A multicomponent model of the theory of planned behaviour
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the measurement and predictive structure of multiple components of attitude (affective and instrumental), subjective norm (injunctive and descriptive) and an alternative measure of perceived behavioural control (PBC; skills/ability, opportunity, and resources) in the exercise domain. An additional purpose of the study was to compare the validity of the alternative PBC measure to a standard PBC measure for predicting exercise intention and behaviour. Participants were 220 undergraduates who completed measures of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and a 2-week follow-up of exercise behaviour. Results supported the discriminant validity in the measurement domains of all TPB components. Predictive validity of exercise behaviour for these components, however, was only evident for attitude and PBC components. Our alternative PBC measure was found commensurate with the standard PBC measure. Finally, intention significantly (p < .05) predicted exercise behaviour (R2 = .42), while affective attitude, and perceived opportunity significantly (p < .05) predicted intention (R2 = .47).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it