Quality Evaluation Models - High Level Models and Methodologies for Information Systems - page 99

alone, TPB
addresses its shortcomings by taking into consideration the fact that there are
behaviors over which people have reduced volitional control, and even when they
do have it, they can still pose a great dif

While TRA accounts for “ attitudinal and normative in uence ”

culty of execution. Thus, the concept of
perceived behavioral control was introduced into the original model and taken into
account, in order to provide a more realistic approach to the behavior-determining
process (Ajzen 2012 ).
Consequently, the TPB advocates that an individual

' s actions are driven by

“ behavioral beliefs about the likely outcomes of the behavior and the evaluations of

these outcomes; normative beliefs about the normative expectation of others and the
motivation to comply with these expectations; and control beliefs about resources
and opportunities possessed (or not possessed) by the individual and also the
anticipated obstacles or impediments toward performing the target behavior

”

(Shumaila et al. 2010 ).
The introduction of control as a factor represents the most signi cant difference

between TPB and TRA. According to Yzer ( 2012 ), perceived behavior control is
merely the expression of individuals ' understanding of their capacity to perform a

certain behavior. It re ects the notion that a user has of his/her own ability to

execute the behavior in question. The higher is an individual is perception, the more

that individual is expected to act upon that perception, by performing the action in
question with resilience. In the same way, the lower that perception is, the less an
individual is encouraged to act and the more fragile are his/her attempts to perform
the behavior.
TPB also proposes that the attitude that users have toward a speci

'

c technology
will affect their adoption of that technology. Thus, if people have a positive view in
relation to that technology, they will more likely use it, because their positive stance
will enhance their motivation of using it. The attitude of the user affects the
intention of performing a behavior, and that intention will be determinant in terms
of the user final behavior (Lee 2010 ) (Fig. 6.7 ).

Hence, the behavioral intention is originated by the combination of the stance the
person has toward that speci

' s

c behavior, the subjective norm or social pressure, and
the perception of control. Generally speaking, people demonstrate a stronger
intention to execute a behavior when they have an appreciative opinion about that
behavior, which is also shared by their peers, and when they have a high sense of
control (Ajzen 2012 ).
Besides the introduction of control beliefs as the third aspect of intention
determination, the TPB also changed the relationships described in the previous
model. Behavioral and normative beliefs are codependent; normative and control
beliefs are also related because perception of control is first determined within the

external, normative context outside the individual; control beliefs directly in uence

behavioral beliefs, and vice versa, in that the individual ' s perception of how much

control he has over the behavior will in uence his belief on the validity of the

behavior.
It is also important to note that actual control

— '

regardless of the individual s

perception of it — is a part of this model as well, as a completely external factor that,