligned intentions had greater impact on
behaviour than did attitudinally aligned intentions. Thus, the present research indicates
that researchers should be careful to distinguish between morally aligned intentions and
normatively aligned intentions in making comparisons with attitudinally aligned
intention groups.
Second, with respect to the SDT, the findings suggest some interesting possible
implications. For instance, it can be argued that moral norm to act may reflect either an
external pressure (that is, a controlled motivation to act) or reflect the core self (that is,
an autonomous motivation to act). The latter interpretation would make the present
findings consistent with SDT, particularly if morally aligned intentions are considered a
more autonomous source of motivation than attitudinally aligned intentions. However,
there is also a good basis to the former interpretation of moral norms or obligations.
The felt obligation to act can be viewed as the expression of external sources of
motivation that take the form of anticipated regret or feelings of guilt about not taking
action (Parker et al., 1995) and/or fear of punishment from religious authorities or a
vengeful deity. If this was the case, the present findings would suggest that contrary to
one of the basic SDT assumptions, an autonomous source of motivation (as reflected by
attitude) does not better predict behaviour than a controlled source of motivation
(i.e. morally aligned intentions that are externally motivated). It is not the intent of this
paper to claim the superiority of one interpretation above the other, but this tenet of the
SDT might be well worth pursuing in future research.
The present findings also have practical implications for interventions. One practical
consequence is that interventions to promote behavioural changes should consider
morally aligned intentions as well as attitudinally aligned intentions, particularly when
there is reason to believe that either the behaviour under study has moral implications
(e.g. giving blood, driving under the influence of alcohol, consent to organ donation) or
the studied population might attribute moral value to a given action (e.g. not smoking
among pregnant women, adherence to medication among HIV patients, exercising
among coronary heart disease individuals). Consequently, if the population of concern
contains a large percentage of individuals whose intentions are morally aligned,
interventions should focus on increasing the strength of moral norm, that is, the felt
obligation to act. For these morally aligned intention individuals, the predictive validity
of their intentions should increase as moral norms become stronger. In contrast, if the
populations intentions are not morally aligned, or if the behaviours of interest are not
primarily determined by moral norm, then an intervention could try to make people
focus more on moral considerations in forming their intentions, for example, by making
people aware of others needs (e.g. people suffering from haemophilia) and increasing
the perception that adoption of the target behaviour could relieve others needs
(e.g. blood donation). However, before adopting this approach, one must be aware that
feelings of moral obligation can be neutralized prior to overt action by defences against
the relevance or appropriateness of the obligation (Schwartz, 1977, p. 277). Indeed,
people can inhibit feelings of moral obligation by attributing different types of nonmoral costs to an action, or by concluding that adoption of the target behaviour is futile
when faced with overwhelming need and the perception that the situation is beyond
hope.
It is important to mention a number of limitations to our research. One limitation
concerns the limited number of studies that were used for the present analysis.
Obviously, more studies are needed to confirm the present observations. However,

509
we see no reason not to expect the present findings to generalized beyond the health
behaviours considered here. A second limitation of the research is the dependence on
self-report measures of behaviour. A third limitation to our analyses is the correlational
nature of our analyses. Experimental studies that manipulate whether or not moral
norms are activated would provide a better test of the importance of this construct in
the formation of intention and the prediction of behaviour. In sum, the present research
has acknowledged shortcomings that should be addressed in future studies.
Nonetheless, despite the above limitations, the present research has provided strong
evidence that, for morally relevant behaviours, the intentionbehaviour gap (Sheeran,
2002) can be explained, at least in part, by the basis of intention formation. That is,
individuals whose intentions are based on moral norms are more likely to enact
intended behaviour than are individuals whose intentions are based on attitude. Thus,
the extent to which the persons behavioural decision is derived from perceptions of
moral correctness of the act is an important moderator of the intentionbehaviour
relationship.
References
Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1982). Affective and semantic
components in political person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42,
619630.
Abraham, C., Sheeran, P., & Johnson, M. (1998). From health beliefs to self-regulation: Theoretical
advances in the psychology of action control. Psychology and Health, 13, 569592.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50, 179211.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic
review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471499.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. L. (1989). Principles of biomedical ethics (3rd ed.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Blondeau, D., Godin, G., Gagne, C., & Martineau, I. (2004). Do ethical principles explain
moral norm? A test for consent to organ donation. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral
Research, 9, 230243.
Boissoneault, E., & Godin, G. (1990). The prediction of intention to smoke cigarettes only in
designated work site areas. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 32, 621624.
Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct
components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 11911205.
Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1989). Affect versus evaluation in the structure of attitudes.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 253271.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and
avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 14301464.
Conner, M., & Sparks, P. (1996). The theory of planned behaviour and health behaviours.
In M. Conner & P. Norman (Eds.), Predicting health behaviour: Research and practice with
social cognition models (pp. 121162). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Crites, S. L., Fabrigar, L. R., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Measuring the affective and cognitive properties
of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 20, 619634.

