An Analysis of Martin Fishbein's Theory of Reasoned Action
1231 Words5 Pages
Buyer Behavior and Market Research.
Time-Constrained Assessment 1.
1. How feasible are the theories outlined above? Are some parts in the process more important than others? If so, which parts?
Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen developed the Theory of Reasoned Action (1975, 1980). “This resulted from attitude research from the Expectancy Value Models. Ajzen and Fishbein formulated the TRA after trying to estimate the discrepancy between attitude and behavior. This TRA was related to voluntary behavior. Later on behavior appeared not to be 100% voluntary and under control, this resulted in the addition of perceived behavioral control.”
Gordon…show more content… Individuals usually take into consideration the time and place, and don’t depend as much on the norms of their upbringing. Hale et al. (2003), backs up this idea, that the TRA excludes a wide range of behaviors such as spontaneity, cravings and habits, and states that “engaging in these behaviors might not involve a conscious decision on the part of the actor.”
To conclude, the theory lacks external reliability, as some behaviors are not used to produce an outcome. However Fishbein and Ajzen created a theory, which can be applied to purchasing behavior of consumers, and thus can be applied to everyday life.
2. Do you think that consumers approach the purchase of products in the seemingly reasoned way outlined above? Give examples to illustrate your thoughts.
Many consumers will use the processes outline by Fishbein and Ajzen when purchasing a high involvement product that takes careful thought. However consumers will sometimes use impulse buying for the purchase of products. “Impulse buying: Spur of the moment, unplanned decision to buy, made just before a purchase. Research findings suggest that emotions and feelings play a decisive role in purchasing, triggered by seeing the product or upon exposure to a well-crafted promotional message.” Impulse buying therefore cancels out behaviors such as evaluation of outcome and subjective norm.
A second reason why this theory does