This article was downloaded by: [North Carolina State University]

On: 28 February 2013, At: 10:32

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK

Leisure Sciences: An
Interdisciplinary Journal
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ulsc20

Predicting Hunting Intentions

and Behavior: An Application
of the Theory of Planned
Behavior
Daniel Hrubes , Icek Ajzen & John Daigle
Version of record first published: 29 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: Daniel Hrubes , Icek Ajzen & John Daigle (2001): Predicting
Hunting Intentions and Behavior: An Application of the Theory of Planned
Behavior, Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23:3, 165-178
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014904001316896855

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/
terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not
be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or
damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Leisure Sciences, 23:165 178, 2001

C 2001 Taylor & Francis
Copyright
0149-0400 /01 $12.00 + .00

Predicting Hunting Intentions and Behavior:

An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

DANIEL HRUBES
ICEK AJZEN
Department of Psychology
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA, USA

JOHN DAIGLE
University of Maine
Using a mail survey (n D 395) of outdoor recreationists, the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991) was applied to the prediction and explanation of hunting. In a
series of hierarchical regression analyses, it was found that hunting intentions, but not
perceptions of behavioral control, contributed to the prediction of self-reported hunting
frequency. Hunting intentions, in turn, were strongly in uenced by attitudes, subjective
norms, and perceptions of behavioral control, and these predictors correlated highly
with theoretically derived sets of underlying beliefs. Broad values related to wildlife and
to life in general correlated weakly with hunting behavior, and their effects were largely
mediated by the components of the theory of planned behavior.
Keywords

attitudes, beliefs, outdoor recreation, values, wildlife

Over the past 25 years, research has furnished a great deal of descriptive information about
the advantages of hunting and other wildlife-related activities. It has become clear that
hunting is not merely a means to harvest game; it also affords opportunities to actualize a
variety of social, psychological, emotional, and physical bene ts (Hautaluoma & Brown,
1979; Hendee, 1974; Kellert, 1978; More, 1973; Potter, Hendee, & Clark, 1973; Stankey,
Lucas, & Ream, 1973). This work has provided a detailed account of the major outcomes
associated with hunting, of the disparate bene ts derived by different types of individuals,
and of peoples beliefs and attitudes regarding this behavior.
Going beyond a description of beliefs and attitudes, investigators have also attempted
to identify broad values related to hunting and other wildlife-related activities. A number
of studies have demonstrated that values can in uence behavior through their impact on
lower-order beliefs and attitudes (see Homer & Kahle, 1988). A value-attitude-behavior
model has been suggested to delineate more clearly the effect of values on attitudes, behavioral intentions, and actual recreation and environmental behaviors (Fulton, Manfredo,
& Lipscomb, 1996; Tarrant, Bright, & Cordell, 1997; Vaske & Donnelly, 1999; Zinn,
Received 11 October 2000; accepted 9 January 2001.
We are grateful to Shalom Schwartz for his comment s on an earlier draft of this article. The research reported
in this article was supported by Cooperative Research Agreement 23-265 with the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Services Northeastern Research Station.
Address correspondenc e to Icek Ajzen, Department of Psychology, Tobin Hall, Box 37710, University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003-7710 . E-mail: aizen@psych.umass.ed u

165

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

166

D. Hrubes et al.

Manfredo, Vaske, & Wittmann, 1998). The cognitive hierarchy investigations related to
recreation and environmental behaviors have focused on relatively speci c value orientations rather than more fundamental values to life (e.g., universalism, achievement, power).
Value orientations, in contrast to fundamental values, are composed of patterns of beliefs
relative to a particular topic (e.g., wildlife rights, wildland preservation). Fulton, Manfredo,
and Lipscomb (1996) identi ed eight basic wildlife beliefs that comprised two distinct
wildlife orientation domains, one consumptive in orientation and one appreciative. These
two value orientations toward wildlife explained a considerable proportion of variability in
respondents attitudes toward wildlife-related recreation activities. The discovery of parsimonious, well-de ned, and cross-culturally stable structures of broad, fundamental values
to life (Schwartz, 1992, 1994; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987) may help further these efforts by
facilitating theoretical links between general values on one hand and more speci c value
orientations, attitudes, beliefs, and behavior on the other.
Although we now have detailed descriptions of beliefs, attitudes, and values associated
with such wildlife-related activities as hunting, the effort to build a cumulative body of
knowledge has been hampered by lack of a sound theoretical foundation (Manfredo, Vaske,
& Decker, 1995). Such a foundation is needed to help integrate the diverse research ndings
and to provide a framework for the prediction and explanation of wildlife-related and other
outdoor activities (see Decker, Brown, Driver, & Brown, 1987; Driver, Brown, & Peterson,
1991; Hammit, McDonald, & Patterson, 1990; Manfredo & Larson, 1993; Vaske, Fedler,
& Graefe, 1986). The present study tried to meet this need in the context of the theory
of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991), a theory that has been used extensively to model the
determinants of human social behavior (see Ajzen, 2001; Armitage & Conner, 1999; Conner
& Sparks, 1996; Sutton, 1998 for reviews), including such outdoor recreational activities
as mountain climbing, boating, and biking (Ajzen & Driver, 1991; Ajzen & Driver, 1992)
as well as hunting (Rossi & Armstrong, 1999).
A schematic representation of the theory is shown in Figure 1. Brie y, according to the
theory of planned behavior, human action is guided by three kinds of considerations: beliefs
about the likely consequences of the behavior (behavioral beliefs), beliefs about the normative expectations of others (normative beliefs), and beliefs about the presence of factors that
may further or hinder performance of the behavior (control beliefs). In their respective aggregates, behavioral beliefs produce a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward the behavior;
normative beliefs result in perceived social pressure or subjective norm; and control beliefs
give rise to perceived behavioral control, the perceived ease or dif culty of performing the
behavior. In combination, attitude toward the behavior, subjective norm, and perception of

