Running head: TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 1
Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Predict University Students’ Intention and
Future Behaviour of Using Reusable Coffee Cups on Campus
University of East Anglia
Word count: 3250
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 2
Introduction
Plastic pollution, that is the accumulation of synthetic plastic waste in the
environment, has become a pressing issue in the last decade, attracting both public and
scientific interest worldwide (Greenpeace, 2019). As the problem is rooted in human
behaviour, environmental psychologists suggest that it needs to be managed by modifying
people’s behaviour (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Although public awareness of plastic pollution and
its impact on the environment seems to have increased in recent years, research suggest that
having more knowledge about environmental issues does not necessarily produce pro-
environmental behaviour (Gifford & Nilsson, 2014). Considering that environmental
sustainability is greatly dependent on pro-environmental behaviour, it is vital to understand
how people form behavioural intentions to protect the environment and under what
conditions these intentions translate into pro-environmental behaviour.
Plastic pollution is a human-made problem that effects every species on the globe,
including humans themselves. Since the 1950s, about 8.3 billion tonnes of plastic had been
produced worldwide and only about 21% of this had been recycled or incinerated (Geyer,
Jambeck & Law, 2017). The remaining 79% ended up in landfills or been dispersed in the
natural environment (Geyer et al., 2017). The accumulation of plastic waste in the natural
environment is a cause for concern as plastic is not biodegradable, therefore it cannot
decompose by trait (Barnes, Galgani, Thompson & Barlaz, 2009). Furthermore, small
fragments of plastic, also known as microplastics (< 5 mm), can travel through cities’
wastewater systems. Due to their small size, they can escape the treatment screens on
wastewater plants and enter rivers and oceans (Browne, Galloway, & Thompson, 2007). The
contamination of aquatic, marine and terrestrial ecosystems with plastic pollutants can have
widespread consequences for both human and wildlife, including choking and starving of
animals and ingestion of toxic chemicals (Eagle, Hamann & Low, 2016).
Single-use coffee cups are one of the biggest contributors to plastic waste in the UK
(Environmental Audit Committee, 2018). According to a recent report, 2.5 billion disposable
coffee cups are thrown away every year across the country (Environmental Audit Committee,
2018). Although single-use coffee cups are technically recyclable, due to the complexity of
separating the plastic polyethylene lining from the paper, only 1% of coffee cups ends up
being recycled (Allegra, 2018). The rest is sent to landfills where plastic waste can be piled-
up for several years (Barnes et al., 2009). In order to reduce plastic pollution and the amount
of litter being sent to landfills, it is important to consider the waste hierarchy model (Hultman
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 3
& Corvellec, 2012). That is, reducing the environmental impact of waste materials through
prevention rather than through recovery (Hultman & Corvellec, 2012). In the current context,
generation and accumulation of plastic cup waste may be prevented by encouraging
consumers to change their behaviour of opting for disposable cups when buying coffee or tea
on the go.
The Theory of Planned Behaviour
One of the most influential theoretical models to predict social behaviour is the
Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1985, 1988, 1991). The TPB has its roots in the
Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), which is an expectancy-value model
proposing that people have the drive to maximize the expected value of their behaviour
(Edwards, 1954). According to the TPB, salient beliefs about the likely consequences of
performing a behaviour (behavioural beliefs) together with perceptions of expected costs and
benefits associated with the behaviour lead to the formation of attitudes (Ajzen, 1988, 1991).
Attitudes are evaluations of how favourable or unfavourable one feels towards performing a
particular behaviour which can lead to the formation of behavioural intentions. Intentions
represent a person’s willingness to engage in the behaviour in question and are considered to
be the immediate antecedents of behaviour. (Ajzen, 1988, 1991). The model postulates that in
addition to attitudes, behavioural intentions are also determined by subjective norms which
are perceptions of social pressure to perform or not to perform a behaviour. Subjective norm
is a function of salient normative beliefs multiplied by a person’s motivation to comply with
expectations of significant others. Finally, intentions can be influenced by the perceived ease
or difficulty of performing a behaviour, referred to as perceived behavioural control (PBC).
PBC represents perceptions on the likelihood of occurrence and the anticipated obstacles
associated with a particular behaviour. PBC is assumed to guide behaviour either indirectly
through intentions, or directly when perceptions of control reflect actual control (Ajzen,
1988, 1991).