510
Gaston Godin et al.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human needs and selfdetermination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227268.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to
theory of research. Dons Mills: Addison-Wesley.
Godin, G., Gagnon, H., & Lambert, L. D. (2003). Factors associated with maintenance of regular
condom use among single heterosexual adults: A longitudinal study. Canadian Journal of
Public Health, 94, 287291.
Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to healthrelated behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11, 8798.
Godin, G., Maticka-Tyndale, E., Adrien, A., Mason-Singer, S., Willms, D., Cappon, P., Bradet, R., &
LeMay, G. (1996). Cross-cultural testing of three social cognitive theories: An application to
condom use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 15561586.
Harland, P., Staats, H., & Wilke, H. A. (1999). Explaining proenvironmental intention and behavior
by personal norms and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
29, 25052528.
Legare, F., Godin, G., Dodin, S., Turcot, L., & Laperrie`re, L. (2003). From intention to adoption of
hormone replacement therapy: A longitudinal cohort. Psychology and Health, 18, 351371.
Manstead, A. S. R. (2000). The role of moral norm in the attitude-behavior relation. In D. J. Terry &
M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Attitudes, behavior, and social context (pp. 1130). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Parker, D., Manstead, A., & Stradling, S. (1995). Extending the theory of planned behaviour:
The role of personal norm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 127137.
Ryan, R., Sheldon, K. M., Kasser, T., & Deci, E. L. (1996). All goals are not created equal:
An organismic perspective on the nature of goals and their regulation. In P. M. Gollwitzer &
J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action (pp. 726). New York: Guilford Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221279). New York: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H., & Howard, J. A. (1984). Internalized values as moderators of altruism. In E. Staub,
D. Bar-Tal, J. Karylowski, & J. Reykowski (Eds.), Development and maintenance of prosocial
behavior (pp. 229255). New York: Plenum.
Sheeran, P. (2002). Intentionbehavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. In W. Strobe
& M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 130). Chichester:
Wiley.
Sheeran, P., & Abraham, C. (2003). Mediator of moderators: Temporal stability of intention and the
intentionbehavior relationship. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 205215.
Sheeran, P., Norman, P., & Orbell, S. (1999). Evidence that intentions based on attitudes better
predict behaviour than intentions based on subjective norms. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 29, 403406.
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous
and controlled reasons for goals as predictors of effort and attainment. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 23, 915927.
Trafimow, D., & Finlay, K. (1996). The importance of subjective norms for a minority of people.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 820828.
Triandis, H. C. (1980). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. In M. M. Page (Ed.), Nebraska
symposium on motivation. Beliefs, attitudes and values ( Vol. 1, pp. 195259). Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska.
Vermette, L., & Godin, G. (1996). Nurses intentions to provide home care: The impact of AIDS
and homosexuality. AIDS Care, 8, 479488.
Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. W. (2002). Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and selfcentrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
82, 434447.
Received 13 February 2004; revised version received 8 September 2004


Attitude
Moral norm
Intention
Attitude
Moral norm
Intention
Attitude
How would it be for you if you smoked

this term: : :: harmful/beneficial
I personally think that smoking
is: : :: wrong/right
I plan not to smoke this term
I do not want to smoke this term
I will try not to smoke this term
511
5-point scales (22, harmful; 2, beneficial)

5-point scales (22, wrong; 2, right)
5-point scale (2 2, strongly disagree;
2 strongly agree)
For me to refrain from driving

