1. USPJED-40-3 10013482
1
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH PROJECT
USPJED-40-3
Cover sheet
In submitting this project, I declare that it is my work, it contains no unreferenced or
unacknowledged verbatim extracts from the works of others and it has not (either in whole or in
part) been submitted towards any other award at UWE or elsewhere.
Title: A mixed methods investigation testing the effectiveness of the
Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs at predicting exercise behaviour
Student Name: Ruth Curtis...................................
Student Number: 10013482
Supervisor: Dr. James Byron-Daniel....................
Date: 13/05/13

2. USPJED-40-3 10013482
2
I would like to express my appreciation to all those who assisted me in the
making of this research project.
Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. James Byron – Daniel whose
brilliant suggestions and encouragement helped me through the making of
this project. Secondly, I would like to thank the module leader, Dr. Eamon
Fulcher whose unwavering patience in giving advice to all throughout the
year has been deeply appreciated. Lastly, I would like to thank all those who
took part in this research; without their participation this project would not
have been possible.

3. USPJED-40-3 10013482
3
Contents
Description Page Number
Abstract and Introduction 4
Method – Design 8
Participants 9
Materials 10
Procedure 12
Results – Section 1: Quantitative 13
Figure 1: Table of correlations 15
Section 2: Qualitative 15
Discussion 23
References 32
Appendices –
1: Information sheet, Consent form and Survey 36
2: De-brief sheet 44
3: Changes to data 44
4: Ethical Approval form 45
5: Example of qualitative coding 46
Project checklist 47

4. USPJED-40-3 10013482
4
A mixed methods investigation testing the effectiveness of the Theory of
Planned Behaviour constructs at predicting exercise behaviour
Abstract
The aim was to test the effectiveness of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs at
predicting exercise behaviour. A mixed methods design was utilised, 40 participants aged 18
to 30 years responded. It was hypothesised that all TPB variables would be positively
correlated with all exercise behaviour, in all settings as found previously (Hausenblas,
Carron and Mack, 1997). Only normative importance was found to significantly correlate
with walking behaviour. Partial support was found in the qualitative data – ‘Health’
supported the Attitude construct and ‘Acceptance’ supported Subjective Norm. It was
concluded that the quantitative methods used were not valid or reliable; qualitative data
suggests that the TPB should include personality, company, social support and ambivalence
in attitude as additional variables.
Introduction
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB, Ajzen, 1991) was proposed as a predictive model of
health behaviour. Ajzen theorised that 3 main variables or “beliefs” of an individual could
predict their subsequent behaviour. These three beliefs were: attitude towards the
behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control which together were said to
shape an individual's behavioural intentions and ultimately their behaviours. Perceived
behavioural control is said to also have a direct effect on whether the behaviour is engaged
in or not (Ajzen, 1991). Ogden (2012) explains the theory behind each of the components;
Attitude refers to the individual’s evaluation of a behaviour and the outcomes associated
with engaging in it – either positive or negative. In theory the more positive the attitude the

5. USPJED-40-3 10013482
5
more likely the individual is to participate in this behaviour. Subjective norms refer to the
individual’s perceptions of significant others’ attitudes towards a behaviour, social pressures
to perform this behaviour and motivation to comply with this pressure. In theory if high
social pressure is perceived the individual is more likely to comply and engage in the
behaviour. Perceived behavioural control refers to the belief that the individual can perform
this behaviour based on internal and external factors (e.g. skills and obstacles respectively).
In theory if perceived behavioural control is high, the individual will feel they have control
over the obstacles that would stop them engaging in the behaviour and will therefore be
more likely to perform it. This theory was developed from the Theory of Reasoned Action
(TRA; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) which is the same theory minus the component of
perceived behavioural control.
Madden, Ellen and Ajzen (1992) investigated students’ reports of ten different behaviours
and found, when comparing the TRA and the TPB, that the TPB had better predictive power
than the TRA for both intention and behaviour across the behaviours. Armitage and Conner
(2001) conducted a meta-analytic review looking into the efficacy of the TPB. Each construct
was evaluated and it was found that the subjective norm construct is generally found to be
a weak predictor of intentions compared to attitude and perceived behavioural control;
subjective norm may have low efficacy at predicting behaviour. Godin and Kok (1996) also
studied the application of the TPB across many different health behaviours. These
behaviours included weight gain prevention, eating behaviour, exercise behaviour and
more. They found that the theory was applicable across health behaviours however the
efficacy of the theory varied for different behaviours - TPB could account for 42%, 32%,
46.8% of the variance in exercise, eating behaviour and oral hygiene intentions respectively.

6. USPJED-40-3 10013482
6
It could be interesting for a single health behaviour to be studied in detail; as efficacy varies
across behaviours it seems worthwhile to explore one behaviour in an attempt to
understand all underlying motivators to engage in that behaviour.
Hausenblas, Carron and Mack (1997) carried out a meta-analysis which investigated the
effectiveness of the application of both the TRA and the TPB when predicting exercise
behaviour. The paper concludes that there is strong evidence that the TRA is a ‘good’ theory
and the TPB is an even better theory in predicting exercise behaviour. These findings
suggest that the TPB is more effective at predicting exercise behaviour, than the TRA.
Spink, Wilson and Bostick (2012) however, hypothesised that the TPB constructs, specifically
perceived behavioural control would only predict intention to exercise in an unstructured
setting, rather than a structured one. They found support for this hypothesis; a simple
slopes analysis revealed that perceived behavioural control predicted intention only in the
unstructured setting. This research raises the interesting question of whether the TPB
constructs have the same efficacy at predicting exercise behaviour in a wide variety of
settings.
Many research journals look into expanding the TPB and adding additional constructs.
Knowles, Hyde and White (2012) found when using an extended version of the TPB,
incorporating moral norm and past behaviours, these two additional variables were
significant predictors of intention to donate money to charity, as well as the original
constructs. Bozionelos and Bennett (1999) when studying exercise behaviour also found
support for the inclusion of past behaviour as a predictor variable. 114 college students
completed questionnaires measuring TPB variables and later reported actual exercise
behaviour. Past behaviour was found to be the most predictive variable, while Subjective

7. USPJED-40-3 10013482
7
norm and Attitude were not significant predictors of intention to exercise and perceived
behavioural control was not found to significantly predict actual exercise behaviour. This
research does not provide support for the original constructs of the theory, however does
support past behaviour as an important predictor of exercise behaviour. Perhaps if this
variable were added to the TPB it would increase the efficacy of the theory.
The purpose of the current study is to test the effectiveness of the TPB constructs, including
the past behaviour construct, at predicting exercise behaviour in a number of different
settings. Due to the different foci when studying exercise behaviour, moral norm cannot be
included as a predictor variable or component, as there is no real ‘moral norm’ to exercising.
Moral norm concerns moral choices made by an individual in order to fit in with a social
group such as choosing not to steal, however choosing to exercise is not a moral choice.
However, past behaviour can be applied to this research and thus is included as an
additional predictor of behaviour in this study.
The effectiveness of the Theory is tested both quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitative
questions measure all constructs of the TPB individually and a correlation is carried out to
test each construct’s effectiveness at predicting exercise behaviour in different settings.
Intention to exercise was not measured as it would predict future exercise behaviour and
exercise behaviour data is only collected at one time. Based on previous research supporting
the TPB, it is predicted that each of the TPB constructs will significantly positively correlate
with actual exercise behaviour in all settings and thus support the notion that the theory is
effective at predicting exercise behaviour. As past research surrounding the TPB tends to be
quantitative this theory has not been explored much qualitatively. This may be because the
theory is easier to test quantitatively, especially across many different behaviours that may

