国际经济与贸易专业毕业论文外文文献翻译

《国际经济与贸易专业毕业论文外文文献翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《国际经济与贸易专业毕业论文外文文献翻译（7页珍藏版）》请在毕设资料网上搜索。

1、 外文文献翻译 The effects of subjective norms on behaviour in the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analysis Mark Manning* University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA A meta-analysis investigated the effects of perceived injunctive (IN) and descriptive (DN) norms on behaviour (BEH) within t

2、he theory of planned behaviour (TPB) in a sample of 196 studies. Two related correlation matrices (pairwise and listwise) were synthesized from the data and used to model the TPB relations with path analyses.Convergent evidence indicated that the relation between DN and BEH was stronger than the rel

3、ation between IN and BEH. Evidence also suggested a significant direct relation between DN and BEH in the context of TPB. A suppressor effect of IN on DN in its relation with BEH was also noted. Moderator analyses indicated that the DN-BEH relation was stronger when there was more time between measu

4、res of cognition and behaviour, when behaviours were not socially approved, more socially motive and more pleasant: results were mixed in the case of the IN-BEH relation. Results imply that IN and DN are conceptually different constructs. As social beings, normative pressure inevitably affects our b

5、ehaviour. Social nonns influence the way we dress, how we vote, what we buy, and a host of other behavioural decisions.Social psychologists have been exploring the influence of social norms on behaviour for decades. From Aschs and Milgram s conformity- experiments (Asch, 19S6；Milgram, Bickman, & Ber

6、kowitz, 1969) through recent work by Cialdini and colleagues(Cialdini, Reno. & Kallgren, 1990； Reno, Cialdini, & Kallgren, 1993), a substantial body of evidence has demonstrated that people conform to the judgments and behaviours of others. In experiments conducted by Cialdini and his colleagues (Ci

7、aldini et al., 1990； Reno et al., 1993), participants inferred behavioural norms for littering from environmental cues and acted in accord with these norms. The results highlight the fact that perceptions of norms, ratber than actual norms, can affect behaviour. Tlie relation between perceived norms

8、 and bebaviour has received much empirical support (Borsari & Carey, 2003； Campo, Brossard, Fnizer. Marchell, Lewis, & Talbot, 2003； Gomberg, Schneider, & Dejong, 2(K)I； Grube, Morgan, & McGree, 1986； Okun, Karoly, & Lutz,2002； Rimai & Real, 2005). However, one ofthe most influential models for pred

9、icting behaviour, the theorof planned behaviour (TPB； Ajzen, 1991), posits that rather than a direct relation between norm and behaviour, perceived nortns influence behaviour indirectly by way of behavioural intentions. Investigating the perceived norm-behaviour relation in tlie context of this theo

10、ry offers insight not only into the strength of the relation, but also into the extent to which perceived norms may directly influence behaviour counter to theoretical expectations. The present study used meta-analytic path analyses to examine, the relation between two types of perceived norms (inju

11、nctive (IN) and descriptive (DN) norms； described below) and behaviour in the context of the TPB (Ajzen. 1991). The investigation explored the direct effects of IN and DN on behaviour as well as factors that may moderate the effect of subjective norms (SN) on behaviour. The theory of planned behavio

12、ur According to the TPB, the immediate antecedent of behaviour is the intention to pertbrm the behaviour (Figure 1). This behavioural intention is in turn a function of three major determinants: attitude towards the behaviour, perceived SN pertaining to the behaviour, and perceived degree of control

13、 over engaging in and ctJmpleting the behaviour (perceived behavioural control). The formation of attitudes (ATT), SN and perceived behavioural control (PBC) are respectively functions of behavioural beliefs, normative beliefs and control beliefs that a person holds with regards to the behaviour. Co

14、ncerning ATT, the set of accessible beliefs that a person holds about the outcome of a behaviour will determine the evaluation of the behaviour, and thus influence the strength and direction of the ATT towards the behaviour.SN are a function of the normative beliefs that people relevant to the indiv

15、idual are perceived as having towards tbe behaviour coupled with the motivation of the individual to comply with the expected notins of these relevant persons. PBC is a function of the perceived factors that will influence the ability to engage in the behaviour coupled with the perception as to whet

16、her or not these factors will be present. In short, the TPB holds that favourable ATT, SN. And perceptions of control will lead to favourable intentions to engage in a given behaviour. Actual control over engaging in the behaviour is itself an important determinant. To the extent that individuals re

17、alistically appraise the amount of control that they have over the behaviour, the measure of PBC； can serve as a proxy for actual control. Perceived control is expected to have a moderating effect such that intentions will be reflected in actual behaviour to the extent that perceived control is high