FIGURE 1 The theory of planned behavior.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

167

behavioral control lead to the formation of a behavioral intention. As a general rule, the
more favorable the attitude and subjective norm, and the greater the perceived control, the
stronger should be the persons intention to perform the behavior in question. Finally, given
a suf cient degree of actual control over the behavior, people are expected to carry out
their intentions when the opportunity arises. Intention is thus assumed to be the immediate
antecedent of behavior. However, because many behaviors pose dif culties of execution
that may limit volitional control, it is useful to consider perceived behavioral control in addition to intention. To the extent that people are realistic in their judgments of a behaviors
dif culty, a measure of perceived behavioral control can serve as a proxy for actual control
and can contribute to the prediction of the behavior in question (see Ajzen, 1991).
The theory of planned behavior also speci es the nature of the relations between beliefs and attitudes, relying on an expectancy-value model. According to this model, peoples
evaluations of, or attitudes toward, a behavior are determined by their accessible beliefs
about the behavior, where a belief is de ned as the subjective probability that the behavior
will produce a certain outcome (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). According to the expectancyvalue model, a persons overall attitude toward a behavior is determined by the subjective
values of the outcomes associated with the behavior and by the strength of these associations
(Fishbein, 1963; 1967; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Speci cally, the evaluation of each outcome contributes to the attitude in direct proportion to the persons subjective probability
that the behavior produces the outcome in question. The basic structure of the model is
shown in the following equation (Feather, 1959; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975):
AB D 6bi ei ;
where AB is the attitude toward behavior B, bi is the strength of the belief (the subjective
probability) that the behavior will produce outcome i, ei is the evaluation of outcome i, and
the sum is taken over all accessible outcomes.
The present article reports the results of a survey that used the theory of planned behavior
in an attempt to predict and explain hunting behavior. The survey contained items assessing
the main components of the theory, as well as questions designed to assess wildlife-related
value orientations and fundamental life values. According to the theory of planned behavior,
valueswhether relatively speci c to wildlife or global values to lifeare background factors that should in uence behavior indirectly by guiding a persons beliefs and attitudes with
respect to hunting. One objective of the investigation, therefore, was to examine the extent
to which the theory affords prediction of hunting behavior, and whether the effect of values
on behavior is indeed mediated by the theorys more immediate determinants (attitudes,
subjective norms, perceptions of control, and intentions). In addition, the theory proposes
that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceptions of control are derived from the relevant
information, or belief systems, associated with engaging in hunting. A second objective,
therefore, was to investigate the strength of the associations between direct measures of
attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control, and belief systems related to behavioral
consequences, normative pressures, and performance dif culties, respectively.

Method
Sampling Procedure
In order to ensure that both hunters and nonhunters were well represented among the
participants, two sampling methods were employed. The rst method used a random sample
of 388 individuals from the population who purchased hunting licenses in Vermont in 1997.