8. USPJED-40-3 10013482
8
be qualitatively different from one another. There seems to be a gap in the literature,
therefore qualitative data is also collected in this study. Qualitative data is collected through
open-ended questions. This data is thematically analysed and motivations to exercise and
barriers preventing exercise are identified. The motivations and barriers are compared to
the TPB constructs to assess whether these motivations ‘fit in’ to these constructs. Ajzen
(1991) argued that behavioural intent reflects how hard a person is willing to try or how
motivated he or she is, to perform the behaviour; behavioural intent is thought to be
influenced by Attitude, Subjective Norm (SN) and Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC)
therefore studying motivations to exercise qualitatively was thought to be appropriate in
this research. If the constructs in the TPB are effective at predicting exercise behaviour, it is
expected to take all motivations to exercise and barriers preventing exercise into account.
Method
Design
Once ethical approval was obtained (see Appendix 4), a mixed methods design was
employed. A mixed methods approach was needed for this research as one methodology
was insufficient to both analyse relationships between exercise behaviour and the TPB
constructs and to scrutinise whether participants themselves qualitatively identified
attitude, subjective norms, PBC and past behaviour as the only factors affecting whether
they choose to exercise or not. Intention to exercise was not measured as this would predict
future exercise behaviour and actual exercise behaviour was only collected at one time.

9. USPJED-40-3 10013482
9
In this study several correlations were carried out to test for a positive relationship between
The TPB constructs (Attitude, Subjective Norms, Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC) and
past behaviour) and exercise behaviour, in different settings (work, travel, home, garden
and leisure) at different intensities (vigorous, moderate or walking). A positive relationship
would indicate that the construct correlated with exercise behaviour would have a
significant influence on whether the participant exercises or not.
Qualitative data were also collected in this survey through open-ended questions. Data was
analysed using Thematic Analysis to identify themes in the data relating to participants’
motivations to exercise. This method was utilised to assess whether these motivations
would make sense in terms of The TPB constructs. The type of thematic analysis conducted
was deductive, semantic and essentialist. Thematic Analysis was considered a ‘good’
method of analysis as it allows for unanticipated responses; is relatively quick and easy and
Braun and Clarke (2006) state it is a good method to use for researchers with little
experience of qualitative research. The qualitative questions on the survey were designed
using Ajzen’s (2002) ‘Constructing a Theory of Planned Behaviour Questionnaire’. The
statements were put to participants to respond to quantitatively first and then they were
asked to explain why they felt this way qualitatively e.g. ‘why do you see physical activities
to be a good/bad thing?’
Participants
There were 40 participants in the sample; 11 males, 28 females and 1 ‘undisclosed’. The age
range was between 18 and 30 years; this was an inclusion criteria to ensure the sample
represented a young population. A smaller sample was thought to be appropriate as both
quantitative and qualitative data were being analysed and it would have been time

10. USPJED-40-3 10013482
10
consuming to analyse both kinds of data from more Ps. 40 Ps was also thought to be a large
enough sample to represent the population. All Ps were students attending the University of
the West of England. The sampling method was opportunity sampling; Ps accessed the
survey via the participant pool at university and completed it in order to obtain credit
counting towards their degree. This method was thought to be appropriate as it was less
time-consuming; data was collected quickly and easily and, as Ps accessed the survey via
university, it was easier to obtain a student sample of the desired age range.
Materials
A single survey was created to measure all variables (See Appendix 1). It consisted of 49
questions. It was formulated by combining the International Physical Activity Questionnaire
(IPAQ) (long version) and questions formulated using Ajzen’s (2002) ‘Constructing a Theory
of Planned Behaviour Questionnaire’. The IPAQ data measured the respondents’ actual
behaviours quantitatively. Craig et al. (2003) found when using the IPAQ across 12 different
countries the questionnaires produced repeatable data (Spearman’s rho clustered around
0.8). The long form of the IPAQ was used in this research as it is more suited for research
requiring more detailed assessment and the short form is more suitable for national
monitoring. Since this research was on a much smaller scale, the longer version was chosen.
As this questionnaire also surveys exercise behaviour in a number of different settings, it
was thought to be more useful when testing whether the constructs have the same
predictive power in different settings. This questionnaire measured exercise behaviour by
setting (e.g. work) and by intensity (e.g. vigorous). In each of these settings Ps were required
to report days of exercise in the last 7, and minutes of exercise in that setting on one of
those days. This number of minutes was then multiplied by the number of days the

11. USPJED-40-3 10013482
11
participant reported exercising at that level in that setting. For example, if a P reported
exercising for 40 minutes vigorously during their leisure time on one day in the last 7 days,
and reported exercising this way 4 days in the last 7 their overall score for vigorous leisure
exercise would be 160. It is assumed that if the P exercised for 40 minutes on one of those 4
days they would exercise for 40 minutes on the other days as well.
As previously mentioned this questionnaire was integrated with questions, both
quantitative and qualitative, formulated using Ajzen’s (2002) ‘Constructing a Theory of
Planned Behaviour Questionnaire’. These questions tested the constructs of the TPB
individually, including the past behaviour construct which will be included in this study.
Attitude, Subjective Norms, PBC and past behaviour were all measured by means of likert
scales. Ps were shown several statements and given the option to respond with 1 of 7
responses. An example question would be ‘I believe frequent exercise to be a good thing’,
Ps could then respond with one of the following options - strongly disagree, disagree,
somewhat disagree, neither agree nor disagree, somewhat agree, disagree, strongly agree.
Each response was represented numerically with numbers 1 – 7; 1 meaning strongly
disagree, 7 meaning strongly agree.
Other likert scales were used measuring importance, likelihood, and similarity to self.
Several questions were used to measure each construct so that scores from the questions
measuring the same constructs could then be added together to produce overall Attitude,
Subjective Norm, PBC and past behaviour ‘scores’. Subjective Norm was split into 4 separate
sections as the construct appeared to be multifaceted. These sub-sections were - normative
importance (how important are your peers’ opinions of your exercise habits?), similar habits
(how similar are your exercise habits to your peers’?), important similar (how important it is

12. USPJED-40-3 10013482
12
to have similar exercise habits to your peers’?) and likely encourage (how likely are peers to
encourage you to exercise?). A higher score for Attitude indicates a more positive attitude
towards exercise; for Subjective Norm indicates subjective norms are more important; for
PBC indicates high PBC and for past behaviour indicates typically higher levels of exercise
than reported.
Quantitative questions were followed by qualitative open-ended questions allowing the Ps
to explain why he/she felt, for example, a friend’s opinion on their exercise habits was
important or unimportant to them. These questions were formulated by rewording the
quantitative questions simply allowing Ps to express why they held this opinion. Ajzen
himself explains how to test the TPB constructs (Ajzen, 2002), this could allow for bias when
making this questionnaire; however as there are no standardised questionnaires to test the
TPB, formulating questions following these instructions was one of the few viable options
when collecting data through a survey.
Procedure
Participants were recruited by means of the University participant pool through opportunity
sampling. Before beginning the survey Ps were shown an information sheet (see Appendix
1), divulging all information about the study; Ps were not deceived at all. Ps were given a
link to a website explaining what exercise addiction is and another link in case, although this
is highly unlikely, anyone became worried by taking this survey that they may have an
addiction to exercise. Ps were then shown a consent form (see Appendix 1) that informs the
Ps they can withdraw at any point without giving a reason for doing so; all information will
be kept confidential; the survey will bring them no physical or psychological harm and asks

