The Theory of Reasoned Action: Understanding Human Behavior

The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), a groundbreaking psychological model introduced by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen in 1980, delves into the intricate dynamics of human behavior. By focusing on individuals’ attitudes, beliefs, and subjective norms, this theory provides profound insights into the decision-making process. At its essence, TRA posits that people are rational actors who carefully weigh the consequences of their actions before arriving at a choice. This framework sheds light on how our internal perceptions shape our external behaviors.

By highlighting the interplay between personal beliefs and social influences, the TRA emphasizes that understanding human behavior requires more than just examining individual motives. It suggests that individuals navigate their choices through a complex web of cognitive evaluations and societal expectations. As we explore this model further, we can unravel how these intertwined factors guide us in making decisions that ultimately define our actions and interactions within society.

Brief Overview of the Theory of Reasonable Action

According to this theory, the motivating element for behavior is behavioral intention. Behavioral intention is formed from an individual’s attitude toward the behavior (one’s evaluation of the behavior) and the subjective norm (one’s evaluation of what others think one should do). Either of these two factors may dominate in any particular situation (Trafimow, 2009).

The weight distribution of attitude and subjective norm is determined by both the situational context and personal characteristics. Accordingly, some people are more prone to give more weight to one factor or the other. Moreover, some situations may influence the weight distribution, for instance while marching with an angry crowd, one is less likely to express autonomy over subjective norm.

Key Elements of the Theory

• Attitude: According to the TRA, an individual’s behavior is influenced by their attitude toward that behavior. This attitude is shaped by the individual’s beliefs about the outcomes of the behavior and the subjective value they place on these outcomes. For example, if someone believes that regular exercise leads to good health and places a high value on being healthy, they are more likely to engage in regular physical activity.
• Subjective Norms: In addition to attitude, the TRA emphasizes the role of subjective norms in determining behavior. Subjective norms refer to the perceived social pressure to perform or not perform a particular behavior. This accounts for the influence of social factors, such as the expectations of family, friends, or society at large. For instance, if an individual perceives that their peers highly value recycling, they are more likely to engage in recycling behavior to meet the perceived social expectations.
• Behavioral Intention: The TRA posits that an individual’s behavioral intention is the key determinant of their actual behavior. This intention is influenced by their attitude toward the behavior and their subjective norms. The stronger the intention to perform a behavior, the more likely the individual is to actually engage in that behavior.

Attitude

Ajzen defines attitude as, “A disposition to respond favorably or unfavorably to an object, person, institution, or event” (Ajzen, 1988). Perhaps, this is similar to Antonio Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis. Antonio suggest that experience leaves somatic markers that arise in reaction to specific situations and stimuli, creating an emotional bodily responses that influences decision making (Damasio, 2005).

David Trafimow explains that attitude is formed by behavioral beliefs about the likelihood of various consequences and an evaluation of the weight of those consequences (good and bad) if they were to occur (Trafimow, 2009). Attitude reflects an individual’s perceptions of, and information about, the attitude object (Ajzen, 1988).

The object elicits an automatic affective response. This response is an expression of attitude towards the object.

See Somatic Marker for more on this topic

Subjective Norm

Subjective norms play a pivotal role in shaping individual decision-making, as articulated by Trafimow (2009), who emphasizes the profound influence that social circles exert on personal choices. This concept highlights how individuals often consider the opinions and expectations of those they regard as significant—such as family, friends, and colleagues—when determining their actions. The weight of these subjective norms can significantly sway one’s intentions to engage in specific behaviors, suggesting that our decisions are not made in isolation but are rather embedded within a broader social context. For instance, if an individual perceives that their peers expect them to adopt healthier lifestyle choices or participate in community activities, this perceived pressure may enhance their motivation to comply with those expectations.

Moreover, Ajzen reinforces this idea by stating that “people intend to perform a behavior when they evaluate it positively and when they believe that important others think they should perform it” (Ajzen, 1988). This observation underscores the dual influence of personal attitudes and social validation on behavioral intention. When individuals have a favorable view of a particular action coupled with strong beliefs about supportive social norms, their likelihood of following through increases significantly. In essence, subjective norms serve not only as external motivators but also shape our internal evaluations and intentions—demonstrating how intertwined our personal beliefs are with societal influences in guiding our behaviors.

Inhibitive Responses

Behavioral responses are typically perceived as actions we take; however, a significant aspect of human behavior involves the decision to refrain from certain activities. This inhibition is not merely a passive choice but is influenced by both individual attitudes and subjective norms. Often, individuals find themselves navigating complex social landscapes where the desire to conform to societal expectations can lead them to suppress behaviors that they might otherwise engage in. This dynamic illustrates that our decisions are shaped not only by what we choose to do but also by what we consciously decide not to pursue.

Ajzen (1988) highlights this phenomenon by stating, “People who believe that most referents with whom they are motivated to comply would disapprove of their performing the behavior will have a subjective norm that puts pressure on them to avoid performing the behavior.” This quote encapsulates how social pressures can create inhibitive norms, compelling individuals to abstain from specific actions due to their perceptions of others’ expectations. As such, understanding the role of these subjective norms provides valuable insight into why people may resist engaging in particular behaviors—even when they hold positive attitudes towards those actions—thereby illustrating the intricate interplay between personal beliefs and external influences in shaping our choices.