Over more than three decades of research, the TPB has been successfully applied to a
variety of behavioural domains in environmental and social sciences, including waste
management (Taylor & Todd, 1995), green consumption (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008) and
pro-environmental behaviour (Klöckner, 2013; Oreg & Katz-Gerro, 2006). A number of
meta-analyses demonstrated that intentions can predict behaviour reasonably well (Armitage
& Conner, 2001; Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). Furthermore, evidence shows that intentions can
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 4
be predicted from measures of attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control
with considerable accuracy (Armitage & Conner, 2001). Finally, the proposition that
attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control can be predicted from the
corresponding sets of behavioural, normative and control beliefs has also received substantial
empirical support (Armitage & Conner, 2001).
Although the applicability and predictive validity of the TPB in environmental and
social sciences is well established, the model is not without shortcomings (Conner & Spark,
2015). One common criticism is that it assumes that all behaviour is rational and fails to take
into account the affective components of human behaviour (Sparks, 1994). As Sparks (1994)
pointed out, emotions can influence the formation of behavioural, normative and control
beliefs in a variety of contexts, which in turn can impact on intentions and behaviour.
Another criticism is that historically, intentions can only explain about 15% - 36% of the
variance in behaviour, implying that behaviour may also be influenced by factors other than
the ones included in the TPB (McEachan, Conner, Taylor, & Lawton, 2011). A number of
studies addressed this issue by adding further potential predictors to the model (Ajzen, 1991).
While additional measures improved the interpretation ability of the TPB with varying
success (Conner & Armitage, 1998), constructs such as past behaviour, habits and self-
identity have shown a great potential to capture additional aspects of environmentally
relevant behaviour (Sparks & Shepherd, 1992; Ouellette & Wood, 1998).
Past behaviour, counter-intentional habits and self-identity within the TPB
The rationale behind measuring the impact of past behaviour within the TPB is that in
various social contexts, past behaviour has been shown to be a strong predictor of intentions
and future behaviour (McEachan et al., 2011). Empirical evidence demonstrated that after
taking account of attitude, subjective norm and PBC, past behaviour can explain a further
7.2% of the variance in intentions (Conner & Armitage, 1998), and 10.9% of the variance in
future behaviour (McEachan et al., 2011). Despite these strong effects, critics warn that the
contribution of past behaviour to the prediction of future behaviour can depend on various
factors, including measurement methods and repetition of behaviour (Ajzen, 2002). Ouellette
and Wood (1998) suggest that frequent past behaviours performed in stable contexts can
reflect automatic habitual tendencies and may directly determine future behaviour. In
contrast, past behaviours that are performed in unstable contexts are more likely to be
influenced by conscious decision making and may determine future behaviour indirectly, by
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 5
mediating the relationship between intentions and future behaviour (Ouellette & Wood,
1998).
The role of habits in predicting intentions and behaviour can also depend on context
and interpretation. Based on the assumed level of cognitive effort involved in a particular
behaviour, previous research has conceptualized habit as either a ‘type of behaviour’
(Gardner, 2015) or a ‘type of automaticity’ (Verplanken & Wood, 2006). In both cases,
habits can refer to repeated activities that are performed in stable contexts in the presence of
specific situational cues (Gardner, 2015). Habits may develop either in line with attitudes and
intentions or interfere with a person’s wishes and motives that attitudes and intentions
represent (Kuhl, 1984). Counter-intentional habits that are short-term hedonistic-driven
behavioural patterns performed at the expense of long-term, valued goals can be interesting
to measure within the TPB as they can compete with implementation intentions, and
depending on habit strength, they may overrule self-regulatory strategies (Verplanken &
Aarts, 1999). Thus, counter-intentional habits can either moderate the relationship between
intentions and behaviour or exert a direct, negative effect on the target behaviour
(Verplanken & Faes, 1999).
Self-identity which is a set of meaningful definitions attached to a person’s self-
concept (Baumeister & Muraven, 1996) has also been shown to be a useful addition to the
TPB in various social contexts (Sparks & Shepherd, 1992). Sparks and Shepherd (1992)
reported that people’s self-identification as ‘green’ consumers had a significant independent
effect on the prediction of their intentions to eat organic vegetables. Moreover, a meta-
analytic review of 40 studies found that self-identity can capture an additional 6% of the
variance in intention after components of the TPB are taken into account, and explains an
increment of 9% of the variance when past behaviour is also controlled (Rise, Sheeran &
Hukkelberg, 2010). Despite these promising findings, critics pointed out that a lack of
consensus in the literature with regards to measuring this construct could have created a
conceptual overlap between self-identity and other TPB variables, such as attitudes and
intentions, therefore more research is needed to determine the potential utility of the construct
in the model (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010).
