# Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Perceived behavioural control and motivation

* Multimedia presentation (3 min)

## Overview

Perceived behavioural control (PBC) is a component of Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behaviour, and specifically relates to an individual’s belief in their ability to perform a behaviour or task. As Ajzen said when he proposed the addition of PBC into his existing theory to create the theory of planned behaviour, “Of greater psychological interest than actual control… is the perception of behavioural control and its impact on intentions and actions. Particularly when examining the aspect of PBC that relates to an individual’s self-assessment of their skills and abilities, similarities between PBC and self-efficacy begin to emerge. In many cases, the two can be hard to functionally differentiate. However, once you begin to look at PBC as a multi-dimensional construct and examine how the different levels interact with intentions and behaviours, the differences start to become more evident. While the concept of PBC may sound relatively simple, it’s effect on motivation and behaviour is far more complex. In different situations, the effect of PBC on motivation can be completely reversed from one study to another, which we will address in this chapter.
* Focus questions:
* What is PBC?
* How does it differ from self-efficacy?
* How does it relate to motivation?

## What is perceived behavioural control?

PPBC is a person’s belief that a behaviour is easy or difficult to perform, based on their past experiences and the present obstacles. Research into PBC supports the theory that PBC is in fact a multi-dimensional construct. It is a component of the driving factors behind our behaviour.
In a study conducted by Trafimow et al (2002), participants were presented with a number of different scenarios and had to rate items on a four-point scale that was designed to determine the level of perceived control and perceived difficulty each participant had for each scenario. The intention of this study was to determine whether Ajzen’s concept of perceived behavioural control was in fact multi-dimensional, consisting of two variables: perceived control and perceived difficulty. The idea was that if perceived behavioural control was just a single construct, then it should be impossible to perform manipulations that would affect one variable more than the other. Through their study, they were able to show that perceived control and perceived difficulty are two different constructs and highlighted the importance of distinguishing between the two when trying to predict variance in intentions and behaviours.[for example?]
However, while there are a lot of studies showing how these two levels of PBC are separate, in other domains there is evidence that these two social constructs interact such as in research on illicit drug use.[for example?]

### Perceived control

Within PBC, perceived control refers to the extent to which a person considers the performance of a behaviour to be under their volitional control. This aspect of PBC is particularly where the similarities to self-efficacy are drawn, as this perceived control involves an individual’s self-assessment of their skills and abilities to perform a behaviour. For example, an individual would be highly likely to perceive themselves as having control over a behaviour if they believe that they have control over personal resources, such as confidence, required skills, and their ability to perform the target behaviour. This concept of perceived control is notably distinct from the concept of locus of control, as while locus of control focuses on actual control, and is relatively stable across situations, perceived control is only concerned with an individual’s perception of their control over a behaviour rather than actual control.[for example?]

### Perceived difficulty

Perceived difficulty is a person’s belief, based on past experience and present obstacles, on whether a behaviour is easy or difficult to perform. For a behaviour to be perceived as easy to perform, it would often need to be relatively free from external or extrinsic influences that would hinder the performance of the behaviour. Research conducted by Trafimow et al [factual?] found that perceived difficulty was a stronger predictor of behavioural intentions and actual behaviours than perceived control. Further, they found that while people would generate more beliefs regarding a behaviour’s difficulty for behaviours where difficulty was considered a more important issue, this difference was reduced for behaviour where control was considered to be more important.[for example?]
The question may be raised that with all that exists to distinguish perceived control and perceived difficulty within PBC, why not split PBC into these two constructs? Even though analyses of each item of perceived behavioural control provide substantial evidence for their distinction, there is also considerable commonality between them to support a two-level hierarchal model – that is, that perceived behavioural control is the comprehensive construct that is comprised of perceived control and perceived difficulty as two lower-level components[Rewrite to improve clarity]. This multi-dimensional view of PBC has valuable implications for future studies, namely that depending on the purpose of any given study involving PBC, they may need to contain separate measures to assess perceived control and perceived difficulty.

