grad-tpb
用計畫行為理論預測行為意圖，找出介入的槓桿點
中文翻譯
--- name: "grad-tpb" description: "運用計畫行為理論，從態度、主觀規範與知覺行為控制預測行為意圖，並找出介入的槓桿點。當使用者需要預測新行為的採用、診斷為什麼打算做的行為沒有發生、設計行為改變的宣導活動，或問「為什麼人們說了不做」「什麼能預測行為改變」「怎麼提高採用率」時使用。" metadata: category: "WP-29 心理學理論" tags: ["theory-of-planned-behavior", "TPB", "Ajzen", "behavioral-intention", "attitude", "subjective-norms", "perceived-behavioral-control"] --- # 計畫行為理論（TPB） ## 概述 計畫行為理論（Ajzen，1991）延伸了理性行動理論，加入知覺行為控制，作為意圖與行為兩者的預測因子。行為意圖由三個因素決定：對該行為的態度、主觀規範，以及知覺行為控制。意圖是行為的近端預測因子，並受實際控制所調節。 ## 何時使用 - 預測目標族群會不會採用新行為（健康、技術、政策） - 診斷意圖與行為之間的落差，也就是為什麼人們有意願卻沒有付諸行動 - 針對最弱的預測因子，設計說服或行為改變的介入措施 - 從態度、規範與控制三個面向，評估宣導活動的成效 ## 何時不要使用 - 習慣性或自動化的行為，意圖在其中的作用極小 - 行為主要由無意識或情緒的歷程驅動（改用雙歷程模型） - 完全受外部控制的行為（沒有自主意志的成分） ## 假設 ``` 鐵律：意圖「只有」在知覺行為控制高的時候才能預測行為， 沒有實際的控制，光有意圖是不夠的。 自主控制越低，意圖與行為之間的落差就越大。 ``` 關鍵假設： 1. 人們根據手上的資訊做出有道理（不一定理性）的決定 2. 行為信念、規範信念與控制信念，是資訊上的基礎 3. 態度、規範與 PBC 的相對權重，會隨行為與族群而異 ## 方法 ### 步驟 1：明確指出目標行為 用 TACT 框架精確定義行為： - **T**arget（對象）：針對什麼對象或人 - **A**ction（動作）：具體做什麼動作 - **C**ontext（情境）：在什麼情況下 - **T**ime（時間）：在什麼時間範圍內 ### 步驟 2：測量三個預測因子 | 預測因子 | 定義 | 背後的信念 | |-----------|------------|--------------------| | 態度 | 對執行該行為的正面/負面評價 | 行為信念（結果 x 評價） | | 主觀規範 | 感知到要做或不要做的社會壓力 | 規範信念（參照對象 x 順從動機） | | 知覺行為控制（PBC） | 感知到執行該行為的容易或困難 | 控制信念（促進因素/障礙 x 影響力） | ### 步驟 3：評估意圖與意圖-行為落差 - 把行為意圖當作這三個預測因子的函數來測量 - 找出哪個預測因子是最弱的一環（介入的槓桿最高） - 評估實際的行為控制，以判斷落差的風險 ### 步驟 4：設計有針對性的介入措施 - **聚焦態度**：提供新的結果資訊、重新框架後果 - **聚焦規範**：讓社會規範看得見、運用社會認同、拉意見領袖參與 - **聚焦 PBC**：降低障礙、建立自我效能、提供技能訓練 - **執行意圖**：用「如果-就」的規劃，彌合意圖與行為的落差 ## 輸出格式 ```markdown ## TPB 分析：[目標行為] ### 行為界定（TACT） - 對象：[物件/人] - 動作：[具體行為] - 情境：[情況] - 時間：[時間範圍] ### 預測因子評估 | 預測因子 | 分數 | 主要信念 | 介入潛力 | |-----------|-------|-------------|----------------------| | 態度 | [+/-] | [顯著的信念] | [高/中/低] | | 主觀規範 | [+/-] | [主要參照對象] | [高/中/低] | | PBC | [+/-] | [障礙/促進因素] | [高/中/低] | ### 意圖強度：[強/中/弱] ### 意圖-行為落差風險：[高/中/低] ### 建議的介入措施 1. [主要槓桿：最弱的預測因子] 2. [執行意圖策略] 3. [移除障礙或強化促進因素] ``` ## 常見陷阱 - TPB 假設資訊處理是理性的，低估了情緒、習慣與無意識驅動因素的角色 - 主觀規範在統合分析中一直是最弱的預測因子，但這可能反映的是測量問題，而不是它真的無關 - 過去的行為往往比 TPB 的構念解釋更多變異，顯示習慣與自動化的部分被低估了 - PBC 不等於實際控制，人們會系統性地高估或低估自己的控制 - 這套理論最適合經過考慮的一次性決定；對於重複性的行為，應以習慣養成模型來補充 TPB - 跨文化套用時，需要重新校準規範信念，集體主義文化對主觀規範的權重較高 ## 參考資料 - Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. *Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes*, 50(2), 179-211. - Armitage, C. J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. *British Journal of Social Psychology*, 40(4), 471-499. - Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2010). *Predicting and changing behavior: the reasoned action approach*. Psychology Press.