The present study
Although the TPB has been employed in a wide range of behavioural research related
to plastic pollution, for example to help understand consumers’ intention to recycle plastic
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 6
waste (Khan, Ahmed, Najmi & Younus, 2019), examine intentions to ditch plastic bags (Sun,
Wang, Zhao & Fan, 2017) and design marketing strategies to reduce marine plastic pollution
(Eagle et al., 2016), to date, no known studies have tested the model’s applicability to predict
young consumers’ intention to use reusable coffee cups. Furthermore, no previous studies
related to plastic pollution examined the potential predictive power of past behaviour,
counter-intentional habits and self-identity within the TPB framework. The present study
aims to address this gap in research by extending the TPB model with the aforementioned
variables to examine university students’ intention and self-reported behaviour of using
reusable coffee cups on campus (see Figure 1). Accordingly, this study proposes the
following hypotheses:
H1: All standard TPB variables, including attitudes, subjective norms and PBC will be
positively correlated with university students’ intention to use reusable coffee cups on
campus.
H2: Behavioural intentions will be positively correlated with university students’ future
behaviour of using reusable coffee cups on campus.
H3: Past behaviour of using reusable coffee cups on campus will have a direct positive effect
on university students’ future behaviour of engaging in the same activity, independent of the
potential mediating effect of intentions.
H4: Counter-intentional habits of using disposable coffee cups will negatively correlate with
university students’ future behaviour of using reusable coffee cups on campus. For university
students with weak counter-intentional habits, this effect will moderate the relationship
between intentions and future behaviour.
H5: Self-identity will be positively correlated with university students’ intention to use
reusable coffee cups on campus.
H6: The extended TPB model will explain a higher percentage of variance in university
students’ intentions and future behaviour of using reusable coffee cups on campus, compared
to the standard framework.
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 7
Attitudes Self- Past
identity behaviour
Subjective Future
Intentions
norms behaviour
Counter-
PBC intentional habits
Figure 1. Proposed research framework. Solid arrows illustrate expected effects of TPB
variables on intentions and future behaviour, while dashed arrows represent potential
alternative relationships. Possible correlations between predictor variables are not displayed.
Method
Participants
Participants will be male and female university students (age 18 or over) from the
University of East Anglia. Participants will be recruited through the Sona system, which is an
internal online research platform, and will be compensated with Sona credits according to
university policy. Sample size will be computed based on recommendations of using 15-20
observations per studied variable in structural equation modelling (Hair, Anderson, Tatham &
Black, 1998). As the present research has 8 constructs (5 items for attitudes, 3 items for
subjective norms, 4 items for PBC, 3 items for past behaviour, 3 items for counter-intentional
habits, 3 items for self-identity, 2 items for intentions, and 2 items for future behaviour,
totalling 25 items), a minimum of 500 (=25 x 20) participants will be recruited.
Design
Pilot study.
A qualitative preliminary research will be conducted to assess salient behavioural,
normative and control beliefs in the target population (Ajzen, 2011). A representative sample
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 8
of ca. 50-100 students will be recruited from a UK university (other than UEA) to avoid
double participation with the main study. An open-ended paper questionnaire will be
administered to determine students’ readily accessible beliefs about reusable coffee cup usage
on campus. Participants will be asked to write down their thoughts about using reusable
coffee cups on campus, including the advantages and disadvantages of using reusable coffee
cups on campus in the next two weeks, people who would approve or disapprove of their
using of reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks, and factors that could
facilitate or interfere with their using of reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two
weeks (Ajzen, 2011). Contact analysis will be conducted to determine salient behavioural,
normative and control beliefs in the target population by counting the number of times a
response has been emitted. The most frequently mentioned beliefs will be used to construct
modal sets which will guide the design of the questionnaires employed in the main part of the
study (Ajzen, 2011).
Main study.
For the main study, two separate questionnaires will be designed using Qualtrics
software. Both questionnaires will be administered online via the Sona system. The first
questionnaire will be advertised at the start of the academic year (e.g. in October) and will
assess all predictor variables, including attitudes (IV1), subjective norms (IV2), PBC (IV3),
past behaviour (IV4), counter-intentional habits (IV5), and self-identity (IV6), as well as the
criterion variable behavioural intentions (DV1). The second questionnaire will be
administered 2 weeks after the first survey. Participants will be contacted by the researcher
via e-mail to complete the second part of the study which will measure students’ self-reported
behaviour of reusable coffee cup usage during the elapsed two weeks’ time (DV2).