13. USPJED-40-3 10013482
13
for their consent to participate. The Ps must have understood and agreed to the terms of
the consent form before continuing to take the survey.
Ps were required to complete one online survey which should have taken no more than 30
minutes to complete. Each participant was assigned a unique code so no data may be traced
personally back to any individual. It was the participants’ responsibility to ensure their data
was kept private whilst they completed the questionnaire e.g. complete it in a confidential
setting such as at home on their home computer with no one watching. After Ps had
completed the online survey they were shown a debrief sheet (see Appendix 2) attached to
the end of the survey reiterating the purpose of the study and informing them of previous
research in the area.
Once all data was collected, it was downloaded to SPSS for statistical analysis and the
qualitative data was transferred to Microsoft Word for coding. The qualitative data was
analysed using a deductive, semantic and essentialist approach. Deductive as the TPB is
being tested so the analysis was theory driven; essentialist as the responses coded were
taken to represent the participants’ ‘true’ reality and semantic as the entire data set was
coded in a descriptive manner. The data was read several times so it was familiar.
Everything concerning motivations or barriers to exercise was coded and similar codes were
grouped together if they were considered to portray the same underlying motivation or
barrier to exercise (see Appendix 5 for an example of coded data).
Results
Section 1 : Quantitative

14. USPJED-40-3 10013482
14
Before analysis some of the ambiguous data had to be altered in order for analysis to be
possible. A few participants stated the time they had spent doing exercise in hours,
consequently this was changed to minutes. 3 participants also stated the time they spent
exercising as a range e.g. 30 – 60 minutes, these entries were changed to the middle value
of the range – 45 minutes in this instance (full details in Appendix 3). A high value for these
variables indicated more minutes spent exercising.
As previously mentioned, scores from questions measuring the same TPB construct were
added together to produce an overall score for that construct. Furthermore for each setting
minutes of exercise was multiplied by days of exercise in that setting in the last 7 days to
create an overall number of minutes of exercise for the last 7 days. Individual correlations
were carried out between minutes of exercise in each setting and the TPB constructs. If the
TPB is effective at predicting exercise behaviour all constructs should be positively
correlated to actual behaviour. The hypothesis that all the TPB constructs would correlate
with actual exercise behaviour in all settings was not supported. A Pearson’s r test showed a
statistically significant positive correlation between leisure walking and SN, specifically
normative importance i.e. the importance of peers’ opinions on how much the individual
exercises (r=0.35, N=35, p=0.039). However, this was the only statistically significant
correlation found; none of the TPB constructs were significantly correlated with any other
exercise variable. Exercise through working, bicycle riding, walking as a means of travel,
gardening, housework and leisure activities (vigorous and moderate) were not significantly
correlated to the TPB constructs (p>0.05, See Figure 1).

15. USPJED-40-3 10013482
15
Figure 1. A table of correlations between TPB variables and exercise behaviour (p values to 2
decimal places)
Type of exercise
TPB variables
Attitude Normative
importance
Similar
habits
Important
similar
Likely
encourage
PBC Past
exercise
Vigorous work 0.50 0.69 0.22 0.27 0.35 0.55 0.22
Moderate work 0.32 0.66 0.43 0.15 0.36 0.17 0.26
Walking work 0.20 0.94 0.28 0.55 0.32 0.89 0.54
Bicycle riding 0.13 0.54 0.54 0.32 0.54 0.80 0.13
Walking to travel 0.63 0.48 0.78 0.47 0.69 0.90 0.92
Vigorous garden 0.25 0.07 0.58 0.80 0.62 0.54 0.64
Moderate garden 0.45 0.18 0.58 0.45 0.79 0.54 0.85
Moderate
housework
0.70 0.25 0.83 0.38 0.75 0.51 0.16
Leisure walking 0.22 0.04* 0.25 0.17 0.45 0.76 0.30
Vigorous leisure 0.19 0.16 0.52 0.64 0.11 0.32 0.12
Moderate leisure 0.11 0.28 0.53 1.00 0.70 0.14 0.30
Section 2 : Qualitative
A thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data, and 8 themes surrounding
motivations to exercise were identified. The themes identified were - Health, Competition,
Friendship, Performance, Appearance, ‘Feeling Good’ and finally Independence. A further 5
themes surrounding barriers to exercise were also identified. These themes were - Exercise
as not a priority; The body as a barrier; Motivation; Weather and Money. Of these, themes
of Health, Friendship, Independence and Exercise as not a priority will be discussed and
analysed in terms of whether they fit into the TPB constructs.
Health
A number of Ps identified health as a motivator to exercise. Ps responses suggest that they
believe exercise improves their health therefore hold a positive attitude towards it and are
more likely to engage in it. P19 stated that “It (exercise) is a good thing because it… keeps

16. USPJED-40-3 10013482
16
me physically and mentally healthy”. This response indicates the P’s belief that by exercising
she will remain healthy, both physically and mentally. This broadens the term of health to
include mental health as well as physical health. P28 also seemed to share this belief about
exercise – “(Exercise) contributes to keeping a healthy weight and healthy mental state”.
P10 reported that “Exercise is just as important as a good balanced diet”; this extract
suggests that this P believes that incorporating exercise is just as important as a healthy diet
in order to maintain a healthy lifestyle. It seems that Ps tend to hold positive attitudes
towards exercise behaviour and believe that by exercising they will experience positive
health outcomes. This implies that the P holds a positive belief towards exercise before
engaging in it; the expectation of positive health outcomes is the motivator to engage in
exercise. These beliefs strongly resemble the Attitude construct of the TPB – positive
evaluation of a particular behaviour due to expected positive outcomes from it.
P41 stated that “It will make me become fitter because I am doing more exercise, it effects
my attitude positively”. This supports the assumption that the expectation of positive
outcomes is what drives the P to exercise, and the relevance of the Attitude construct in this
theory. However, it could be interpreted that, this positive attitude towards exercise
behaviour has been produced through exercising. Therefore it is not the Ps attitude that has
made them intend to exercise, it is in exercising itself that this positive attitude towards it
has been produced. P23 articulates that “I force myself to go to the gym almost every day …
so my fitness improves, this has changed my attitude towards exercise because I can see the
changes in myself and makes me feel a lot more positive about it”. As the P reported she has
to force herself to exercise, this implies that the positive belief she holds towards exercise
was not there originally; it was after she began to see fitness and health improvements