168

D. Hrubes et al.

The sample of licensees was provided by the State of Vermont Department of Fish and
Wildlife. The second sampling method obtained volunteers by means of direct contact with
visitors to the Green Mountain National Forest (GMNF) in Vermont. Sampling took place
at a wide variety of recreational settings in the forest including trail heads, campgrounds,
waterfalls, summits, and information stations.1 A total of 339 GMNF visitors agreed to
participate. In all, 727 individuals were recruited to participate in the study.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Questionnaire
The questionnaire assessed variables associated with three outdoor recreational activities:
hunting, wildlife viewing, and outdoor recreation unrelated to wildlife. Only items related to hunting are described here. The questionnaire contained several separate sections.
Items assessing attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intentions
with respect to hunting were grouped together. Similarly, items designed to assess behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs were also each grouped together. For
all of these items, the target behavior was hunting over the next 12 months. In addition,
there were separate sections dealing with wildlife-related values and fundamental values
to life.
Behavior. One open-ended item asked participants to indicate how frequently they
had hunted over the previous year. Although, strictly speaking, this measure refers to past
behavior, it is assumed that participation in hunting is an activity that is relatively stable
over time (Bissell, Duda, & Young, 1998; Mannell & Kleiber, 1997) and that reports of past
behavior can serve as an indication of likely future behavior. Similar questions were also
asked with respect to the number of times respondents had engaged in wildlife viewing and
in outdoor recreation unrelated to wildlife.
Intentions. Two 7-point bipolar adjective scales were used to assess participants intentions to engage in hunting. On the rst scale, respondents indicated whether they intended
to engage in hunting (extremely unlikely extremely likely). The second scale asked them
whether they were planning to engage in hunting (de nitely no de nitely yes).
Attitudes. Attitudes toward the behavior were assessed directly by asking respondents
to evaluate hunting on two 7-point scales with endpoints labeled extremely bad extremely
good and extremely pleasant extremely unpleasant.
Subjective norms. Two 7-point scales were also used to measure subjective norms
concerning hunting. The rst scales required participants to rate the truth of the statement
that most people important to them think that they should hunt (not at all true completely
true). On the second scale, respondents indicated whether most people who are important
to me would (disapprove approve) of their engaging in hunting.
Perceived behavioral control. Two 7-point scales were used to measure perceived behavioral control by asking respondents to rate the dif culty of engaging in hunting (extremely
dif cult extremely easy) and the truth of the statement, If I wanted to, I could easily go
hunting in the next twelve months. (de nitely false de nitely true).
Behavioral beliefs. In order to assess participants beliefs about the bene ts (or costs)
resulting from hunting, that is, their behavioral beliefs, a list of 12 potential outcomes was
compiled. These included important outcomes associated with wildlife-related activities
identi ed in previous research pertaining to the goals of achievement, af liation, and appreciation (Decker, Brown, Driver, & Brown, 1987) as well as some negative outcomes
(Enck & Decker, 1991). Among these outcomes were observing and learning about wildlife

169

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

behavior, feeling tired and exhausted, and feeling a sense of competence. Participants rated
the likelihood that hunting would produce each of the 12 outcomes on an 11-point scale
ranging from 0 (extremely unlikely) to 10 (extremely likely). After completing the likelihood
ratings, participants indicated their evaluations of the 12 outcomes by rating the desirability
of each on a 7-point scale (extremely undesirable extremely desirable).

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Normative beliefs. In addition to the direct measure of normative beliefs regarding the
expectations of important others, two survey questions assessed normative beliefs regarding
two speci c referents: friends and family. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent
to which they thought that their friends and their families encouraged them to engage in
hunting, using the same 11-point scale (0 D extremely unlikely, 10 D extremely likely).
Control beliefs. Four items were included to assess speci c control beliefs, in addition
to the two items that assessed perceived behavioral control directly. Employing the same
11-point scale that was used to assess behavioral and normative beliefs, respondents rated
how likely it was that they were too busy to go hunting, that they had the knowledge and
skills, that they could afford the cost, and that it takes a great effort for them to engage in
hunting.
Wildlife value orientations. Wildlife-related value orientations were assessed by having participants indicate their agreement with eight statements regarding enjoyment and
management of wildlife. These value statements were selected to represent the orientation
domains of wildlife enjoyment and animal rights/management reported in the literature
(Fulton, Manfredo, & Lipscomb, 1996; see Table 1 for a list of value statements). Agreement with the statements was expressed on 7-point scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)
to 7 (strongly agree).

TABLE 1 Principal Components Factor Analysis of Wildlife Values

Factor loadings
Items

Factor 1

It is important to manage the populations

of wildlife for bene t of humans.a
I enjoy watching wildlife when I take a trip.
It is important to protect wildlife for
future generations.
Hunting and shing are cruel and inhumane
to the animals.
I notice birds and wildlife around me every day.
People should not cause pain and suffering to wildlife,
regardless of how much we may bene t.
It is important that we learn all we can about wildlife.
Animals should have rights similar to the rights of humans.
Eigenvalue
% explained variance

:13
.77
.58
:19

Factor 2
.62
:04
.08
.77

.76
.05

:13
.71

.80
.24
2.30
28.80

.00
.75
2.05
25.60

Note: Wildlife values were rated on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
This item was reverse coded.