Materials
Following Ajzen’s (1988) recommendations on constructing a TPB questionnaire, all
standard measures in the model will be matched by the principle of compatibility. This theory
posits that any behaviour can be defined in terms of four features: action, target of the action,
context and time of occurrence (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977). Measured variables will better
predict behaviour if all constructs, including the behaviour under consideration, are specified
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 9
based on these four features (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977). Accordingly, the present study will
design questionnaires that comply with the aforementioned principle.
Measures of attitudes, subjective norm and PBC will be developed with the guidance
of salient behavioural, normative and control beliefs obtained from the pilot study. For
example, if findings would show that one of the most prevalent behavioural beliefs is that
‘using reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks would help protect the
environment/reduce plastic pollution’, the measurement scale for attitudes could include the
adjective pairs ‘useful – useless’ and ‘beneficial – detrimental’ in response to the same
statement. Similarly, if the pilot study would find that university students’ opinion on using
reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks is mostly influenced by their lecturers,
the subjective norm scale could include a corresponding item measuring this belief.
All variables will be measured by two to five items and each item will be rated on a 6-
point Likert scale. Scale reliability will be assessed by Cronbach’s alpha (Nunally, 1978). For
a full list of proposed measurement scales see Appendix A and B.
Procedure and Ethics
Participants will be able to take part in the study through Sona. The study will be
described as a longitudinal research on coffee cup use on campus. Informed consent will be
obtained before commencing to the survey. Ethical issues such as voluntary participation,
anonymity and right of withdrawal will be addressed. After completing the first survey,
participants will be partially debriefed. Full debrief will follow after completion of the second
survey. Participants will be offered the opportunity to contact the researcher via e-mail if they
wish to receive a brief summary of general (but not individual) results. Contact details of the
university’s Ethics Committee will also be provided, in case participants wish to raise any
concerns.
Analyses and Expected Results
Data will be analysed in 3 stages. In the first stage, confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) will be performed to test the quality and adequacy of the TPB model. Goodness of fit
will be assessed by several indicators, including (chi-square), CFI (comparative fit index),
GFI (goodness-of-fit index) and RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation). Uni-
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 10
dimensionality of constructs will be established through CFI (recommended > 0.9; Kline,
1998) and standardised root mean residual (SRMR, 0.08; Hu & Bentler, 1998). Construct
validity will be tested by establishing the convergent validity (the extent to which measures
that should be related are related) and the discriminant validity (the extent to which measures
that should not be related are not related) of variables (Hair et al., 1998). High
intercorrelations will indicate that items converge on the same construct, while low
intercorrelations will show that measures are related to different constructs.
In the second stage, structural equation modelling (SEM) will be carried out to
examine causal relationships between variables and to evaluate the model’s explanatory
power. It is expected that standardised coefficient estimates (ß) among attitudes, subjective
norm, PBC and intentions will be positive and significant (H1). Furthermore, it is presumed
that paths between intentions – future behaviour (H2), self-identity – intentions (H5) and past
behaviour – future behaviour (H3) will also be positive and significant. Counter-intentional
habits and future behaviour are expected to be negatively correlated (H4). The explanatory
power of the standard (attitudes, subjective norms, PBC) vs extended (+ past behaviour,
counter-intentional habits and self-identity) TPB model will be compared. It is assumed that
the extended TPB model will provide a better fit for the data, accounting for a greater
variance in university students’ intentions and future behaviour of using reusable coffee cups
on campus (H6).
In the third and last stage, the potential moderating impact of counter-intentional
habits on the intention – future behaviour relationship will be tested. It is expected that low
scores on counter-intentional habits will show a greater negative correlation with intentions
than with future behaviour, supporting the aforementioned hypothesis (H4).
Brief summary
The present study will apply the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1985, 1988,
1991) to predict university students’ intentions and future behaviour of using reusable coffee
cups on campus. It will add the constructs of past behaviour, counter-intentional habits and
self-identity to the model and examine the predictive power of individual variables and that
of the standard vs extended framework in explaining intentions and behaviour. Data will be
analysed using CFA and SEM. Hypothesized relationships among variables are expected to
be supported by results. Findings could provide guidance for future intervention strategies by
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 11
identifying key aspects of reusable coffee cup usage behaviour. Future research could test the
applicability of the proposed model to further populations and in various other behavioural
contexts.
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 12
References
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. In J. Kuhl, & J.
Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: from cognition to behaviour (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg:
Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behaviour. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I. (2002). Residual effects of past on later behaviour: habituation and reasoned action
perspectives, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 107–22.
doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0602_02.