18、. The TPB has been applied successfully to a wide range of behaviours accounting for a sizable amount of variance (Armitage & Ckmner, 2001: Bamberg, Ajzen, & Schmidt,2003； Hardeman. Johnston. Johnston, Bonetti, Wareham, & Kinmonth. 2002； Povey.Wellens, & Conner, 2001； Rise. Thompson. & Verplanken, 2

19、003). Regarding the SN construct, the theory holds tbat the effect of SN on behaviour is fully mediated by behavioural intentions. In other words, SN are not expected to have a direct effect (DE)on behaviour but instead influetice behaviours indirectly through their effect on intentions. Descriptive

20、 and injunctive norms Two types of SN can be distinguished. IN are social pressures to engage in a behaviour based on the perception of what other people want you to do whereas DN are social pressures based on the observed or inferred behaviour of others. Tliis distinction has been empirically suppo

21、rted (Cialdini et al .,1990； Deutsch & Gerard. 1955； Grube et al., 1986； Larimer & Neighbours, 2005； Larimer. Turner, Mallett. & Geisner, 2004； Reno et al.,1993； Rhodes & Courneya, 2003； White, Terry, & Hogg, 1994). Within the TPB, the SN construct was originally conceptualized as an injunctive norm

22、 (Ajzen, 1991). More recently, however, Ajzen and Fishbein (200S) have recommended including both types of normative measures in constructing planned behaviour stirveys. DN and IN will therefore be considered separately in the analyses to follow. Subjective norms-behaviour relation In reviewing the

23、SN construct in the planned behaviour context, Conner and Armitage(1998) have noted the lack of predictive power of the IN construct when predicting intention. Due to the paucity- of studies including DN in the planned behaviour context,conclusions regarding DN in this context are sparser. Recently,

24、 several investigators have included DN as predictors of intentions in the planned behaviour model (PBM；Fekadu & Kraft, 2002； MCiMUlan & Conner, 2(K)3； Okun et al. 2002: Sheeran & Orbell,1999b). Rivis and Sbeeran (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of DN in the planned behaviour context. Their analysis

25、, based on 18 studies, demonstrated a significant relationship between DN and intention when controlling for otlier variables in the TPB.In that, these previous studies have investigated the effects of SN on intentions, to date,no planned behaviour mcta-ana lysis has explored the potential for diffe

26、rences in the effects of SN on behaviour in the planned behaviour context. Deutsch and Gerard (1955) have suggested that DN and IN refer to different sources of motivation. Regarding DN, it has been shown that perceptions of behaviours of others lead one to behave in similar manners (Asch,1956；Milgr

27、am et al., 1969). Descriptive normative information ftinctions as a heuristic with regards to behavioural decisions offering cues as to what is appropriate behaviour iii a given situation (Cialdini et al.,1990； van Knippenberg, 2000). IN on the other iiand operate more through the role of motivation

28、 to comply with social sanctions (Ajzen, 1991；Lapinski & Rimal, 2005). To the extent that individuals are motivated to comply with perceived behavioural expectations of relevant referents, they avoid social sanctions. Though several studies have looked at the effect of one or botli types of norms on

29、 particular behaviours, there has yet to be a single meta-analytical review that compares the relationship between the two types of norms and behaviours across a spectrum of behaviours. Consequently, on a general level it is unknown whether one type of norm has a stronger effect on behaviour than th

30、e other it may be hypothesized that DN have a stronger effect on behaviour than IN because DN are activated in the immediate behavioural situation. Furthermore, processing of DN for behavioural decisions may require less cognitive effort relative to the processing of IN, in that DN may rely more on

31、heuristic than systematic information-processing. Perhaps, this advantage contributes to efficient behavioural decision-making in line with descriptive normative information. In fact, researchers have shown that conditions that facilitate the use of heuristic information-processing lead participants

32、 to act more in line with DN (Hertel, Neuhof, Theucr, & Kerr, 2000). It is expected therefore, that DN will have a stronger effect on behaviour relative to IN. Direct effect ofSN on behaviour The TPB posits that the relationship between SN and beliaviour is fully mediated by behavioural intentions (

33、Ajzen, 1991； Ajzen & Fishbein, 1973). However, a number of planned behaviour studies that have included normative constructs as a behavioural predictor have found direct effects of SN on behaviour (Christian & Abrams, 2004 -Study 2； Christian & Armitage, 2002； Christian, Armitage, & Abrams, 2003； Ok

34、un et al.,2002； Trafimow & Finlay, 2001). In most research with the TPB, the effect of the normative component on intentions has received most attention (Armitage & Conner,2001； Rivis & Sheeran, 2003) while the potential for a DE of SN on behaviour has received little empirical or meta-analytical scrutiny.One reason to explore, the potential for a DE may be the hypothetical nature under which most people report cognitions pertaining to behaviour in planned