Indicates factor assignments.

a

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

170

D. Hrubes et al.

Fundamental life values. The Schwartz Value Survey (Schwartz, 1992; Schwartz &
Bilsky, 1987) was used to assess participants fundamental values to life. This survey
asks respondents to rate the importance of 56 motivational goals using a 9-point scale
that ranges from 1 (is opposed to my values) to 7 (is of supreme importance). These
motivational goals correspond to 10 value dimensions that are located in a two-dimensional
space described by two higher-order bipolar value dimensions of self-transcendence versus
self-enhancement and openness versus conservation. The rst dimension contrasts selftranscendence, which values the acceptance of others and the concern for the welfare of
others, to self-enhancement, which values personal success and the domination of others.
Scores on this dimension can range from 8 (high self-transcendence) to 8 (high selfenhancement). The second dimension contrasts openness, which values independent thought
and change, to conservation, which values self-restriction and tradition. Scores on this
dimension can range from 8 (high openness) to 8 (high conservation). The validity of
the structure and content of these values has been demonstrated across 97 samples in
44 countries (Schwartz, 1994).

Results
Response Rates and Demographics
Of the 727 individuals who were mailed a survey, 395 ultimately responded. This represents a nal overall response rate of 54%. Of the hunters who received a questionnaire,
41% responded; of visitors who received a questionnaire, 74% responded. The rather large
difference in response rates could be due to the verbal commitment to complete the survey
that was obtained from the visitors during the initial contact. The hunting sample was not
contacted prior to the mailing, and these individuals made no verbal commitment prior
to receiving the questionnaire. The length and scope of the questionnaire may have also
contributed to the low response rates from hunters. Visitors were informed that the questionnaire would take 20 to 30 minutes when they were contacted so they may have been
more willing to expend the time required.
The respondents were predominantly male (73%) and white (79%) with a mean age of
40.5 years. Forty-seven percent of the respondents reported annual family incomes between
$20,000 and $61,000, 35% reported incomes above $61,000 and 11% reported incomes
below $20,000. Over half of the sample (53%) graduated from college, 16% attended at
least some college, and 29% achieved a high school education or less.
Preliminary Analyses
Theory of planned behavior measures. As an indication of reliability, the internal
consistency of item pairs that assessed the different components of the theory of planned
behavior directly was tested by calculating Pearson correlations. Overall, the correlations
were of acceptable magnitude (rs D .99, .96, .84, and .85, for intention, attitude, subjective
norm, and perceived control, respectively). The item pairs for each of the components were
therefore averaged to form aggregate indices.
Wildlife value orientations. The eight individual wildlife value measures were submitted to a principal components factor analysis which con rmed the two-dimensional factor
structure previously identi ed in the literature (see Fulton, Manfredo, & Lipscomb, 1996).
The two dimensions involve values that have to do with bene ts or enjoyment derived from
wildlife on one hand, and wildlife rights on the other (see Table 1). The individual beliefs
that loaded highest on each factor were averaged to create measures of the corresponding
value orientations.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