Ajzen, I. (2011). Behavioural interventions: design and evaluation guided by the theory of
planned behaviour. In M. M. Mark, S. I. Donaldson, & B. Campbell (Eds.) Social
Psychology for Program and Policy Evaluation (pp. 74–100). New York: Guilford
Press.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behaviour relations. A theoretical analysis and
review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888-918.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.
Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behaviour. In D. Albarracin,
B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Handbook of attitudes and attitude change:
basic principles (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Allegra. (2018). Project Cafe2017 UK. Allegra Strategies Limited.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-
analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–99.
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 13
Barnes, D. K. A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R. C., & Barlaz, M. (2009). Accumulation and
fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philosophical Transactions,
364, 1985-1998. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0205
Baumeister, R. F., & Muraven, M. (1996). Identity as adaptation to social, cultural, and
historical context, Journal of Adolescence, 19, 405–16. doi: 10.1006/jado.1996.0039
Browne, M. A., Galloway, T., & Thompson, R. (2007). Microplastic - an emerging
contaminant of potential concern? Integrated Environmental Assessment and
Management, 3, 559-561.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: A review
and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1430-
1464. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01685
Conner, M., & Sparks, P. (2015). The theory of planned behaviour and the reasoned action
approach. In M. Conner, & P. Sparks (Eds.), Predicting and changing health
behaviour: research and practice with social cognition models 3rd ed. (pp. 142-188).
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
de Leeuw, A., Valois, P., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Using the theory of planned
behaviour to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behaviour in high-
school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 42, 128–138. doi: org/10.1016/[Link].2015.03.005
Eagle, L., Hamann, M., & Low, D. R. (2016). The role of social marketing, marine turtles
and sustainable tourism in reducing plastic pollution. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 107,
324-332. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2016.03.040
Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 380–417.
Environmental Audit Committee. (2018). Disposable Packaging: Coffee Cups. Second
Report of Session 2017-19. London: House of Commons.
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 14
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behaviour: The reasoned action
approach. New York: Psychology Press.
Gardner, B. (2015). A review and analysis of the use of ‘habit’ in understanding, predicting
and influencing health-related behaviour. Health Psychology Review, 9, 277–295.
[Link]/10.1080/17437199.2013.876238
Geyer, R., Jambeck, J. R., & Law, K. L. (2017). Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever
made. Science Advances, 3, 1-5. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1700782
Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-
environmental concern and behaviour: a review. International Journal of Psychology,
49, 141-157. doi: org/10.1002/ijop.12034
Greenpeace (2019). Key facts about plastic pollution. Retrieved from: [Link]
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data
Analysis (5th ed). Prentice-Hall, NJ: Upper Saddle River.
Hu, L., Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modelling: sensitivity to
under parameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.
Hultman, J., & Corvellec, H. (2012). The European Waste Hierarchy: from the socio-
materiality of waste to a politics of consumption. Environment and Planning A, 44,
2413-2427. doi: 10.1068/a44668
Khan, F., Ahmed, W., Najmi, A., & Younus, M. (2019). Managing plastic waste disposal by
assessing consumers’ recycling behaviour: the case of a densely populated developing
country. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 33054-33066.
doi: org/10.1007/s11356-019-06411-4
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling. Guilford
Press, NY: New York.
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 15
Klöckner, C. A. (2013). A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental
behaviour - A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23, 1028-1038.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2013.05.014
Kuhl, J. (1984). Volitional aspects of achievement motivation and learned helplessness:
Toward a comprehensive theory of action control. In B. A. Maher, & W. A. Maher
(Eds.), Progress in experimental personality research. New York: Academic Press.
McEachan, R. R. C., Conner, M., Taylor, N. J., & Lawton, R. J. (2011). Prospective
prediction of health-related behaviours with the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-
analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5, 97-144. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2010.521684
Norman, P., & Conner, M. (2006). The theory of planned behaviour and binge drinking:
Assessing the moderating role of past behaviour within the theory of planned
behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11, 55–70.
doi: org/10.1348/135910705X43741
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oreg, S., & Katz-Gerro, T. (2006). Predicting pro-environmental behaviour cross-nationally:
Values, the theory of planned behaviour, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment
and Behaviour, 38, 462-483. doi: 10.1177/0013916505286012
Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: the multiple
processes by which past behaviour predicts future behaviour. Psychological Bulletin,
124, 54–75.