17. USPJED-40-3 10013482
17
through exercising that she began to feel positively about exercise. This supports the
alternative interpretation that, through exercising and experiencing positive health
outcomes, the positive attitude is induced.
Some Ps also discussed their concerns about the negative health effects of not exercising.
The concern that by not exercising there will be negative health repercussions may be
another important motivator to exercise. P7 reported that he felt exercise was important
“because I don’t want to be unhealthy or unfit”. This extract supports the notion that health
may also motivate participants to exercise in order for them to avoid becoming unhealthy or
unwell. P32 stated that exercising was important to him “Because I want to be active now in
order to have a long and healthy life”; this implies that it is believed that, by exercising, life-
threatening illness is less likely and health is maintained in the future. Ps appear to hold the
attitude that exercise prevents bad health and thus is a good thing, supporting the inclusion
of the Attitude component in the TPB. However, Ps attitudes may not be entirely positive –
they may not enjoy exercise but see the behaviour as necessary to remain in good health.
Friendship
Another motivator to exercise identified across the data was ‘Friendship’. Ps seem to
identify exercise as important as they want others to feel positively towards them and feel
exercise will help to produce this positive opinion. Others appear to feel that exercising is a
fundamental requirement of being in their friendship group. Ps also reported that they
enjoy exercising with friends - for some as it keeps them motivated, and for others as they
enjoy the company. This theme was split into two sub-themes – Acceptance and Company.
Acceptance

18. USPJED-40-3 10013482
18
Acceptance was a recurrent sub-theme throughout the data. A number of participants
reported pressure to engage in physical activity from their peers. A number of Ps reported
caring about their peers’ opinions of their exercise habits; P2 stated “I care about these
people’s opinions as it reflects what they think of me”. Ps seemed to feel that through
exercising their peers would think more positively about them and they would be accepted;
P38 “I care what they think everyone wants to be accepted its human nature”. It would
appear that a motivator to exercise is Ps wanting to conform to group norms by engaging in
exercise and thus to be accepted. A number of other Ps expressed their desire to appear
how they perceived their peers wanted them to i.e. active; P33 reported “I don’t want to
seem lazy”. This extract implies the P cares about others’ opinions of her exercise habits as
she doesn’t want to be perceived badly. The SN construct in the TPB refers to the
perception of normative amounts of a behaviour (e.g. exercise) and perceived pressure to
perform that behaviour and motivation to comply with these norms. As previously shown in
the data extracts, it appears some Ps perceive social pressure to engage in exercise and are
thus more likely to participate as they don’t want to be disapproved of. P26 said “(I) Don’t
want to be looked down on for not exercising”. This implies the P perceives exercise habits
to be important to her social status; she feels she must exercise in order for others to not
think badly of her and is therefore motivated to comply to these norms, supporting the
relevance of the SN construct.
Some Ps reported they felt they had to adhere to the amount of exercise their peers were
engaging in - P32“I feel pressure to keep up with them”. Some described feeling badly if
they did not conform to the amount of exercise their peers do - P33 “If I don’t adhere to the
amount they do I feel guilty”. It seems that some Ps felt a sense of need to engage in the

19. USPJED-40-3 10013482
19
‘expected’ amount of exercise that those around them engage in, and comply with social
norms. P7 stated that “Because they are your friends they are going to have similar interests
as you”. This suggests this P may believe that peers are supposed to do as much exercise as
one another; it is almost as if it is believed to be a requirement of friendship to engage in
the same levels of exercise as each other so you have that in common. This implies that by
conforming to the normative amount of exercise in the group, it is believed you are
accepted within the friendship group. This would be the individual’s motivation to comply
with exercise norms if this was to be understood in terms of the SN construct.
Company
Another sub—theme identified under the broader theme of ‘Friendship’ was Company. It
was interpreted that peer company and encouragement whilst exercising was a motivator
to exercise. P4 “I train with a friend in the gym, and he helps keep me motivated in going to
the gym and when we are there to keep pushing me”. It appears that it may not just be
social pressures that make people exercise but their company that motivates them – P14
“My family sometimes encourage me to exercise. It motivates me if they are also doing the
activity.” This statement implies the encouragement only works coupled with company of
others also engaging in the activity, otherwise encouragement alone would not work. This P
doesn’t seem to feel the opinions of others on his exercise habits are important; it would
seem company is his encouragement. The influence of company is not addressed in the
TPB, social norms are the only motivator mentioned. When asked if the amount their peers
exercise influences their exercise habits P1 reported “they (peers) come with me and make
me go with them when I am less inclined”; this suggests that if this P didn’t have his peers

20. USPJED-40-3 10013482
20
for company whilst exercising he would not go as often. P12 reported she was motivated by
company - “Friends for company at the gym”.
Throughout the data it was noticed that Ps sometimes used exercise as a means to meet up
with, and socialise with friends - P10 “I find exercise to be a social thing as well so spending
time with family and friends at the same time”. This data implies that peers sometimes
make time for seeing their friends through exercising together - P2 “Same interests, stuff to
talk about and fitting in time for your friends via exercise”. It could be interpreted that if
peers did not exercise the same amount as this P they may not be ‘fit in’ to this P’s life as
easily; friendships could be being maintained through exercising together socially. This
influence is not directly referred to in the TPB motivation to exercise as it is a social activity
– social influences are only mentioned in the SN construct referring to others’ attitudes
about the behaviour affecting the individual’s.
P38 stated “It is easier to work out with a buddy then alone”. This response implies that
exercise seems less challenging when you have a “buddy” to exercise with. Several Ps
reported a preference to exercising with peers – P8 “I prefer to exercise with friends” and
that it was more enjoyable – P37 “it is more fun to exercise with friends”. These responses
seem to suggest that Ps are more motivated to exercise if with someone else, as it is more
fun which makes them want to exercise more - P27 “playing sports with friends is always
more enjoyable and you are more likely to want to do it again”. These extracts seem to
support the Attitude construct in the TPB as Ps feel more positive about the behaviour if
they have company and are therefore more likely to participate in it; however there is no
direct mention of company as a motivator in the TPB and it seems to be, for these Ps, of
some importance.

21. USPJED-40-3 10013482
21
Independence
On the other hand, many Ps deemed exercise to be a personal activity and seemed to feel
the exercise habits of others or others’ opinions on their exercise habits were unimportant.
This is a completely contrasting opinion to those previously mentioned. P35 reported “my
social life doesn’t revolve around exercise”, this response implies that for this P social
acceptance does not depend upon how much exercise they do. P27 reported “I am my own
person and keep what I do to myself and don’t let other influence me” this statement was
interpreted to mean this P does not care about others’ influences or opinions on their
(undisclosed gender) exercise habits, it was interpreted that they feel they exercise as much
as they want regardless of others. This opinion seemed to be shared – P6 “I don’t care that
much about other people’s opinions”. Others expressed the failure of others’ pressures to
persuade them to exercise - P37 “Family have (tried to motivate me) but doesn’t motivate
me”. It would seem that some feel their exercise habits are personal and, even when under
pressure from others to exercise, they will exercise or not exercise as they would have done
without outside influences. These extracts completely contest the importance of the SN
construct as these Ps felt others opinions had no influence on their exercise behaviours and
felt no pressure to comply.
Some participants wrote about how exercise was for personal gain, therefore it seemed
these Ps felt others’ opinions were irrelevant - P34 “I exercise for my benefit not theirs”.
Others wrote about their individuality - P9 “Everyone is different and need different levels
of exercise”. It seemed some Ps believe exercise habits are subjective to the needs of the
individual and a personal activity and therefore social norms were of no importance to
them. It was interpreted that many Ps felt they themselves were the only people important