171

Fundamental life values. Before the Schwarz value scale is submitted to analysis,
it is common practice to eliminate participants who do not discriminate between values
(Schwartz, personal communication). Therefore, respondents who used the highest rating
more than 21 times were dropped as were respondents who used any single response more
than 35 times. Using these criteria, 63 participants were eliminated from the life values
analyses.
As is the usual practice, a smallest space analysis (Borg & Lingoes, 1987) was conducted on the 56 individual value measures, yielding a structural solution very similar to the
solutions obtained in previous research (see Schwartz, 1992).2 The values were therefore
collapsed to create measures of the 10 superordinate values. The appropriate subsets of
these 10 superordinate values were then combined into the two higher-order bipolar dimensions corresponding to self-transcendence versus self-enhancement and openness versus
conservation.
Descriptive Data
Based on their self-reports of behavior in the previous year, participants were divided into
three groups. The rst group consisted of individuals who reported engaging in wildlife
viewing but not hunting (wildlife viewers; N D 101). The second group consisted of individuals who reported engaging in hunting but not wildlife viewing (hunters; N D 69). The
third group consisted of individuals who reported participating in outdoor recreation unrelated to wildlife but not wildlife viewing or hunting (outdoor recreationists; N D 110). The
three groups were similar in mean age and marital status, and wildlife viewers and outdoor
recreationists also were much alike in other demographic characteristics. However, hunters
differed from the other two groups in that they were almost exclusively male and, compared
to the other two groups, somewhat less educated and of lower income levels. In addition,
the sample of hunters also contained fewer Caucasians and more Native Americans and
people of mixed ethnicity.
Components of the theory of planned behavior. The means and standard deviations
of the main components in the theory of planned behavior are shown in the upper part of
Table 2. It can be seen that hunters reported extremely positive mean attitudes, subjective
norms, perceptions of behavioral control, and intentions with respect to hunting. The differences between the mean scores for hunters on these variables and those for the other
two groups were quite large and signi cant. Wildlife viewers and outdoor recreationists
reported similar and quite negative mean scores on perceptions of behavioral control and
intentions with respect to hunting. Their attitudes and subjective norms regarding hunting
were also unfavorable, although outdoor recreationists reported somewhat more negative
attitudes and subjective norms than did wildlife viewers.
Value scales. The middle part of Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations for
the two wildlife value scales. The pattern of means on the wildlife enjoyment dimension
indicates that the three groups were very similar in their high valuation of the enjoyment
of wildlife, although wildlife viewers and hunters displayed somewhat higher scores than
did outdoor recreationists. The groups differed, however, in their valuation of animal rights.
Wildlife viewers and outdoor recreationists had similar mean animal rights scores near the
midpoint of the scale. By contrast, hunters mean animal rights scores were substantially
below the scale midpoint which indicates a general disagreement with the idea that animal
rights should be equal to human rights.
The mean group scores on the higher-order bipolar value dimensions of selftranscendence versus self-enhancement and openness versus conservation are shown in

172

D. Hrubes et al.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

TABLE 2 Means and Standard Deviations for Wildlife Viewers, Hunters, and Other
Outdoor Recreationists

Theory of planned behavior

Attitudes
Perceived control
Intentions
Past behavior frequency
Wildlife value scales
Wildlife enjoyment
Wildlife rights
General life values
Self-transcendence vs.
Self-enhancement
Openness vs. conservation

Wildlife viewers
(N D 101)

Hunters
(N D 69)

Outdoor
recreationists
(N D 110)

2:35a (1.76)
3:12a (1.95)
1:25a (0.94)
0.00

6:72b (0.91)
6:69b (0.63)
6:91b (0.41)
26.75 (27.61)

1:92c (1.36)
2:92a (2.17)
1:09a (0.42)
0.00

6:68a (0.41)
4:04a (1.46)

6:64a (0.60)
2:20b (1.04)

6:27b (0.69)
4:02a (1.39)

1:81a (1.06)
0:94a (1.37)

0:58b (1.12)
:02b (0.98)

1:22c (0.95)
0:63a (1.38)

Note: Standard deviations in parentheses. Attitudes, subjective norms, perceived control, and
intentions measured on a scale from 1 to 7 with higher numbers indicating more positive attitudes
and norms, higher perceptions of control and intentions. Scores could range from 1 to 7 for wildlife
values and from from 8 to 8 for general life values. For each variable, different superscripts
indicate a signi cant difference at p < :01.

the lower part of Table 2. Hunters were somewhat less concerned with others and somewhat
less open to change than wildlife viewers, with outdoor recreationists falling between these
two groups. Hunters tended to place relatively more weight on the self-enhancement values
of power and achievement, while also showing somewhat less concern for others and greater
conservatism.
Main Analyses
In the following sections we examine the ndings relevant to our major hypotheses. In a
series of hierarchical regression analyses, we tested the predictive validity of the theory
of planned behavior, as well as the extent to which values related to wildlife and to life
in general can account for additional variance in intentions and behavior. These analyses
are followed by an examination of the relations between the direct measures of attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceptions of control and their respective belief-based counterparts.
Prediction of intention and behavior. Table 3 displays the results of hierarchical regression analyses that examined the effectiveness of the theory of planned behavior in predicting
hunting intentions and behavior. In the rst set of analyses presented in the upper half of
Table 3, behavior was the dependent variable. The relevant components of the theory
intentions and perceptions of behavioral controlwere entered in the rst step, followed
by the two wildlife values in the second step, and the fundamental life values in the last
step.
The multiple correlation in the rst step was of relatively high magnitude ( R D :62). It is
worth noting that only intention contributed signi cantly to the prediction of behavior while
perceived behavioral control failed to explain additional variance. A likely explanation for

173

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

TABLE 3 Multiple Regressions of Hunting Behavior and Intentions on Components
of the Theory of Planned Behavior, Wildlife Value Orientations, and Fundamental
Values to Life