## How does perceived behavioural control influence motivation?

As the theory from which Perceived Behaviour Control derives seeks to explain the internal processes that direct behaviour, it is at its core a study of motivation. Much research has been made into the correlation between PBC and motivation at a variety of levels.
However, the endeavour of defining the relationship between PBC and motivation is not a simple one. From its creation, Ajzen said that it was a characteristic of perceived behavioural control that it can and does vary across situations. This makes the relationship between PBC and motivation fluid and context dependent. There have been streams of research that focus on this facet of PBC, and on the conditions in which PBC has a stronger or weaker impact on behavioural intention. Notani’s (1998) meta-analysis found that PBC is a stronger predictor of behavioural intention when the student samples were used rather than nonstudent samples, and when the behaviour was familiar rather than unfamiliar. However, PBC was a stronger predictor of actual behaviour when nonstudent rather than student samples were used.[What are the practical implications?]

### Low PBC and motivation

In some studies, low PBC was correlated with high motivation Individuals who perceive themselves to have a low level of behavioural control are generally less confident in their abilities to perform a target behaviour, and as such are likely to believe there is a large gap between their actual abilities and the desired ability required to achieve a goal. As a result of this perceived deficiency, these individuals experience heightened motivational arousal and are more likely to believe they need to and actually engage in the cognitive effort to improve their abilities and resources to match the desired ability level more closely.[for example?]
When perceived control is low, attitude was found to be a significant predictor of behavioural intention, and individuals were more motivated to use cognitive resources (i.e. deliberative processing) when creating a behavioural intention.

### High PBC and motivation

High perceived control has in a number of studies been correlated with low motivation. Individuals who believe they have a high level of control over a particular behaviour are generally confident in their ability to perform the behaviour and are more likely to perceive a small distance between their current ability and their desired ability to achieve a certain goal. As a result of this perception, those with high perceived control are more likely to experience complacency, lacking the motivation required to participate in effortful cognitive processing to improve their existing capabilities or resources to form a behavioural intention.[for example?]
When perceived control is high, past behaviour has been found to be a significant predictor of behavioural intention. This [which?] study showed that those with high PBC were less motivated to use cognitive resources, and instead used nondeliberative, heuristic processing (that is, processing that relies on cognitive short-cuts) when they were forming a behavioural intention. Their third study used an argument-quality paradigm to further study how perceived control can influence motivational levels in engaging in cognitive resources[factual?]. The idea was that if an individual was able to discriminate between strong and weak arguments when they were forming a behavioural intention, then they must have been motivated to process the information deliberatively. Comparatively, if the individual was unable to discriminate between strong and week arguments, then they were unmotivated to process the information deliberatively. Those with high perceived control were unable to discriminate between the strong and weak arguments, while those with low levels were able to, revealing a lack of motivation for those with high levels of perceived control.[for example?]
However, the relationship between motivation and PBC is not that simple. In other studies, the exact opposite results were found. For example, Chase, Reicks, and Jones (2003) applied the theory of planned behaviour onto the promotion of whole-grain foods by dieticians and found that PBC was the second strongest predictor (behind attitudes) in predicting the intention of the sample of dieticians to promote whole-grain foods – specifically, that high levels of PBC were related to high levels of motivation and actual behaviour. This study is not alone with these findings: a different study predicting condom use had similar results.
These PBC-motivation effects have implications for intervention strategies to increase the propensity of individuals performing target behaviours. Ru et al. (2018) studied the effects of perceived behavioural control on individual’s energy-saving intentions and found that a low level of PBC could be counteracted by a strong perception of the subjective norm to create a high level of energy-saving intention, meaning that high social pressure can decrease the effects of PBC. Conversely, subjective norms have limited correlation to individuals who display a high level of PBC, meaning that intervention strategies for those with high PBC and low PBC would need to be individuated.[for example?]
This variance in significance is not confined to PBC. Even among different elements of the theory of planned behaviour, such as subjective norms, there has been a significant amount of variance noted on the level of affect the construct has on predicting behaviour. For example, Armitage & Conner (2001) found subjective norms to be a weak predictor of intentions, which they partly attributed to poor measurement and the need for the component to be expanded. However, in a study conducted by Kang, Hahn, Fortin, Hyun, and Eom into the effects of PBC on consumer intention of using e-coupons, found that subjective norm was a significant determinant for behavioural intention in using traditional or e-coupons. This is in fact reflective of Ajzen’s idea that the importance of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control in predicting behavioural intention would vary across situations and behaviours. So in a situation where attitudes are particularly salient, or where subjective norms are strong (such as seen in Kang et al, 2006), PBC could be expected to be less strong of a predictor.