英文原文
--- name: "grad-tpb" description: "Apply the Theory of Planned Behavior to predict behavioral intentions from attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, and identify intervention leverage points. Use this skill when the user needs to predict adoption of a new behavior, diagnose why an intended behavior does not occur, design behavior change campaigns, or when they ask 'why do people not follow through', 'what predicts behavior change', or 'how to increase adoption rates'." metadata: category: "WP-29 心理學理論" tags: ["theory-of-planned-behavior", "TPB", "Ajzen", "behavioral-intention", "attitude", "subjective-norms", "perceived-behavioral-control"] --- # Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) ## Overview The Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) extends the Theory of Reasoned Action by adding perceived behavioral control as a predictor of both intention and behavior. Behavioral intention is determined by three factors: attitude toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Intention is the proximal predictor of behavior, moderated by actual control. ## When to Use - Predicting whether a target population will adopt a new behavior (health, technology, policy) - Diagnosing the intention-behavior gap — why people intend to act but do not follow through - Designing persuasion or behavior change interventions by targeting the weakest predictor - Evaluating campaign effectiveness on attitude, norm, and control dimensions ## When NOT to Use - For habitual or automatic behaviors where intention plays a minimal role - When behavior is primarily driven by unconscious or emotional processes (use dual-process models) - For behaviors under complete external control (no volitional component) ## Assumptions ``` IRON LAW: Intention predicts behavior ONLY when perceived behavioral control is high — without actual control, intention alone is insufficient. The intention-behavior gap widens as volitional control decreases. ``` Key assumptions: 1. People make reasoned (though not necessarily rational) decisions based on available information 2. Behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs are the informational foundations 3. The relative weight of attitude, norms, and PBC varies across behaviors and populations ## Methodology ### Step 1 — Specify the Target Behavior Define the behavior precisely using the TACT framework: - **T**arget: at what object or person - **A**ction: what specific action - **C**ontext: in what situation - **T**ime: in what time frame ### Step 2 — Measure the Three Predictors | Predictor | Definition | Underlying Beliefs | |-----------|------------|--------------------| | Attitude | Favorable/unfavorable evaluation of performing the behavior | Behavioral beliefs (outcomes x evaluations) | | Subjective norms | Perceived social pressure to perform or not perform | Normative beliefs (referents x motivation to comply) | | Perceived behavioral control (PBC) | Perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior | Control beliefs (facilitators/barriers x power) | ### Step 3 — Assess Intention and the Intention-Behavior Gap - Measure behavioral intention as a function of the three predictors - Identify which predictor is the weakest link (highest leverage for intervention) - Evaluate actual behavioral control to assess gap risk ### Step 4 — Design Targeted Intervention - **Attitude-focused**: provide new outcome information, reframe consequences - **Norm-focused**: make social norms visible, use social proof, engage opinion leaders - **PBC-focused**: reduce barriers, build self-efficacy, provide skills training - **Implementation intentions**: bridge the intention-behavior gap with "if-then" planning ## Output Format ```markdown ## TPB Analysis: [Target Behavior] ### Behavior Specification (TACT) - Target: [object/person] - Action: [specific behavior] - Context: [situation] - Time: [time frame] ### Predictor Assessment | Predictor | Score | Key Beliefs | Intervention Potential | |-----------|-------|-------------|----------------------| | Attitude | [+/-] | [salient beliefs] | [High/Medium/Low] | | Subjective norms | [+/-] | [key referents] | [High/Medium/Low] | | PBC | [+/-] | [barriers/facilitators] | [High/Medium/Low] | ### Intention Strength: [Strong/Moderate/Weak] ### Intention-Behavior Gap Risk: [High/Medium/Low] ### Recommended Intervention 1. [Primary lever: weakest predictor] 2. [Implementation intention strategy] 3. [Barrier removal or facilitator enhancement] ``` ## Gotchas - TPB assumes rational information processing; it underestimates the role of emotions, habits, and unconscious drivers - Subjective norms are consistently the weakest predictor in meta-analyses — but this may reflect measurement issues rather than true irrelevance - Past behavior often explains more variance than TPB constructs, suggesting habit and automaticity are under-represented - PBC is not the same as actual control — people systematically overestimate or underestimate their control - The theory works best for deliberate, one-time decisions; for recurring behaviors, habit formation models should supplement TPB - Cross-cultural application requires recalibrating normative beliefs — collectivist cultures weight subjective norms more heavily ## References - Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. *Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes*, 50(2), 179-211. - Armitage, C. J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. *British Journal of Social Psychology*, 40(4), 471-499. - Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2010). *Predicting and changing behavior: the reasoned action approach*. Psychology Press.