An Analysis of Fishbein and Ajzen's Theory of Reasoned Action

This essay provides a detailed overview of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), developed by Fishbein and Ajzen, which aims to understand and predict human behavior based on attitudes and subjective norms. The theory posits that behavioral intention, a balance between attitudes and anticipated behavior, is influenced by an individual's beliefs and what others expect them to do. The essay explores how marketers can leverage TRA to influence consumer behavior by reinforcing positive attitudes and norms, while also addressing potential limitations of the theory, such as the impact of external control factors and the importance of measuring attitudes and behavior at the same level. It further discusses the role of attitudes, subjective norms, and behavioral intentions in predicting behavior, emphasizing the importance of considering these factors in marketing strategies. The essay concludes by highlighting the need to account for subjective norms and the complexities of behavioral expectations in order to effectively influence consumer behavior.

Running head: Theory of Reasoned Action 1
Theory of Reasoned Action
Student’s Name
Institution

Theory of Reasoned Action 2
Theory of Reasoned Action
Theory of Reasoned Action was created by Fishbein and Ajzen on the basis to make
changes on Information integration theory (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). It tries to focus more on
behavior patterns of an individual(s) towards doing a particular thing. Fishbein and Azjein came
up with two main advancements: To begin with, Reasoned Actions includes another component
during the time spent influence, behavioral expectation instead of endeavor to anticipate states of
mind. Reasoned Action is expressly worried about conduct. Additionally, the theory assumes
that there are circumstances that prevent or reduce attitude influence on a certain conduct. For
instance, if our attitude demands us to go for a nice dining meal with friends, but we have no
time to do that, the lack of time will deter our motive to go and have a nice meal with friends.
Thus, the theory predicts behavioral goal, a bargain between ceasing at the state of mind
forecasts and anticipating conduct. Since it isolates behavioral goal from conduct, Reasoned
Action additionally talks about the components that utmost the impact of expectations of certain
behavior.
Secondly, the theory predicts a particular behavior to be as a result of subjective norms
and attitudes. The attitude most focuses on how strong the belief is where-else the subjective
norms include what other people would expect me to do and the significance to me. Like in the
above example, the subjective norm is that my friends will be demanding me to turn up for the
dining meal and on the other hand is to what extent or how important the dining meal will be of
benefit to me. These norms usually intrigue someone towards adopting a particular kind of
behavior. In marketing, a particular perceived attitude towards a certain product or service will

Theory of Reasoned Action 3
determine whether the customer will buy it or not. The subjective norms will also have a direct
impact on the decision of the buyer.
As a marketer, by the use of the Theory of reasoned action, there are several ways to
convince someone to buy a product or service: First, ensure the belief strength of an attitude is
reinforced to back up the ultimate end convincing aim. Lessen the assessment of a state of mind
(evaluation) that backs the powerful objective. Make fresh attitude with a strength of belief and
assessment that back the convincing objective. Make sure to remind your target group of an
overlooked attitude with a conviction quality and assessment that backs the convincing objective.
For instance, the above scenario of fine meal dining with friends, I suggest that I want to
convince and manipulate one of my friends to turn up for the dining event. If the friend has a
positive attitude towards attending the event by claiming it's going to be fun, I could increase the
strength belief by assuring him it is going to be fun and there will be all sorts of meals. If the
friend has a poor attitude towards attending the meal dinner, I could try my best to lower the
belief strength by showing him the importance of socializing with his fellow friends not just the
dinner meal only.
Moreover, the applicability of such norms(subjective) gives several other choices:
reinforce a regulating conviction that backs the powerful objective, increment the inspiration to
agree to a standard that backs the convincing objective, decrease the belief that restricts the
powerful objective, decrease the inspiration or motive that restricts the powerful persuasive
objective, make another subjective standard that backs the enticing objective and help the target
group of people to remember an overlooked subjective standard that backs the enticing objective.

