Sorry for the delay
A key reference is:
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior:
An Introduction to Theory and Research: Addison-Wesley.
This is also covered, I believe but have not checked in, introductory SOCIAL
psychology texts
Here is some more recent work form the SEMNET list. Note that a lot comes
from marketing, where the concern is indeed whether people DO what they say.
Albarcín, D., Fishbein, M., Johnson, B.T. & Muellerleile, P.A. (2001).
Theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour as models of condom use: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 142-161.
Brown, K. M. (1999). Theory of reasoned action/Theory of planned behaviour.
Retrieved March 5, 2007 from http://hsc.usf.edu/~kmbrown/TRA_TPB.htm.
Fishbein, M. (1993): Introduction. (eds): D. J. Terry; C. Gallois and M.
McCamish: The Theory of Reasoned Action: Its Application to Aids-Preventive
Behaviour. Oxford. Pergamon Press: xv-xxv.
Morwitz, Vicki G. and David C. Schmittlein (1998), "Testing New Direct
Marketing Offerings: The Interplay of Management Judgement and Statistical
Models," Management Science, 44 (May), 610-628.
Chandon, Pierre, Vicki G. Morwitz, and Werner J. Reinartz (2004), "TheShort-
and Long-Term Effects of Measuring Intent to Repurchase," Journal of
Consumer Research, 31 (December), 566-572.
Bagozzi, Richard P. (1982), "A Field Investigation of Causal Relations
Among Cognitions, Affect, Intentions and Behavior," Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 562-584
Best
Diana
Professor Diana Kornbrot
University of Hertfordshire
College Lane, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://web.mac.com/kornbrot/iWeb/KornbrotHome.html
Blended Learning Unit
voice: +44[0]170 728 1315 fax: +44[0] 170 728 1320
Psychology
voice: +44[0]170 728 4626 fax: +44[0]170 728 5073
Kornbrot
19 Elmhurst Avenue
London N2 0LT, UK
voice: +44[0208 883 3657 fax: +44[0] 0208 444 2081
|-----Original Message-----
|From: John Barker [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
|Sent: 16 March 2007 15:57
|To: kornbrot
|Subject: Re: What is the explanation for the difference/
|Importance: High
|
|Dear Professor Kornbrot,
|
|As a month has now gone by, could you please let me have even
|just a couple of key references? - I would be very grateful.
|
|Yours sincerely,
|
|John Barker
|
|----- Original Message -----
|From: "kornbrot" <[log in to unmask]>
|To: "'John Barker'" <[log in to unmask]>
|Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:21 PM
|Subject: RE: What is the explanation for the difference/
|
|
|> You are all correct, that I should have cited reference, apologies
|> these are dispersed in the psychological literature I will
|send list soon
|> diana
|>
|> Professor Diana Kornbrot
|> University of Hertfordshire
|> College Lane, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK
|> Email: [log in to unmask]
|> Web: http://web.mac.com/kornbrot/iWeb/KornbrotHome.html
|> Blended Learning Unit
|> voice: +44[0]170 728 1315 fax: +44[0] 170 728 1320
|> Psychology
|> voice: +44[0]170 728 4626 fax: +44[0]170 728 5073
|>
|> Kornbrot
|> 19 Elmhurst Avenue
|> London N2 0LT, UK
|> voice: +44[0208 883 3657 fax: +44[0] 0208 444 2081
|>
|>
|>
|> |-----Original Message-----
|> |From: email list for Radical Statistics
|> |[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Barker
|> |Sent: 13 February 2007 20:16
|> |To: [log in to unmask]
|> |Subject: Re: What is the explanation for the difference/
|> |
|> |Many thanks for this, and also the contribution of Jeff Evans.
|> |Before I explore either, I just put my own thoughts down.
|> |
|> |1)The claim by Kornbrot was given without any references. This
|> |is not the scientific way.
|> |By all means make claims, narrow or wide, but it surely is a
|> |responsibility of the person making them to provide evidence.
|> |
|> |2) Kornbrot's claim was very wide:
|> |"Psychological research has consistently show that the
|> |correlation between attitudes expressed in questionniares is,
|> |at best, very loosely correlated with behaviour".
|> |
|> |Now Polls/questionnaires on voter intentions, taken some time
|> |before elections, even fairly close to the date, may not
|> |always give a good indication of outcome, indeed I can vaguely
|> |remember occasions when this was indeed true, and of course
|> |political party canvassing is carried out under the assumption
|> |that poll results may not necessarily translate into actual
|> |voting . Further, such polls I would think make up a
|> |significant proportion of the total number of polls made. It
|> |might therefore be true, taking all polls, that the
|> |correlation is not very good.
|> |
|> |Whether that be so or not, clearly there are different
|> |categories of polls, of which voter intention is one example.
|> |And intuitively, one might expect a good correlation with
|> |actual outcome in some types of polls, and a less good or even
|> |poor correlation with other types of poll.