22. USPJED-40-3 10013482
22
in deciding their own exercise habits - P21 “it is my choice what I do with my body”. P17
reported “I don’t try and do the same as them the lack of exercise is based on my time”, this
extract was interpreted to mean this Ps exercise habits are nothing to do with others’ habits
or opinions; it is this P’s time that controls how much exercise she engages in, which is
personal to the individual.
Exercise as not a priority
The main barrier Ps reported for not engaging in exercise was time; P10 “Lack of time is a
barrier that stops me from exercising”. However it was interpreted that throughout the data
when Ps mentioned having a lack of ‘time’ it actually meant that exercise was not a priority
and other pressures took precedence; P18 “Time is a major barrier in trying to fit everything
in”. It seemed that it was not time itself that stood in the way of exercising, rather the
engagement in other activities. P4 reported “I have a lot of studying to do and that is out of
my control” it was interpreted that Ps chose to blame other commitments on their lack of
exercise and perceived to have no control over these other commitments as barriers. P17
shared the belief that other commitments were a barrier to exercise - “My workload stands
in the way, I have no control over deadlines and amount of work”. These responses support
the inclusion of PBC in the TPB as Ps perceive that these other commitments stop them
from engaging in exercise and they have no control over these barriers.
Interestingly however, when asked about the barriers that prevent exercise, P25 reported
“social activity and uni work … limit the time I can spend doing exercise. I have control over
these but choose to allocate my time this way”; this P writes of the other commitments
preventing exercise, however states that he has control over his time as he chooses which
activities to engage in at any time or not. This extract supports the notion that Ps reporting

23. USPJED-40-3 10013482
23
having a lack of time may just feel exercise is not a priority in their lives and use other
commitments as an excuse to not exercise, as they have a choice which activities they
engage in. This interpretation is also supported by P15’s entry “It’s (exercise is) not that
important to me because I find other things to do”. These two Ps seem to feel there is
always a choice of how to allocate your own time. They were interpreted to feel they have
control over their barriers to exercise however still do not want to engage in it. This
contests the importance of the PBC construct in the TPB for these Ps.
Discussion
It was found that only the SN construct was related to walking exercise behaviour in a
leisure setting. No other significant correlations were found. The hypothesis that the TPB
constructs would all relate to all types of exercise behaviour in all settings was not
supported. This is not in-keeping with what other researchers have found; the literature
mainly supports the TPB (Madden, Ellen and Ajzen, 1992; Armitage and Conner, 2001; Godin
and Kok, 1996; Hausenblas, Carron and Mack, 1997). As there is vast support for the TPB in
the literature and the current research largely contests what has been found before, the
methods used to collect data in this study may need to be questioned.
The scales used to calculate total exercise behaviour for the week may have influenced the
results. Days of exercising were multiplied by the time the P reported to have exercised on
one of those days; the P may not have necessarily exercised for that amount of time on each
of the occasions they exercised that week. Therefore this scale may not be valid as it may
not be a true representation of the time each P exercised in that week; the amount of

24. USPJED-40-3 10013482
24
exercise is likely to be overestimated. The quantitative questions in the survey measuring
PBC and past exercise may also have limited validity. The question supposed to be
measuring PBC only asks the P to rate if they feel their current fitness level will allow them
to exercise a healthy amount. As PBC is composed of the Ps perception of both internal
(skills( i.e. fitness level)) and external control factors (i.e. obstacles), this question may only
have allowed for the former to be measured. The question measuring past exercise only
asks the P if they normally do more or less exercise than they have stated in the survey. This
does not adequately represent whether the P has exercised regularly in the past or not; it
only tells whether they currently do more or less than was reported. It should also be noted
that as the survey only asked P to recount the amount the P exercised within the last 7 days
this may not be a true representation of how much the P exercises typically. If the test were
carried out again completely different results could be obtained, consequently the data may
not be reliable.
Another major limitation of this research is that data was analysed using several
correlations; this does not allow for any causal relationship to be established between
variables, the significant result found only implies a relationship. There could be another
variable influencing both levels of SN and walking exercise behaviour. Other confounding
influences could have been that, as the information sheet informed Ps exactly what was
being measured, they could have answered the survey differently than they would have
done had they not known why the questions were being asked. Although this method allows
for the Ps not to be deceived in any way, the knowledge of what the research is about could
have influenced their responses. A second confounder could have been that data was
collected by means of self-report. Ps were trusted to truthfully and accurately account their

25. USPJED-40-3 10013482
25
exercise behaviours of the past week. Social desirability bias could have interfered with how
truthful the accounts of exercise behaviour were; Ps may have reported more exercise than
they actually participated in as they may view exercise as a socially desirable activity, or may
have reported a positive attitude towards exercise when they may actually feel indifferent.
The qualitative data provided partial support for TPB constructs. Attitude seemed to be an
important motivator; SN was interpreted to be an important motivator but the theme of
Independence contested it’s relevance for some Ps. PBC appeared to be a factor as to
whether Ps exercised or not, however some participants seemed to feel that they did have
control over the barriers preventing exercise and chose not to exercise. This raised the
question as to whether the Ps in fact did not have control over the barriers preventing
exercise or did have control over these barriers but used them as excuses not to exercise as
it was not a priority.
Although you cannot generalise qualitative research, some researchers have also theorised
that barriers reported may not be “real” barriers, or even perceived as real, but excuses to
not exercise as it is not a priority to them. Dishman (2001) theorised that Ps reporting
barriers to exercise were not necessarily reporting real obstacles to exercise. It was found
that exercisers and non-exercisers reported the same barriers; if this is the case then it
raises the question of how some Ps in the current study felt they had control over these
barriers and some did not? Dishman also noted that some drop-outs from an exercise
program lived closer to exercise facilities and had more leisure time than their counterparts
who continued with the exercise program. Barriers that Ps are reporting may well be
excuses more than actual barriers. Ps may have wanted to report they had no control over
the barriers to exercise due to the social desirability effect; they may not have wanted to

26. USPJED-40-3 10013482
26
appear ‘lazy’. Morgan (1977) found that even those living in environments where time
restraints are minimal (e.g. prison), do not have exercise habits that are substantially
different from those of people in the general population. The findings of this study suggest
that for some, other commitments and time are just an excuse not to engage in exercise, as
people with large amounts of free time still do not do significantly more exercise than the
general population. Ps in the current study may have believed that they had no control over
the barriers to exercise – “I have a lot of studying to do and that is out of my control”, which
would support the inclusion of PBC in the TPB. However, some reported having control over
the same barriers but choose to engage in other activities in their leisure time – “I have
control over these but choose to allocate my time this way” these extracts support the
notion that some barriers that are reported may just be excuses not to engage in exercise.
PBC is partially supported however, it will prove very challenging to tell whether Ps are
reporting real barriers or just making excuses. This should be explored in further research.
Ps seemed to hold positive attitudes towards exercise due to it being perceived as being
good for their health – “It is a good thing because… it keeps me physically and mentally
healthy”. However it seemed to be unclear whether the positive attitude preceded the
exercise behaviour and motivated the Ps to engage in it or was induced by “seeing results”
through participating in exercise and therefore feeling more positively about it. Sutton
(2002) argues that the TPB constructs are assumed to causally influence behaviour and this
causality cannot be assumed unless experimental methods are used to conclude this. The
theory does not consider that an attitude could be induced by the engagement in a
behaviour or that relationships between variables may not be causal. Sniehotta (2009)
tested the TPB experimentally using a behaviour change intervention and found that