Rise, J., Sheeran, P., & Hukkelberg, S. (2010). The role of self-identity in the Theory of
Planned Behaviour: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40,
1085–1105. doi: org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00611.x
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 16
Sparks, P. (1994). Attitudes towards food: applying, assessing and extending the ‘theory of
planned behaviour’. In D. R. Rutter, & L. Quine (Eds.), Social psychology and health:
European perspectives (pp. 25–46). Aldershot: Avebury.
Sparks, P., Guthrie, C. A., & Shepherd, R. (1997). The dimensional structure of the perceived
behavioural control construct. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 418-438.
doi: org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00639.x
Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned behaviour:
Assessing the role of identification with green consumerism. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 55, 388–399. doi: 10.2307/2786955
Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative
review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309-317.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2008.10.004
Sun, Y., Wang, S., Li, J., Zhao, D., & Fan, J. (2017). Understanding consumers’ intention to
use plastic bags: using an extended theory of planned behaviour model. Natural
Hazards, 89, 1327–1342. doi: org/10.1007/s11069-017-3022-0
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). An integrated model of waste management behaviour: A test
of household recycling and composting intentions. Environment and Behaviour, 27,
603–630. doi: org/10.1177/0013916595275001
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2008). Sustainable food consumption among young adults in
Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and
values. Ecological economics, 64, 542-553. doi:10.1016/[Link].2007.03.007
Verplanken, B., & Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, attitude and planned behaviour: is habit an empty
construct or an interesting case of goal directed automaticity? European Review of
Social Psychology, 10, 101–134. doi: org/10.1080/14792779943000035
Verplanken, B., & Faes, S. (1999). Good intentions, bad habits, and effects of forming
implementation intentions on healthy eating. European Journal of Social
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 17
Psychology, 29, 591–604. Doi: org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199908/09)29:5/6<591
:AID-EJSP948>[Link];2-H
Verplanken, B., & Wood, W. (2006). Interventions to break and create consumer habits.
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25, 90–103. doi: 10.1509/jppm.25.1.90
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 18
Appendix A
Attitudes (adapted from de Leeuw, Valois, Morin & Schmidt, 2014) R = reverse scored
For me, using reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks would be …
useful useless (R)
annoying pleasant
beneficial detrimental (R)
cool uncool (R)
rewarding unrewarding (R)
Subjective norms (adapted from Sparks, Guthrie & Shepherd, 1997)
1. Most people who are important to me think I should use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. People whose opinion I value would prefer that I use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
3. My lecturers’ positive opinion influences me to use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
Perceived behavioural control (adapted from Sparks et al., 1997)
1. I believe I have the ability to use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. I have the resources to use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
3. Reusable coffee cups are generally available in shops and cafés on campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
4. I feel that using reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks is totally within my control.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
Past behaviour (adapted from Norman & Conner, 2006)
1. In the past, I have deliberately used reusable coffee cups in most shops and cafés on campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. In the past, I have automatically used reusable coffee cups in my favourite shop(s) and café(s) on campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
3. On average, how often have you used reusable coffee cups on campus in the past?
never (1), < 1x per week (2), 1x per week (3), >1x per week (4), 1x per day (5), >1x per day (6)
Counter-intentional habits (adapted from Verplanken & Faes, 1999)
1. In the last two weeks, I have mainly used disposable coffee cups when purchasing a hot beverage on campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. In the last two weeks, I have automatically used disposable coffee cups when purchasing a hot beverage on
campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
3. On average, how often have you used disposable coffee cups on campus in the last two weeks?
never (1), < 1x per week (2), 1x per week (3), >1x per week (4), 1x per day (5), >1x per day (6)
Self-identity (adapted from Sparks & Shepherd, 1992)
1. I see myself as someone who is very concerned about plastic pollution.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. It is important to me to (a) reduce my plastic consumption to decrease environmental damage.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
(b) re-use products to protect the environment.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
Intentions (adapted from Sparks and Shepherd, 1992)
1. I am willing to use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. I feel motivated to use reusable coffee cups on campus in the next two weeks.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
TPB TO PREDICT REUSABLE COFFEE CUP USAGE BEHAVIOUR 19
Appendix B
Future behaviour (adapted from Norman & Conner, 2006)
1. In the last two weeks, I have mainly used reusable coffee cups when purchasing a hot beverage on campus.
strongly disagree (1) – strongly agree (6)
2. On average, how often have you used reusable coffee cups on campus in the last two weeks?
never (1), < 1x per week (2), 1x per week (3), >1x per week (4), 1x per day (5), >1x per day (6)