10 mph or more above the speed
limit on a motorway during the day
would be: : : usefuluseless,
beneficialharmful, positivenegative,
badgood
It would be quite wrong for me to drive
10 mph or more above the posted speed
limit on an urban road during the day
I intend to refrain from driving 10 mph or
more above the posted speed limit on a
motorway during the day
I want to refrain from driving 10 mph or
I plan to refrain from driving 10 mph or
For me, adhering to UP for each

IV injection during the next 3 months
would be: : :: unpleasant/pleasant,
unsatisfying/satisfying, punishing/rewarding,
useless/useful
Moral norm It is within my principles to adhere to UPs for
each IV injection during the next 3 months
I would feel guilty about not adhering to UP
7-point scales (23 useless,

3 useful; 23 harmful,
3 beneficial; 23 negative,
3 positive; 2 3 bad, 3 good)
7-point scale (23, strongly

disagree; 3 strongly agree)
7-point scale (23, definitely do not;
3 definitely do)
7-point scale (23, strongly disagree;
3 strongly agree)
7-point scale (23, definitely do not;
3 definitely do)
7-point scales (2 3, very unlikely;

3, very likely).
7-point scale (2 3, strongly disagree;

3 strongly agree)
Appendix: List of items used to measure attitude and moral norm among
the studies
(1) Smoking (Behaviour): School pupils were asked about smoking behaviour in the
previous term (3 months).
(2) Driving (Behaviour): Members of the general population used a driving simulator
approximately 1 week after completing measures of attitude, moral norm and
intentions. Proportion of time spent driving 10 mph or more over the speed limit on the
motorway segment of the simulation was recorded by the simulator.
(3) Universal precautions (Behaviour): Nurses were asked to estimate how many
times they had adhered to universal precautions (UP) out of the last 10 intravenous
injections (IV) performed in the past 3 months.

512
Gaston Godin et al.
Intention
Moral norm
Intention
Attitude
Moral norm
Intention
I believe it is morally unacceptable not to

adhere to UP
I have the intention of adhering to UPs
I will adhere to UPs
If I can, I will adhere to UPs
My chances that I will adhere to UPs
All 7-point scales. First 3 scales:

unlikely/likely and the 4th scale: low/high
I would feel guilty about not doing

30 minutes of moderate intensity
physical activity on at least 5 days a week
Not doing at least 30 minutes
of moderate intensity physical activity on
at least 5 days a week would go against
my principles
I feel obliged to do 30 minutes of moderate
intensity physical activity on at least
5 days a week
I intend to do 30 minutes of moderate
5 days a week
I want to do 30 minutes of moderate
5 days a week.
I expect to do 30 minutes of moderate
5 days a week
In your opinion, to participate regularly

in one or more physical activities
during your free time within the next
6 month would be: : : Agreeable/
disagreeable, interesting/dull,
stimulating/boring, pleasant/unpleasant?
I feel morally obliged to participate regularly
in one or more physical activities during
my free time within the next 6 months?
What is the probability out of 100 that you
will participate regularly in one or more
physical activities during your free time
within the next 6 months?
7-point scale (2 3, strongly

7-point scale (2 3, definitely

do not; 3 definitely do)
7-point scale (2 3, strongly
7-point scale (2 3, extremely
unlikely; 3 extremely likely)
7-point scales (2 3, very unlikely;

3, very likely)
7-point scales (2 3, strongly disagree;

3, strongly disagree)
A 10-point scale (010%, 1120%, etc.)
(4) Physical activity (Behaviour): University employees reported the number of times
per week they engaged in moderate intensity physical activity for at least 30 minutes in
the last 8 weeks.
(5) Physical activity (Behaviour): Adults reported the number of times they
participated in one or more physical activities for 2030 minutes per session during
their free time during the past 6 months.

Bridging The Intention-Behaviour

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Bridging The Intention-Behaviour

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

See

Bridging the intention-behavior gap: The role

275 PUBLICATIONS 8,465 CITATIONS

261 PUBLICATIONS 14,751 CITATIONS

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

Available from: Paschal Sheeran

Copyright The British Psychological Society

British Journal of Social Psychology (2005), 44, 497512