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Dependent variable
Behavior (N D 301)
Step 1: Intention
Perceived control
Step 2: Intention
Perceived control
Wildlife enjoyment
Wildlife rights
Step 3: Intention
Perceived control
Wildlife enjoyment
Wildlife rights
Self-transcendence
Openness
Intention (N D 311)
Step 1: Attitude
Subjective norm
Perceived control
Step 2: Attitude
Subjective norm
Perceived control
Wildlife enjoyment
Wildlife rights
Step 3: Attitude
Subjective norm
Perceived control
Wildlife enjoyment
Wildlife rights
Self-transcendence
Openness

r
.62
.48
.16
:36

:33
:14
.91
.89
.75

.25
:54

:37
:26

b
.58
.05
.57
.04
.02
:03
.53
.03
.06
:01
:14
.00
.58
.37
.07
.56
.39
.07
.01
.08
.55
.36
.07
.03
.09
:06
:04

R2

.62

:38a

.62

.00

.63

:02a

.93

:86a

.93

.00

.94

:02a

Note: Sample sizes vary due to missing data. r D zero-order correlation, b D standardized regression
coef cient, RD multiple correlation.
a
signi cant increase in R 2 (p < :05).

p < :05; p < :01.

this nding is that hunting is largely under volitional control. The more volitional control
one has over a behavior, the less important perceived behavioral control should be (Madden,
Ellen, & Ajzen, 1992).
Turning now to the role of the two wildlife-related and the two fundamental life values, it is instructive to rst examine their zero-order correlations with reported hunting
behavior (see the rst column of Table 3). Reported behavior demonstrated signi cant
correlations with all four value dimensions. Hunting behavior was positively correlated
with values related to wildlife enjoyment and negatively correlated with values related
to wildlife rights. In addition, hunting behavior was negatively correlated with the fundamental life value dimensions of openness and self-transcendence. Generally speaking,

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

174

D. Hrubes et al.

however, these broad values showed rather modest correlations with hunting behavior,
a pattern similar to the usually reported low correlations between global attitudes toward an object and speci c behaviors directed at that object (see Ajzen & Fishbein,
1977).
As can be seen in Table 3, addition of the wildlife values in step two of the hierarchical regression analysis did not lead to a signi cant increase in explained variance for
hunting behavior. The addition of fundamental life values in step three, however, did lead
to a small though statistically signi cant increase in the explained variance for hunting
(R2 change D .02). Examination of the regression coef cients indicated that it was the selftranscendence versus self-enhancement dimension that made a signi cant contribution to
behavioral prediction.
To summarize, of all the measures included in the analyses, intentions proved to be most
closely related to reported hunting behavior. Consistent with the theory of planned behavior,
the effects of wildlife-related values as well as fundamental values to life appeared to be
largely mediated by intentions. However, the fundamental life value of self-transcendence
derived from Schwartzs value scale afforded a small but signi cant improvement in the
prediction of reported hunting.
Similar, though considerably stronger results emerged in the regression of hunting
intentions on the relevant components of the theory of planned behavior (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceptions of behavioral control), on wildlife value orientations, and
on fundamental life values. Inspection of the lower part of Table 3 shows that the multiple
correlation for the rst step based on the theory of planned behavior was signi cant and
quite high (R D :93). Attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control all made
signi cant contributions to the prediction of hunting intentions.
The zero-order correlations between intentions and the four value measures (two
wildlife and two fundamental life values) were very similar and of small magnitude, similar
to the correlations with respect to behavior. When added to the equation in the second step
of the hierarchical regression analysis, the increase in explained variance due to the two
wildlife value orientations was small but statistically signi cant (R2 change D .02). Of the
two wildlife value orientations, only wildlife rights scores made a signi cant contribution
to predicting intentions to hunt.
The addition of fundamental life values in step three of the analysis signi cantly increased the explained variance in hunting intentions as well but, as was the case with behavior, the magnitude of this increase was very small. The dimension of self-transcendence
versus self-enhancement was again responsible for the signi cant contribution to the prediction. In sum, the addition of wildlife values and fundamental values to life did increase
the amount of variance in intentions accounted for by the model, but this increase was small
in comparison to the amount of variance accounted for by components of the theory of
planned behavior.
Informational foundation. According to the theory of planned behavior, in their respective aggregates, behavioral beliefs provide the basis for attitudes, normative beliefs
for subjective norms, and control beliefs for perceived behavioral control.3 To test these
predictions with respect to attitudes, the measures of behavioral belief strength were multiplied by the corresponding outcome evaluations and the resulting products were summed
over all 12 beliefs.4 The sum was then correlated with the direct attitude measure, in accordance with the expectancy value model of attitude. The procedure was easier for the normative and control beliefs: responses to the two normative belief items were averaged, as were
responses to the four control belief items, and the resulting means were correlated with the
direct measures of subjective norm and perceived behavioral control, respectively. All three

