Hellenic Journal of Psychology, Vol. 2 (2005), pp. 143-259 THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR AND HEALTH BEHAVIOURS: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF METHODOLOGICAL AND THEORETICAL ISSUES Bojan Bilic CITY Callege, Thessaloniki, Greece Absirnct: ‘The paper critically analyses the capacity of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) wo predict health behaviours. However, cather than focusing on specilic health behaviours, the paper employs them as a framework for exploring the underlying methodological and theoretical issues that can interfere with both the reliability and the ‘validity of the findings based on the TPB. [tis argued that although the TPB can be regarded ns an effective and parsimonious model for predicting health behaviours, there are serious conceptual problems that call for further research, Also, the final section of the paper ‘ouilines general difficulties in explaining human behaviour that will probably cause the TPB to be incomorated into a linger integrative model of human action, Key words: Health behaviour, Humaa action, Theory of planned behaviour The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) is considered to be one of the most effective and most influential theories for the prediction of different. types of behaviour (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Hagger, Chatzisarantis, & Biddle, 2002; Perugini & Bagoazi, 2001; Rivis & Sheeran, 2003). The first, a more descriptive part of the present paper, provides a description of the TPB along with an explanation of its constituent elements; it particularly focuses on the studies in which the TPE has been applied to Ackrowledgement: The author gratefully acknowledges Dr. Anastasia Efklides, Dr. Angelos Rodafinos, Arse Vucevie, and Jelena Stekic, as well as the bye agonymous reviewers for their comments and constructive eriticisms. ddiress: Bojan Bilic, CITY College, 24 Proxenou Koromila Si., Thessaloniki 346 22, Greece. Tel: +3-2310-325 143, E-mail: b bilie@eity academic. gr244 B. Bilic predict health behaviours. In its second part, the paper, rather than offering an analysis of specific health behaviours, uses them as a framework and draws upon the most recent studies in the area to critically explore the underlying methodological and theoretical issues related to the TPB. Theory of planned behaviour The central objective of the TPB is to predict behaviour and understand its causes (Armitage & Christian, 2003). The TPB represents an extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) which is unable to predict behaviours that are not under complete volitional control (Ajzen, 1991, 2002). The TPB proposes that a person’s intention is the most important as well as the most proximate predictor (immediate antecedent) of a specific behaviour (Ajzen, 2002; Armitage & Conner, 2001). Intentions are defined as a person’s motivation to perform a specific behaviour (Ajzen, 2002). They are determined by three conceptually independent factors, namely: attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. Each of these three major antecedents is further preceded by salient beliefs, that is, salient behavioural beliefs, salient normative beliefs, salient control beliefs (Ajzen, 2002). Salient beliefs refer to those beliefs that are most accessible once a respondent is asked open-ended questions (Lowe, Bennett, Walker, Milne, & Bozionelos, 2003; Sutton et al., 2003). Specifically, attitude, the first determinant of intentions, is defined as a positive or negative evaluation or appraisal of the behaviour in question (Doll & Ajzen, 1992). The second determinant is a social factor known as subjective norm; it represents the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behaviour: The third determinant, which was actually added to the TRA with the aim of addressing those behaviours that are not under complete volitional control, is perceived behavioural control (PBC). It refers to people’s appraisal of their ability to perform the behaviour (Doll & Ajzen, 1992; Sheeran, Conner, & Norman, 2001). According to the TPB model it is expected that the intention to perform a particular behaviour increases as the person’s attitudes and subjective norms become more positive (Ajzen, 2002). The theory also posits that if an intention is held constant, the actual execution of behaviour is more likely with a greater perceived behavioural control (Armitage & Christian, 2003). Meta-analyses of relevant studies show that the TPB can successfully account for a variety of behaviours. More precisely, the three majorThe theory of planned behaviour 245 determinants can predict 39-42% of the variance in intention formation (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Godin & Kok, 1996; Sheeran & Taylor, 1999), whereas intentions and PBC can explain 28-34% of the variance in behaviour (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Godin & Kok, 1996; Trafimow, Sheeran, Conner, & Finlay, 2002). In addition, Elliott, Armitage, and Baughan (2003) as well as Sheeran et al. (2001) claimed that the TPB is a complete theory in the sense that the effects of those variables that are external to the model are actually mediated by its components. However, although it is true that the TPB is generally successful, the TPB variables still cannot account for a large proportion of variance in both intentions and behaviour. Therefore, recent research has been trying to identify a range of moderator variables that could affect the cognition- intention and cognition-behaviour relationships and contribute to the amount of the variance explained (Cooke & Sheeran, 2004). Some of these additional variables that might be incorporated into the current TPB will be more thoroughly explored below. Theory of planned behaviour and health behaviours Health behaviour can be defined as an activity that persons perform to maintain or improve their health irrespective of whether that objective is actually reached (Sarafino, 2002). Previous research indicates that the TPB is generally successful in explaining the intention and frequency of performing different health behaviours (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Blanchard, Courneya, Rodgers, Daub, & Knapik, 2002; Godin & Kok, 1996; Sheeran et al., 2001). Conner, Norman and Bell (2002) found that healthy eating was predicted from intentions, whereas Norman, Conner, and Bell (1999) reported that the perceived behavioural control was an antecedent of the intention to quit smoking. Albarracin, Johnson, Fishbein, and Muellerleile (2001) demonstrated in their meta-analysis of the models of condom use that the TPB is a rather plausible framework for understanding the examined behaviour. They found that intentions were a reliable predictor of future condom use (Albarracin et al., 2001). In contrast to the TPB, PBC did not correlate highly with the actual execution of the intended behaviour (Albarracin et al., 2001). Furthermore, Hagger et al. (2002) reported strong associations between the TPB antecedents and behaviour. Both groups of authors posited that past behaviour represents a significant addition to the model