27. USPJED-40-3 10013482
27
although the constructs successfully predicted intention, behaviour change was not in line
with the theory; there appeared to be an intention-behaviour gap. He concluded that the
TPB leading position in behavioural science should be questioned. However, as this
experiment took place over 2 months, complete control over all extraneous variables was
unlikely to have been maintained; this could have affected the results of this study.
This intention-behaviour gap has been addressed in the research; Conner and Armitage
(1998) suggest that past behaviour can account for 13% future behaviour. Ouellette and
Wood (1998) suggest possible ways past behaviour could influence future behaviour. The
first suggestion is that past behaviour may cause a conscious change in cognition e.g. “I
exercised and it felt good so I will again today”. This pathway seems to explain why some Ps
were interpreted to have induced their positive attitude towards exercise by engaging in it –
“I force myself to go to the gym almost every day … so my fitness improves, this has
changed my attitude towards exercise because I can see the changes in myself and makes
me feel a lot more positive about it”. This additional variable in the TPB may account for
more of the variability in behaviour, and should be included in the model in future studies.
Although this construct was not found to relate to exercise behaviour in the current study,
as was discussed earlier, the quantitative question measuring past behaviour may not have
been valid.
Another question raised by the study was that as Ps only spoke a little about why they felt
positively or negatively towards exercise, it was unclear whether their opinions were
entirely either positive or negative. Breckler (1994) theorised that individuals may hold
“competing evaluative predispositions” towards a behaviour; meaning their attitudes would
not entirely be either positive of negative towards exercise. Sparks et al. (2001) found when

28. USPJED-40-3 10013482
28
taking both negative and positive attitudes into account, when using the TPB to predict food
consumption, participants holding more ambivalent attitudes were less likely to translate
their overall attitude into an intention to eat and actual consumption. These findings
suggest that taking both positive and negative attitudes towards a behaviour into account
and creating an overall attitude variable that considers ambivalence, could account for more
variability in intention and behaviour. Ambivalence should be considered in future studies in
order to get a ‘true’ representation of a participant’s attitude. This could also be possible if
qualitative interviews took place so the researcher could collect rich in-depth data
conveying the participant’s full attitude towards exercise e.g. it is good for my health so I
feel positively about it, however it tires me out and is boring so I feel negatively about
engaging in it.
Support was found for the SN construct within the data – Acceptance was a common sub-
theme throughout. Some Ps seemed to feel that if they listened to their peers’ opinions and
engaged in physical activity they would be accepted by them - “I care what they think
everyone wants to be accepted its human nature”. Some also appeared to feel that they
had to engage in exercise in order to be accepted as if it were a requirement of friendship -
“I feel pressure to keep up with them”. However, Independence was also a common sub-
theme throughout the data. Some Ps felt others’ opinions on their exercise habits were
unimportant - “I don’t care that much about other people’s opinions” and others reported
the failed attempts of others to encourage them to exercise - “Family have (tried to
motivate me) but doesn’t motivate me”. These are contradictory findings suggesting that SN
are not an important motivator to exercise for all; there is an element of subjectivity
possibly depending on the Ps personalities. It appears that a few of the Ps seemed to be

29. USPJED-40-3 10013482
29
self-motivated to engage in exercise behaviour, without external influences - “I am my own
person and keep what I do to myself and don’t let other influence me”. Self-determination
theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000) is a theory of human motivation concerned with how
individuals motivate themselves to engage in a behaviour without outside influence.
Ingledew, Markland and Sheppard (2004) speculated, when investigating personality and
self-determination of exercise behaviour, that extroverted individuals feel self-determined
to exercise as engaging in exercise satisfies their need for relatedness. It was also theorised
that conscientious individuals are able to feel self-determined to exercise as it satisfies their
need for competence. This suggests that the SN construct may bear less motivational
influence on those extroverted or conscientious individuals. Perhaps personality should be
taken into account when using the TPB to predict exercise behaviour as the constructs may
be less influential to some than others.
In a wide variety of studies SN has been found to be the weakest predictor of behaviour in
the TPB (Armitage and Conner, 2001). However some studies have found that similar
influences that are not mentioned in the TPB are influential. As was discussed in the study
Company was a common sub-theme. This is not mentioned directly in the theory and in this
data appeared to be very influential - “Friends for company at the gym”. Ball, Bauman, Leslie
and Owen (2001) found walking with a companion, peers or pets was positively correlated
with engaging in more walking exercise behaviour. Although this is only a correlational study
meaning there was only a relationship between variables, it was not necessarily causal.
However, Courneya, Plotnikoff, Hotz, and Birkett (2000) found when conducting telephone
interviews that social support was a superior predictor of exercise intention than SN. In the
current study many Ps commented on their peers providing social support to continue with

30. USPJED-40-3 10013482
30
exercise behaviour - “I train with a friend in the gym, and he helps keep me motivated in
going to the gym and when we are there to keep pushing me”. These findings suggest that
the SN construct should be revised or these additional variables should be considered in the
theory when being used to predict exercise behaviour.
Although qualitative data cannot be generalised it appears that the TPB cannot account for
all the motivators Ps report to engage in exercise behaviour in the current study. In future
studies, past behaviour, ambivalence of attitude, personality, company and social support
should be taken into account to investigate whether these additional variables will increase
the predictive power of the TPB.
The current study takes a fairly novel approach to this research area, qualitative studies are
not common in exploring theories of behaviour. The study allows for quantitative analysis as
well as analysis of in-depth qualitative data allowing the Ps to explain why they felt for
example a peer’s opinions on their exercise behaviour was important or unimportant. The
method allowed for explanation of underlying mechanisms of influence on exercise
behaviour. By using two methodologies this allows for triangulation; if quantitative
methodology alone had been used it may have been concluded that the TPB constructs
have little relation to exercise behaviour however, the qualitative data found partial support
for the constructs therefore the quantitative methodology was questioned.
Despite the study’s strengths, there were several methodological issues in addition to those
stated earlier. The qualitative questions asked to Ps were leading and could have affected
responses e.g. ’Does the amount your peers exercise influence how much you exercise?
Why?’. This question directly asks the P to think about whether his/her peers influence how
much he/she exercises; if this study were to be carried out again more general questions

31. USPJED-40-3 10013482
31
should be asked to Ps such as ‘what motivates you to exercise?’ . This way a true account
may be given as to what is important to the P when it comes to influences to exercise.
However, when using leading questions, Ps still reported other motivators other than the
TPB constructs – Company, Appearance and so on. In future studies perhaps conducting a
focus group asking Ps about general motivations to exercise would be more beneficial. As
there was only one significant result when conducting a quantitative study perhaps the
constructs may be ‘captured’ better qualitatively. Ps can then freely report all motivators
and barriers to exercise without such leading questions restricting what they can discuss.
In conclusion, this study provides partial support for the effectiveness of the TPB in
predicting exercise behaviour. However, in future studies the theory should be tested
qualitatively so all motivations to exercise can be explored in an in-depth fashion. Additional
variables should also be considered when using this theory to predict exercise behaviour as
this research and a number of studies support the inclusion of these variables – past
behaviour, ambivalence of attitude, personality, company and social support.

