The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and leisure activity choices

Ajzen, I. & Driver, B. E. (1992). Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Leisure Choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), 207-224.

The TPB argues that we are rational beings who make systematic use of information available to us. We consider the implications of our actions before they decide to engage or not engage in certain behaviours. In this way, you can see that it is the opposite to the intuitive thinking of System 1 in the Dual Systems (Processing) theory. TPB has been used by health programme planners to inform their strategies, and by educationalists to understand the factors behind the decision to stay on at school versus leave early.

Ajzen and Driver (1992) completed the following study into leisure activity choices.

Aim: To investigate how well TPB can explain decision-making and behaviour when it comes to choosing and carrying out five different outdoor leisure activities.

Procedure: Survey method was used. A volunteer sample of 146 US college psychology students completed a questionnaire that measured involvement, moods, attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, and intentions concerning five leisure activities: spending time at the beach, jogging or running, mountain climbing, boating, and biking. One year later 111 of these participants reported how often they had performed these behaviours during the preceding year.

The data were analysed in two ways: an independent samples comparison and repeated measures, with the questionnaire from one year earlier providing the measure of intention and the second providing the measure of behaviour. Independent samples analysis examined variations between different respondents for a given activity, and repeated measures analysis examined how one respondent varied across the 5 activities studied.

Results

The 3 main factors of the TPB - attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control - each contributed to varying degrees, with attitudes the strongest and subjective norms the weakest, to the prediction of intentions. The combination of intentions and perceived behavioural control produced strong multiple correlations with reported behaviour.

Conclusion

Therefore, the results show how the TPB can help understand the factors that determine engagement in leisure activities.

Strengths

• The use of independent samples and repeated measures, and the follow-up survey questionnaire all combined to give a multitude of data about the students’ behaviour.

• The return rates on the questionnaires were good, and the few that did not respond were demographically similar to the many that did; therefore the data should not be affected.

Limitations

• The sample was relatively homogeneous, being US students, and the range of activities limited. The study should be repeated with cross-cultural samples of non-student participants and include other activities.

• Self-report studies are subject to the social desirability effect, and therefore the study may lack internal validity, as there is no way of cross-checking that the participants engaged in the leisure behaviours as reported.

Further considerations

• What factors does the TPB not consider? (Think about the resources needed to engage in leisure activities?)

• What may happen if there is a mis-match between perceived behavioural control and actual control? Can you give a real-life example from your own experience?

• How do all of the considerations above impact the internal validity and reliability of this study?

• To what extent could the results from this study be generalized to other populations and activities?