Theory of Reasoned Action 4
As in the above example, try to show the friend on the effects of failing to go and have
dinner with his fellow friends. Effects such as: lack of company and low self-esteem. It will
strengthen the prior and existing belief of the friend on going to the dinner with his friends.
Alternatively, weakening the belief or the motivation for not going to the dinner or create a fresh
belief like telling him that a popular celebrity will be attending the dinner. Norms and attitudes
influence the behavior intention of a particular individual. It enables marketers to focus on those
factors to come with well-constructed, messages that will persuade the intended customers to
purchase a particular product or service in the market. If a factor either the attitude or norm backs
the convincing aim much more than the other, ensure that factor is more significant compared to
the other.
According to Adjoin (2012), they foresee a new perspective for behavior expectation
influenced by norms and attitudes. The theory states three important factors that determine the
expectations of our behavior. First, there need to be control measures towards certain behavior.
Taking the instance above, lack of money will not allow me to accompany my friends to a fine
dining meal. The general public from numerous points of view is agreeable; we don't get what
we need (what our states of mind lead us to want and what standards recommend we should
need) since we simply don't have control over our condition.
Also, a moment motivation behind why behavioral goal may not yield the normal
conduct is that states of mind (attitude) and conduct must be estimated at a similar level. A few
analysts felt that they found that behavioral plan did not impact conduct since they didn't
quantify aim and conduct accurately. For instance, in one behavioral examination purpose was
estimated by soliciting a gathering of individuals on the off chance that they like snakes.

Theory of Reasoned Action 5
Everybody said no, demonstrating a negative state of mind. At that point, these individuals were
inquired as to whether they might want to touch a snake, and numerous did as such. The analysts
presumed that the individuals who touched the snake were not consistent because they were
occupied with a particular (touching a snake) that was conflicting with their state of (disliking
snakes). On that regard, this conduct (touching a snake) isn't a decent marker of their disposition.
Maybe they were interested to recognize what a creature they didn't care for felt. A more decent
behavioral measure would have been to inquire as to whether they needed a snake for a pet. It
appears to be likely that everybody who showed a negative state of mind ("I don't care for
snakes") would have likewise had negative conduct ("No, I won't take a snake for a pet"). Along
these lines, for states of mind or behavioral plan must be estimated at a similar level.
Thirdly, attitudes usually change over a certain period. Behavioral expectation and
conduct must be estimated in the meantime to expect that they will relate. Theory of Reasoned
Action expresses that attitudes, together with subjective standards, decide behavioral
expectation. This implies if a man's state of mind changes, his or her behavioral purpose will
presumably change too. Along these lines, if we take in individuals' behavioral goal and after
that hold up to gauge their conduct a little while or months after the fact, that conduct may relate
to their current behavioral goal yet not the behavioral aim learned.
However, several limitations have been associated with The Theory of Reasoned Action.
These limitations have been associated with behavior prediction. The theory assumes the genuine
conduct, not results; some results are past the customer’s control, the suspicion of conduct as
purposeful might be invalid at times, attitude measures don't relate to the conduct they should
foresee. There is still substantial time allocation between the behavior and attitude measure.

Theory of Reasoned Action 6
Extensive research has been carried out on the Theory of Reasoned Action. The study is
by and large strong of the expectations it makes: Behavioral plan can be anticipated from
dispositions toward conduct and subjective standards. These expectations hold up in an
assortment of circumstances, similar to customer conduct, decision making, and others. The
exploration demonstrates that, of the two segments, attitude is a more precise indicator of
behavioral expectation than subjective standards. O'Keefe (2009), calls attention to the
connection between the attitudinal segment, and the elements that add to it (assessment,
conviction quality) is more grounded than the connection between the subject standards and their
parts such as standardizing convictions, an inspiration to consent.
To conclude, as a marketer, it is vital to include the possibility of subjective standards, as
they sometimes affect our conduct and entirely our attitudes. Theory of Reasoned Action
confounds comprehension of influence or convincing power because it includes other factors in
the whole process such as the message structure, behavioral expectations, negative and positive
attitudes. Moreover, the theory seeks to give clarifications why behavioral expectation or attitude
will eventually give rise to the behavior that was predicted earlier.

Theory of Reasoned Action 7
References
Ajzen, I. (2012). Martin Fishbein’s legacy: The reasoned action approach. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 640(1), 11-27.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action
approach. Taylor & Francis.
O’Keefe, D. J. (2009). Theories of persuasion. R., Nabi, MB Oliver,(Eds.), Handbook of media
processes and effects, 269-282.