|> |
|> |So I am not expecting to find some universal 'psychological
|> |failing' that ensures that generally speaking, peoples
|> |intentions do not translate into the corresponding action. But
|> |I'll try to keep an open mind.
|> |
|> |That being said, I will tomorrow follow up on your link and
|> |the reference kindly given by Jeff Evans.
|> |
|> |Many thanks,
|> |
|> |John Barker
|> |
|> |I'll follow up if the serious internet connection problems
|> |besetting me at the moment allow.
|> |
|> |----- Original Message -----
|> |From: "Culbert, John" <[log in to unmask]>
|> |To: <[log in to unmask]>
|> |Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 8:24 PM
|> |Subject: Re: What is the explanation for the difference/
|> |
|> |
|> |John Barker asked:
|> |
|> |> Now some members of Radstats are no doubt thoroughly
|> |familiar with the
|> |evidence on the value of questionnaires. However, some may not
|> |be, and I
|> |certainly am not.
|> |
|> |>So could Professor Kornbrot kindly give me and others a
|reference or
|> |two so
|> |we can explore this issue?
|> |And of course in any other members can supply evidence,
|that would be
|> |useful.
|> |
|> |In the absence of Prof Kornbrot clarifying what she had in mind - I
|> |imagine this is an allusion to the view about the possible
|> |inconsistency
|> |of attitude and behaviour that goes back to the classic
|(1934) work of
|> |La Piere re attitudes and behaviour expressed by hoteliers
|to a Chinese
|> |couple.
|> |Not being well versed in the literature on this a Google
|search led me
|> |to the following JSTOR article reviewing the issue -
|> |
|> | Attitudes and Behavior
|> |
|> | Howard Schuman; Michael P. Johnson
|> |
|> | Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 2. (1976), pp. 161-207.
|> |
|> | Stable URL:
|> |http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=03600572%281976%292%3C161%3AAA
|> |B%3E2.0.C
|> |O%3B2-K
|> |
|> |This might be of interest?
|> |
|> |John
|> |
|> |-----Original Message-----
|> |From: email list for Radical Statistics
|> |[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
|> |On Behalf Of John Barker
|> |Sent: 12 February 2007 09:28
|> |To: [log in to unmask]
|> |Subject: What is the explanation for the difference/
|> |
|> |I do not seem to have received any response to my e-mail of 28th
|> |January
|> |(copied below).
|> |I would be very grateful for some response now.
|> |
|> |John Barker
|> |
|> |------
|> |
|> |Dear all,
|> |
|> |This thread started when on 20th December I drew attention to an
|> |apparent
|> |discrepancy in evidence about Indian fertility in the UK.
|> |However, a subsequent posting has shown that there is
|another apparent
|> |disrepancy, this time between two quite clear claims, one
|specific, one
|> |more
|> |general.
|> |In the paper by Penn and Lambert to which I originally referred, we
|> |read:
|> |"It is generally accepted that attitudes towards ideal family size
|> |closely
|> |correlate with actual patterns of fertility".
|> |But Professor Kornbrot, in her posting of 30th December stated:
|> |"Psychological research has consistently show that the correlation
|> |between
|> |attitudes expressed in questionniares is, at best, very loosely
|> |correlated
|> |with behaviour.
|> |
|> |Now Penn and Lambert give references for their claim,
|although I find
|> |that
|> |one reference has the wrong provenance. But Professor
|Kornbrot does not
|> |give
|> |references.
|> |
|> |Now some members of Radstats are no doubt thoroughly
|familiar with the
|> |evidence on the value of questionnaires. However, some may not
|> |be, and I
|> |certainly am not.
|> |
|> |So could Professor Kornbrot kindly give me and others a
|> |reference or two
|> |so
|> |we can explore this issue?
|> |And of course in any other members can supply evidence,
|that would be
|> |useful.
|> |
|> |Yours sincerely,
|> |
|> |John Barker
|> |
|> |******************************************************
|> |Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
|> |message will go only to the sender of this message.
|> |If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
|> |'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
|> |to [log in to unmask]
|> |Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of
|the sender
|> |and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of
|> |views held by
|> |subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about
|> |Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read
|> |current and past
|> |issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site
|> |www.radstats.org.uk.
|> |*******************************************************
|> |
|> |Email has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email
|> |management service - www.altman.co.uk/emailsystems
|> |
|> |******************************************************
|> |Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
|> |message will go only to the sender of this message.
|> |If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
|> |'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
|> |to [log in to unmask]
|> |Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of
|> |the sender and
|> |cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by
|> |subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more
|> |about Radical
|> |Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and
|> |past issues of
|> |our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site
|> |www.radstats.org.uk.
|> |*******************************************************
|> |
|> |******************************************************
|> |Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
|> |message will go only to the sender of this message.
|> |If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
|> |'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
|> |to [log in to unmask]
|> |Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of
|> |the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the
|> |range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics
|> |Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims
|> |and activities and read current and past issues of our
|> |newsletter you are invited to visit our web site
|www.radstats.org.uk.
|> |*******************************************************
|> |
|> |
|>
|>
|
|
|
|
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|