## Theoretical frameworks

While PBC is a component of Azjen's theory of Planned Behaviour, TPB itself was developed from an existing theory: Reasoned Action Theory.

### Theory of reasoned action

The theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) proposes that people's behaviours are determined by their behavioural intentions and their pre-existing attitudes towards the behaviour, as well as subjective norms, and posits that you can predict how people will act based on their pre-existing attitudes and behavioural intentions.
The Theory of reasoned action was developed to explain the relationship between attitudes and behaviours, which includes four key components: subjective norms (perceived social pressure to perform the target behaviour, based on an individual’s beliefs of the level of approval or disapproval is likely to be received from performing the behaviour); attitudes towards the behaviour (a cognitive evaluation regarding the target behaviour based on a perception of likely consequences of performing versus not performing the behaviour); behavioural intention (the internal declaration to act); and behaviour (the actual act performed). The theory predicates that if a person’s attitude is favourable towards a behaviour and it has normative support, this can be a predictor of an intention to act which in turn predicts actual behaviour.

### Theory of planned behaviour

The theory of Planned Behaviour has one key difference that separates it from its predecessor: the addition of PBC in increasing or dictating the likelihood of behavioural achievement.
Like its predecessor, this theory is a social cognitive model that aims to predict behaviour based on people’s pre-existing intentions and attitudes. It includes all of the components of TRA (subjective norms, attitudes, behavioural intention, and behaviour) except with one notable addition: perceived behavioural control. One rationale behind the addition of PBC into this theory is that it could assist in predicting behaviours that were determined to not be under complete volitional control. Ajzen’s reasoning for this addition was twofold: if an individual has confidence in their ability to perform a behaviour (i.e., someone who is confident in their ability to learn how to ski) then they are more likely to expend the effort that is required to perform the behaviour, meaning that the effort someone is willing to put towards a task would increase with their perceived behavioural control. The second reasoning Ajzen noted was that PBC could often be used as a proxy for measures of actual control.
From its proposal, many studies have been conducted comparing the success of TPB over TRA, and many have found the addition of PBC to be a significant improvement. It is argued, however, that TPB neglects some important predictors of behaviour. Specifically, the role of habit or past behaviour as a predictor of future behaviour. Actions can become somewhat automatic and operate independently of the processes that are fundamental to TPB. There have in fact been a number of recommendations to try and improve or modify PBC, which included delineating PBC into internal and external components.

## Conclusion

Perceived behavioural control is a complex multi-dimensional concept that relates to an individual’s belief in their ability to perform a behaviour or task through both the tasks perceived difficulty, and the individual’s perceived control.
While PBC has many similarities to self-efficacy, and there are arguments to make the similarities more salient, the fundamental difference between the two is that current definitions of PBC focus on an individual’s belief that their efforts can influence a behavioural outcome, while self-efficacy is a reflection of an individual’s confidence that they can achieve a behavioural outcome. That being said, the difference between the two can still be difficult to ascertain between various studies
Ultimately, there is no simple way to summarise the relationship between perceived behavioural control and motivation. There is a clear link between the two, as PBC is used as a predictor of intention (i.e. motivation) and behaviour, however the exact nature of this relationship can vary between situations. Nonetheless, it is an important facet of behavioural intentions that should not be overlooked but does require further studies to try and operationalise as a concept[vague].