32. USPJED-40-3 10013482
32
References
Armitage, C. J., Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-
analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
Ajzen, I., (2002). Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological
considerations. Retrieved from http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~aizen/pdf.
tpbmeasurement.pdf.
Ball, K., Bauman, A., Leslie, E., Owen, N. (2001). Perceived environmental aesthetics and
convenience and company are associated with walking for exercise among Australian
adults, Preventive Medicine, 33( 5), 434–40.
Bozionelos, G., & Bennett, P. (1999). The Theory of Planned Behaviour as predictor of
exercise: The moderating influence of beliefs and personality variables. Journal of Health
Psychology, 4, 517–529.
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77-10.
Breckler, S. J. (1994). A comparison of numerical indices for measuring attitudinal
ambivalence. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 350-365.
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, 1429-1464.

33. USPJED-40-3 10013482
33
Courneya, K. S., Plotnikoff, R. C., Hotz, S. B., Birkett, N. J. (2000). Social support and the
theory of planned behavior in the exercise domain. American Journal of Health Behavior, 24,
300-308
Craig, C. L., Marshall, A. L., Sjorstrom, M., Bauman, A. E., Booth, M. L., Ainsworth, B. E.,
Pratt, M., Ekelund, J. F., Oja, P. (2003) International physical activity questionnaire: 12-
country reliability and validity. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 35 8: 1381-
1395.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Dishman, R.K. (2001). The problem of exercise adherence: Fighting sloth in nations with
market economies, Quest, 53, 279-294.
Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to
Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Godin, G., Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications in
health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11, 87-98.
Hausenblas, H. A., Carron, A. V., Mack, D. E. (1997). Application of the theories of reasoned
action and planned behavior to exercise behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, 19, 36-51.
Ingledew, D.K., Markland, D., Sheppard, K.E. (2004). Personality and self-determination of
exercise behaviour. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1921-1932.

34. USPJED-40-3 10013482
34
Knowles, S., Hyde, M., White, K. (2012) Predictors of Young People’s Charitable Intentions to
donate Money: An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Perspective. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 42, 9, pp. 2096–2110.
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior
and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 3-9.
Morgan, W. P. (1977). Involvement in vigorous physical activity with special reference to
adherence. In L I. Gedvilasand M.W. Kneer (Eds.) Proceedings of National College Physical
Education Association, pp. 235-246.
Ogden, J. (2012) Health Psychology: a textbook: Open University Press: Buckingham
Ouellette, J. A., Wood, W. (1998). Habit and Intention in Everyday Life: The Multiple
Processes by Which Past Behavior Predicts Future Behavior. Psychology Bulletin, 124(1), 54-
74.
Sniehotta, F. (2009). An Experimental Test of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Applied
Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 257–270.
Sparks, P., Conner, M., James, R., Shepherd, R., Povey, R. (2001). Ambivalence about health-
related behaviours: An exploration in the domain of food choice. British Journal of Health
Psychology, 6, 53-68.
Spink, K., Wilson, K., Bostick, J. (2012). Theory of Planned Behavior and Intention to Exercise:
Effects of Setting. American Journal of Health Behavior. 36 (2), 254-264.

35. USPJED-40-3 10013482
35
Sutton, S. (2002). Testing attitude–behaviour theories using non-experimental data: An
examination of some hidden assumptions. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 293–
323.

36. USPJED-40-3 10013482
36
Appendices
Appendix 1: Information sheet, Consent Form, Survey - example of a completed survey

37. USPJED-40-3 10013482
37

38. USPJED-40-3 10013482
38

39. USPJED-40-3 10013482
39

40. USPJED-40-3 10013482
40

41. USPJED-40-3 10013482
41

42. USPJED-40-3 10013482
42

43. USPJED-40-3 10013482
43

44. USPJED-40-3 10013482
44

45. USPJED-40-3 10013482
45
Appendix 2: De-brief sheet
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey!
A revised version of Azjen's (1991) The Theory of Planned Behaviour was tested in this research. Ajzen
thought 3 main variables or “beliefs” of an individual could predict their subsequent behaviour. These
three beliefs were: attitude towards the behaviour, subjective norms , and perceived behavioural control
which together were said to shape an individual's behavioural intentions and ultimately their behaviours.
Perceived behavioural control is also seen to have a direct effect on behaviour. Past behaviour was also
included as a predictor variable. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of Ajzen's 'Theory of
Planned Behaviour' in relation to exercise behaviours. A second aim of the research is to test if past
behaviour is a significant predictor of intention and behaviour in relation to exercise.
Hausenblas, Carron and Mack (1997) is a meta-analysis which investigates the effectiveness of the
application of both the Theory of Reasoned Action (which is the Theory of Planned Behaviour minus the
Perceived Behavioural Control construct) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour when predicting exercise
behaviour. The paper concludes that there is strong evidence that the Theory of Reasoned Action is a
‘good’ theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour is an even better theory in predicting exercise
behaviour.
Armitage and Conner (2001) conducted a meta-analytic review looking into the efficacy of the Theory of
Planned Behaviour. Each construct was evaluated and it was found that the subjective norm construct is
generally found to be a weak predictor of intentions compared to attitude and perceived behavioural
control. In this research project questions are asked in order to measure all constructs of the Theory of
Planned Behaviour separately and evaluate the efficacy of the constructs qualitatively.
If you would like any further information or a copy of the results email ruth2.curtis@live.uwe.ac.uk
Appendix 3: Changes to data
 R_0U7XZRDAzMaD6At (8) – walk travel time 10-15 changed to 12.5minutes.
 R_eWXHSrXQPvETuAZ (10) – walk travel time 30 – 60 changed to 45 minutes.
 R_6VxSxIMh0Hbmqr3 (18) – sitting week 4-5 hours changed to 270 minutes (4.5 hrs),
sitting weekend changed from 3-4 hours to 210 minutes (3.5 hours).

46. USPJED-40-3 10013482
46
Appendix 4: Ethical Approval

47. USPJED-40-3 10013482
47
Appendix 5: Qualitative coding example
Q29. Why do you see physical activities to be a good/bad thing?
1. When you push too hard and cause injury
-Exercise associated with injury.
2. Improves health and confidence
- Exercise as improving health and confidence.
3. Can put unnecessary strain on the body and do more harm than good, must be moderated
for effectiveness.
- Exercise associated with negative health outcomes. “Right” amount of exercise needed.
4. They help to reduce fat, improve cardiovascular system, improve health generally.
- Exercise associated with health improvement.
5. Keeps me fit
- Exercise good for fitness and health.
6. Because it is good for your health
- Exercise as good for your health.
7. Because it gets you fit and healthy
- Exercise making you become fit and healthy.
8. I see physical activities as a good thing as they help keep you healthy
- Exercise as good. Keeping you healthy.
9. increases confidence and relieves stress
- Exercise as confidence boosting and mood improving.
10. Exercise is just as important as a good balanced diet
- Exercise as just as important for health as a good diet.
11. Healthy, good for your body
- Exercise as good for the body. Health improving.
12. Releases serotonin/makes you feel better/helps with fitness
- Exercise as mood and fitness improving.
13. keeps you motivated and fit
- Exercise as fitness. Exercise as motivating.
14. I see them as a good thing because as well as health benefits, you tend to feel happier
afterwards.
- Exercise as good – beneficial to health - and mood.
15. Good thing: To stay healthy and physically fit.
- Exercise as health and fitness; a positive thing.
16. it keeps you fit.
- Exercise as keeping you fit and healthy.
17. I don't see them as either good or bad, I just can't find the time to exercise with all the
course work i have to do.
- Neutral feelings about exercise. – Coursework as barrier to exercise.
18. maintain health, and weight
- Exercise as health. – Exercise to maintain current weight.
19. It is a good thing because it releases stress and keeps my physically and mentally healthy.
- Exercise as good for physical and mental health. – Exercise as stress relief.

