The present research was supported by the Human-Technology Interaction Group at Eindhoven University of Technology. The authors thank Cees Midden, Anneloes Meijnders, Henk Staats, Rolf Steyer, and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper; Steven Ralston for his language support; Jacqueline Frick, Therese Kohler, and Niklaus Stulz for entering and preparing data; and the volunteers who completed questionnaires.
Contrasting the Theory of Planned Behavior With the Value-Belief-Norm Model in Explaining Conservation Behavior1
Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Volume 35, Issue 10, pages 2150–2170, October 2005
How to Cite
Kaiser, F. G., Hübner, G. and Bogner, F. X. (2005), Contrasting the Theory of Planned Behavior With the Value-Belief-Norm Model in Explaining Conservation Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35: 2150–2170. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02213.x
- Issue published online: 31 JUL 2006
- Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006
In this paper, we contrast the value-belief-norm (VBN) model and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) for the first time regarding their ability to explain conservation behavior. The participants represent a convenience sample of 468 university students. Using survey data and adopting previously established compound measures, structural equation analyses revealed a remarkable explanatory power for both theories: TPB's intention accounted for 95% of people's conservation behavior and VBN's personal norms accounted for 64%. Compared to the VBN model, the TPB covered its concepts more fully in terms of proportions of explained variance. More importantly, the fit statistics revealed that only the TPB depicts the relations among its concepts appropriately, whereas the VBN model does not.