History of Theory of Reasoned Action

The Theory of Reasoned Action was first presented by psychologists Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen in 1975 (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Fishbein and Ajzen developed this theory as an improvement to the information integration theory and has since become a foundational model in understanding human behavior, particularly in predicting and explaining health behaviors.

Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior

The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) are both psychological models that aim to explain human behavior. The main difference between them is the addition of perceived behavioral control in TPB.

TRA, developed by Fishbein and Ajzen in 1975, predicts behavioral intentions based on two factors:

1. Attitudes towards the behavior.
2. Subjective norms, which are the perceived expectations of others.

TPB extends TRA by adding a third factor:

3. Perceived behavioral control, which refers to the individual’s perception of their ability to perform the behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

This addition in TPB acknowledges that even if someone has a positive attitude and perceives supportive social norms, if they don’t believe they can control the behavior (due to skills, resources, or other constraints), they may not form a strong intention to perform it. Researchers consider TPB more comprehensive as it accounts for situations where people may be willing to act but feel unable to do so.

See Theory of Planned Behavior for more on this theory

Applications and Criticisms

The TRA has been employed in various fields, including health psychology, consumer behavior, and organizational psychology, to understand and predict human behavior. It has provided valuable insights into the factors influencing behaviors such as smoking, exercise, and adoption of new technologies.

However, the theory has also faced criticism for its emphasis on rational decision-making and its potential oversimplification of human behavior. Critics argue that it may not fully account for emotional and impulsive factors that can significantly impact behavior. Moreover, many critics suggest that the theory of reasoned action is not falsifiable and therefore not a good theory (Trafimow, 2009).

Example of Theory of Reasoned Behavior

The Decision to Start a Fitness Regimen

Meet Emily, a software developer who spends most of her day sitting in front of a computer. Lately, she’s been feeling sluggish and notices her energy levels are not what they used to be. She believes that starting a regular fitness regimen could improve her health and vitality.

In this scenario, Emily’s decision-making process aligns with the Theory of Reasoned Action. Her beliefs and attitudes towards exercise, combined with the influence of subjective norms, lead to a clear intention and subsequent behavior change. This theory helps us understand how various factors can predict and influence an individual’s actions in a given context.

Associated Concepts

• Approach-Avoidance Theory: This theory delves into the conflict of desiring and fearing the same goal. It explores the tension between attraction and avoidance, impacting decision-making.
• Behavioral Activation System (BAS): This is a neurological network, regulates goal-directed behavior, motivation, and reward processing. It interacts independently with the Behavioral Inhibition System, affecting personality and psychopathology.
• Achievement-Goal Theory: This motivation theory provides a psychological framework that aims to understand how individuals’ beliefs about competence and the reasons behind their actions influence their behavior and motivation.
• Regulatory Focus Theory: This theory proposes that individuals differ in basic priorities for regulating emotion. He suggests that individuals are either promotion focused with an emphasis on growth, or prevention focused with an emphasis on safety and security.
• Motivational Orientation: This refers to an individual’s underlying motivation to accomplish tasks, goals, or activities. It reflects the underlying motivations that drive a person’s behavior and influence their choices.
• Protective Motivation Theory: This theory provides a conceptual framework to understand people’s motivation to undertake protective behaviors. PMT posits that people’s motivation to engage in protective behaviors is influenced by four main factors: threat appraisal, coping appraisal, fear control, and danger control.
• Health Belief Model: This model suggests that a person’s health-related behavior depends on their perception of the severity of a potential illness, their susceptibility to that illness, the benefits of taking a preventive action, and the barriers to taking that action.

A Few Words by Psychology Fanatic

In summary, the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) serves as a powerful lens through which we can explore and understand the complexities of human behavior. By examining how attitudes intertwine with subjective norms, we unlock deeper insights into what drives our actions. This understanding is not just academic; it equips psychologists and researchers with essential tools to craft more effective interventions that can inspire lasting positive change in individuals’ lives.

Moreover, embracing the principles of TRA empowers us all to make more informed choices that align with our values and societal expectations. As we delve into this framework, we begin to recognize the potential for fostering healthier habits and cultivating socially responsible behaviors within our communities. Ultimately, by applying these insights in everyday life, we can each contribute to creating a more supportive environment where thoughtful decision-making flourishes—leading us toward a brighter future together.

Last Update: August 14, 2025

References:

Ajzen, Icek (1988). ‎Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. Open University Press.
(Return to Article)

Damasio, Antonio (2005). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Penguin Books; Reprint edition.
(Return to Article)

Fishbein, Martin; Ajzen, Icek (1975/2009). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. ‎Psychology Press; 1st edition.
(Return to Article)

Trafimow, David (2009). The Theory of reasoned Action: A Case Study of Falsification in Psychology. Theory & Psychology VOL. 19 (4): 501-518. DOI: 10.177/0959354309336319
(Return to Article)