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

175

correlations were signi cant and of high magnitude (.76, .74, .72, ps < .001, for attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived control, respectively), thus supporting the informational
foundations for attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control proposed by the theory.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Discussion and Conclusions

The theory of planned behavior was found to afford quite accurate prediction of hunting
intentions and behavior. In accordance with the theory, attitudes toward hunting, subjective
norms, and perceptions of behavioral control were signi cant determinants of intentions,
and intentions correlated strongly with self-reported behavior. Perceived behavioral control
did not account for additional variance in hunting behavior, suggesting that hunting-related
activities are largely under volitional control. The successful application of the theory of
planned behavior to hunting is consistent with other research in which the theory effectively
predicted participation in a variety of recreational activities (Ajzen & Driver, 1991; Ajzen
& Driver, 1992; Rossi & Armstrong, 1999). One caveat, noted in the method section, is
that our measure of hunting behavior referred to behavior performed in the past. Although
such measures are common in research with the theory of planned behavior (see Armitage
& Conner, 1999), this practice leaves open the possibility that participants provided biased
self-reports of behavior to be consistent with their expressed attitudes and intentions. It
would thus be important for future research to establish the theorys predictive validity in
relation to subsequent hunting behavior.
The inclusion of wildlife value orientations and fundamental life values furthered our
understanding of the role these constructs play in determining behavior. Our ndings provided evidence in support of a value-attitude-behavior cognitive hierarchy. Wildlife-related
value orientations and fundamental life values were modestly correlated with behavior, but
these relations were largely mediated by beliefs, attitudes, and intentions speci cally dealing
with the behavior of hunting. These ndings are consistent with the results of other studies
which indicated that the in uence of wildlife-related value orientations on intentions is mediated by attitudes (Fulton, Manfredo, & Lipscomb, 1996). They are also consistent with the
theory of planned behavior, according to which broad values are background variables that
in uence behavior indirectly through their in uence on beliefs and attitudes (Ajzen, 1991).
In addition to replicating previous ndings regarding the value-attitude-behavior relationship, our ndings add to the understanding of the relationship between values and behavior
by demonstrating that not only speci c value orientations, but also broad fundamental life
values may in uence intentions and behaviors indirectly through their in uence on beliefs
and attitudes.
Beyond demonstrating the effectiveness of the theory in predicting intentions and behavior, our ndings also provide evidence supporting the proposed informational foundations of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceptions of control. The strong correlations
between the direct measures of these constructs and their respective belief-based aggregates
supports the assumption in the theory of planned behavior that attitudes toward a behavior are derived from beliefs about the behaviors consequences, that subjective norms are
derived from beliefs about the normative expectations of others, and that perceptions of
control are derived from beliefs about the presence of factors that may facilitate or impede
performance of the behavior.
Though the results of this investigation strongly support the effectiveness of the theory
of planned behavior as a conceptual framework for predicting and understanding wildliferelated activities such as hunting, a limiting condition with respect to our measure of general
life values should be noted. A relatively large number of respondents (63) was dropped from
the value analyses due to missing or questionable Schwartz data. This number represented

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

176

D. Hrubes et al.

a considerable proportion of our sample. It could be argued that these individuals differed
in some way that would affect the theory of planned behaviors ability to predict their
participation in hunting activities. In order to rule out this possibility, we recomputed the
regression analyses without the fundamental life value data so that these individuals would
be included. The resulting multiple correlations and regression coef cients were nearly
identical to those in the original analyses. Therefore, it seems unlikely that those individuals
who were originally omitted differed in any way that would affect the predictive power of
the theory of planned behavior.
In sum, the present research demonstrated that the theory of planned behavior offers
considerable power in predicting and explaining participation in hunting intentions and
behavior. Further, it indicates that wildlife value orientations and fundamental life values
may help to account for some of the variance in wildlife related beliefs and attitudes that
ultimately determine the decision to engage or not to engage in hunting.

