British Journal of Social Psychology

Armitage, Christopher J.; Conner, Mark

doi: 10.1348/014466699164022pmid: N/A

The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) has received considerable attention in the literature. However, there have been few attempts to assess the proposed causal links between beliefs, attitudes, intentions and behaviour. The present study was designed to assess the predictive validity and causal ordering of TPB constructs over a 3‐month period. Findings indicated good internal and test‐retest reliability of assessed components; evidence for a distinction between two processes of perceived behavioural control (self‐efficacy and perceived control); support for inclusion of self‐identity into the model; and predictive validity of the TPB over 3 months. Perhaps more importantly, there was some evidence to support causal ordering between predicted TPB variables. In particular, cross‐lagged panel correlation analysis supported the causal impact of self‐efficacy on intention. The present study supports the use of the TPB as a reliable predictor of intentions and behaviour over time. It also highlights the need for further research on the relationship between attitudes, perceived behavioural control and their underlying beliefs.

Rutland, Adam

doi: 10.1348/014466699164031pmid: N/A

This study explores the development of national prejudice, in‐group favouritism and self‐stereotyping in a sample of 329 British children. The aim was to test the prediction, derived from self‐categorization theory (Oakes, Haslam & Turner, 1994; Spears & Haslam, 1997) and in opposition to cognitive‐developmental theory (Aboud, 1988), that the supposed limited cognitive ability of young children to engage in individuated perception will not necessarily result in intergroup discrimination and self‐stereotyping. The children were presented with a photograph evaluation task and some open‐ended questioning. It was found that national prejudice, in‐group favouritism or self‐stereotyping developed only in children aged over 10 years and was not evident in young children. These findings question the validity of the cognitive‐developmental approach which contends that intergroup discrimination and stereotyping are a product of information‐processing biases in young children. The apparent contradiction between the findings of this study and previous research on ethnic prejudice development is discussed in terms of the potential importance of group norms in determining the willingness of people to express national prejudice and in‐group favouritism.

Archer, John; Haigh, Anadelle

doi: 10.1348/014466699164040pmid: 10216929

Previous studies show that men endorse instrumental beliefs about aggression to a greater extent than women, whereas women endorse expressive beliefs to a greater extent than men. However, men and women indicate that they have different opponents in mind when thinking about aggression, and existing measures may emphasize physical forms of aggression. Therefore, beliefs about aggression were examined when the type of aggression (physical or verbal) and the sex of the opponent (same sex or opposite‐sex partner) were specified, among a sample of 200 students. Expressive beliefs were higher and instrumental beliefs lower for an opposite‐sex partner and for physical aggression. The characteristic sex difference applied across all manipulations for expressive beliefs, but not for instrumental ones: men showed higher scores than women only for same‐sex physical aggression. Higher instrumental (but not lower expressive) scores were also found among those who based their responses on real rather than hypothetical events. The sex difference in instrumental beliefs for same‐sex physical aggression was largely confined to respondents using a hypothetical event. As in previous studies, instrumental and expressive beliefs were relatively independent of one another. The position that the beliefs represent rhetorical devices is assessed in the light of these findings.

Poppe, Edwin; Linssen, Hub

doi: 10.1348/014466699164059pmid: N/A

This study examines the content of European nationality stereotypes held by adolescents from six Central and Eastern European countries and in‐group favouritism on the dimensions underlying these nationality stereotypes. It was found that the content of nationality stereotypes reflects a competence and a morality dimension, and that each dimension is related to perceived structural or relational features of nation states. The attribution of competence‐related traits to out‐group nationalities is strongly related to the perceived economic power of the nation states and the attribution of morality‐related traits to the size of the nation states, as well as perceived conflicts of interests, nationalism and economic power. The participants did not blindly favour their in‐group over all foreign nationalities on competence or morality. The tendency to perceive Western European nationalities as more competent than the in‐group reflects a social reality constraint due to lower economic status. Furthermore, in‐group favouritism on competence decreased as a function of the economic status and size of out‐groups, while ingroup favouritism on morality increased as a function of economic status and size of out‐groups. These results are interpreted in terms of self‐categorization theory and social identity theory.

Thoma, Stephen; Barnett, Robert; Rest, James; Narvaez, Darcia

doi: 10.1348/014466699164068pmid: N/A

Emler, Palmer‐Canton & St. James (1998) suggest that scores on the Defining Issues Test (DIT) of moral judgment development are in large measure a reflection of participants political identities. Although we agree that political reasoning and moral judgments overlap, we do take issue with the claim that DIT scores and the findings they produce can be explained by political identity. In three sections we first outline our view of the controversy that this, and the senior author's previous paper, raise concerning the validity of the DIT, then we note our interpretation of the current findings, and finally we draw attention to the limitations of the test manipulation methodology featured in this research and offer an alternative strategy to assess the validity of the DIT. We conclude that, although this research clearly demonstrates that DIT scores can be manipulated by altering the participant's test taking set, it provides no direct evidence on the validity of the DIT.