48. USPJED-40-3 10013482
48
Research Project Schedule of Work Check List
The idea behind this check list is to help you organise your project work and so that you can
see at a glance the work that you need to do. It will also remind your supervisor of your
progress and will help them to provide an academic reference for you when you apply for
jobs or further study. It is also useful for keeping a record of your supervisory meetings and
to identify the level of support you have received.
Separate copies to be retained by the student and the supervisor.
Please synchronise your copies during your supervisory meetings.
Student’s Name Ruth Curtis
Student’s ID 10013482
Student’s Contact Details Ruth2.curtis@live.uwe.ac.uk
Working Title of Project
A mixed methods investigation testing the effectiveness of
the Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs at predicting
exercise behaviour
Please check off the following items as you achieve them. There is room to insert comments
and dates against each item if necessary.
Section 1. Student Declaration Comments
I have read and understood what to hand-in
and on which dates
Yes
I have read the Research Project in Psychology
module handbook
Yes
I understand that I should attempt to keep in
regular contact with my supervisor
Yes
I understand that if I intend to use human
participants that I must not begin testing until
I have received ethical approval (in the form of
an approved Project Certificate)
Yes
I understand that if I intend to use human
participants that it is an assessment offence to
provide false information on them
Yes
I understand that it is an assessment offence
to invent, covertly manipulate, or provide
false information about the data I have
collected and presented in my project
Yes
Section 2. The Planned Study
I have identified a topic area Yes
I have identified a purpose for the study Yes
I have defined the research question or
hypothesis
Yes
I have identified the basic design of the study Yes

49. USPJED-40-3 10013482
49
Section 3. Research Design
For an experimental or quantitative study:
I can describe each independent variable and its levels N/A Correlational – no IV or DV
I can describe the dependent variable(s) and how it is
(they are) to be measured
N/A Correlational – no IV or DV
I can state the particular statistical test to be used to
analyse the data
YES
I know how to use SPSS to analyse this data YES
I have identified a useful text to help me if necessary YES
For a qualitative study:
I am aware of the particular approach for gathering and
analysing the data
YES
I am aware of the method of analysis YES
I know how to apply the method of analysis on my
particular data
YES
I have identified a useful text to help me if necessary YES
I have discussed which materials to use for the
study (photographs, text, music,
questionnaires etc) and how to develop or
obtain them
YES
Section 4. Health & Safety and Ethical Issues
I have discussed ethical issues with my
supervisor
YES
I have discussed any permissions needed with
my supervisor
YES
I have discussed any relevant health and
safety issues with my supervisor
YES
I know how to access and use RAGS YES
I have developed an information sheet for my
study
YES
I have developed a consent form for my study YES
I have developed a debrief sheet for my study YES
I understand that if I carry out my research project
without ethical approval then it may not be marked
YES
I have checked that I have approval to
proceed with my study before testing
participants
YES
I have printed of my Project Certificate from
RAGS
YES
Section 5. Data Collection and Analysis

50. USPJED-40-3 10013482
50
I have carried out my testing or I have
collected my data for qualitative analysis
YES
I have analysed the data YES
I know how to interpret the results of the
study
YES
I know how to report my findings
appropriately
YES
I know how to evaluate its findings YES
I have identified what to include as an
appendix
YES
I understand how to cite and reference
properly
YES
Section 6. Feedback on your Draft Report
I have obtained general feedback on the following
sections/aspects of my report
Your supervisor will not provide very
detailed feedback (e.g., they will not
rewrite your text for you or identify
all of your grammatical, spelling or
typographical errors)
Abstract YES
Introduction YES
Research question or hypothesis YES
Method YES
Results/Analysis YES
Discussion YES
Conclusions YES
Referencing YES
Appendices -
Communication and grammar YES
Critical comments and reasoning YES
Section 7. GDP and References
I have written a curriculum vitae (CV) N/A
I have sent my supervisor a copy of my CV N/A
I have received feedback on my CV from my
supervisor
N/A
I have attempted the GDP Level 3 work N/A
I have completed a personal statement for the
purposes of an academic reference
N/A

51. USPJED-40-3 10013482
51
Section 8. RAGS Check, tick, or comment as appropriate
Project
Outline
H &
S
Ethics
Animals
Genetic
Mod.
Consent
Form
Information
Sheet
Debrief
Student
completed
YES YES YES YES YES N/A N/A
Tutor
checked
and signed
off
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Section 9. Supervisory Record
Date Time Discussed Student’s To Do
27/09/12
3:00
Discussed a number of ideas related to health
psychology. Decided on a rough plan to
conduct a qualitative survey that looks at the
reasons why some people engage in healthy
and un-healthy behaviours and the
contradictions inherent in this body of work
Write a rough plan –
procedure and
rationale for next
meeting
24/10/12
12:00
Discussed the project at length and decided
to change the topic to the Theory of
Planned Behaviour and exercise behaviour;
studying one health behaviour thought to
be easier. Decided on mixed methods
approach. Ajzen’s TPB questionnaire
combined with exercise questionnaire
Work on RAGs and
questionnaire – have
draft for next meeting
26/11/12
3:00
Discussed RAGs and questionnaire
development – putting into qualtrics
Finish RAGs and
questionnaire over
Xmas
07/02/13
3:00 Discussed questionnaire
put de-brief sheet on
questionnaire and
upload to participant
pool

52. USPJED-40-3 10013482
52
25/02/13
3:00
Data collected. Discussed quantitative
analysis
To attempt to analyse
quantitative data in
SPSS
13/03/13
3:00
Trouble analysing using SPSS – advice given
on logistics of software.
Analyse statistical data
09/04/13
3:00
Qualitative analysis discussed. Advice to
start write up given.
Analyse qualitative
data and begin write
up
02/05/13
3:00 Meeting about progression of write up.
Continue as was.
Complete dissertation.
Section 10. Statement about the Level of Assistance Obtained
Comment on or tick the relevant box about the level of assistance with each of the
following: [“I had a lot of step-by-step help on this” would mean that without help you would not have been
able to analyse the data at all; “I had some specific help on this” would mean that you could have done at least
some analysis without any help but you would have been unsure about aspects of your analysis; “I only had
some general advice on this” would mean that you could have done the analysis without any help and that you
just needed to confirm you were on the right tracks.]
I had a lot of
step-by-step
help on this
I had some
specific help
on this
I only had
some general
advice on this
Comments
Design of the
study
YES
Statistical or
qualitative
analysis
YES
Interpretation
of the results
or findings
YES
Section 11. Plagiarism
Please tick the following before handing in your project (add a comment if necessary):

53. USPJED-40-3 10013482
53
I understand the use of
SafeAssign to detect
plagiarism on this module
YES
I have uploaded a draft copy
of my report onto
SafeAssign to check for
plagiarism
YES
I have tried to avoid
plagiarism to the best of my
ability
YES