Notes
1. We are grateful to the managers of the Green Mountain National Forest for their help and
guidance in sampling visitors.
2. We greatly appreciate the assistance with the smallest space analysis provided by Olga Mazo.
3. For the purposes of this article, only the correlation between the aggregate belief measures
and their respective direct measures is reported. Data concerning the individual beliefs and outcome
evaluations will be published in a separate report.
4. An optimal scaling analysis (see Ajzen, 1991) was conducted to test whether the belief scales
should be scored in a bipolar or unipolar fashion. Based on the results of this analysis, bipolar scoring
was applied.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50, 179 211.
Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27 58.
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1991). Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral, normative, and
control beliefs: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Leisure Sciences, 13, 185
204.
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure choice.
Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 207 224.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of
empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888 918.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (1999). Ef cacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analytic
review. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Bissell, S. J., Duda, M. D., & Young, K. C. (1998). Recent studies on hunting and shing participation
in the United States. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 3(1), 75 80.
Borg, I., & Lingoes, J. C. (1987). Multidimensional similarity structure analysis. New York: Springer
Verlag.
Conner, M., & Sparks, P. (1996). The theory of planned behaviour and health behaviours. In M.
Conner & P. Norman (Eds.), Predicting health behaviour: Research and practice with social
cognition models (pp. 121 162). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Decker, D. J., Brown, T. L., Driver, B. L., & Brown, P. J. (1987). Theoretical developments in assessing social values of wildlife: Toward a comprehensive understanding of wildlife recreation
involvement. In D. J. Decker & G. R. Goff (Eds.), Valuing wildlife: Economic and social perspectives (pp. 76 95). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Driver, B. L., Brown, P. J., & Peterson, G. L. (Eds.). (1991). Bene ts of leisure. State College, PA:
Venture Publishing.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Hunting Attitudes and Behavior

177

Enck, J. W., & Decker, D. J. (1991). Hunters perspectives on satisfying and dissatisfying aspects
of the deer-hunting experience in New York. Human Dimensions Research Unit Series Number
91-4. Ithaca, NY: Human Dimensions Research Unit, Cornell University.
Feather, N. T. (1959). Subjective probability and decision under uncertainty. Psychological Review,
66, 150 164.
Fishbein, M. (1963). An investigation of the relationships between beliefs about an object and the
attitude toward that object. Human Relations, 16, 233 240.
Fishbein, M. (1967). Attitude and the prediction of behavior. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude
theory and measurement (pp. 477 492). New York: Wiley.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory
and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fulton, D. C., Manfredo, M. J., & Lipscomb, J. (1996). Wildlife value orientations: A conceptual and
measurement approach. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(2), 24 47.
Hammit, W. E., McDonald, C. D., & Patterson, M. E. (1990). Determinants of multiple satisfaction
for deer hunting. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 18, 331 337.
Hautaluoma, J. E., & Brown, P. J. (1979). Attributes of the deer hunting experience: A cluster analytic
study. Journal of Leisure Research, 10, 271 287.
Hendee, J. C. (1974). A multiple satisfaction approach to game management. Wildlife Society Bulletin,
2, 104 113.
Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior hierarchy.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 638 646.
Kellert, S. R. (1978). Attitudes and characteristics of hunters and antihunters. Transactions of the
North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 43, 412 423.
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and
the theory of reasoned action. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3 9.
Manfredo, M. J., & Larson, R. A. (1993). Managing for wildlife viewing recreation experiences: An
application in Colorado. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 21, 226 236.
Manfredo, M. J., Vaske, J. J., & Decker, D. J. (1995). Human dimensions of wildlife management:
Basic concepts. In R. L. Knight & K. J. Gutzwiller (Eds.), Wildlife and recreationists. Covelo,
CA: Island Press.
Mannell, R. C., & Kleiber, D. A. (1997). A social psychology of leisure. State College, PA: Venture
Press.
More, T. A. (1973). Attitudes of Massachusetts hunters. Transactions of the North American Wildlife
and Natural Resource Conference, 38, 230 .
Potter, D. R., Hendee, J. C., & Clark, R. N. (1973). Hunting satisfaction: Game, guns, or nature.
In J. C. Hendee & C. Schoenfeld (Eds.), Human dimensions in wildlife programs (pp. 62 71).
Washington, DC: Mercury Press.
Rossi, A. N., & Armstrong, J. B. (1999). Theory of reasoned action vs. theory of planned behavior:
Testing the suitability and suf ciency of a popular behavior model using hunting intentions.
Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 4, 40 56.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and
empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology,
(vol. 25 (pp. 1 65). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?
Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 19 45.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a psychological structure of human values. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 550 562.
Stankey, G. H., Lucas, R. C., & Ream, R. R. (1973). Relationship between hunting success and
satisfaction. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference, 38,
235 245.
Sutton, S. (1998). Predicting and explaining intentions and behavior: How well are we doing? Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1317 1338.
Tarrant, M. A., Bright, A. D., & Cordell, H. K. (1997). Attitudes toward wildlife species protection:
Assessing moderating and mediating effects in the value-attitude relationship. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2(2), 1 20.

178

D. Hrubes et al.

Downloaded by [North Carolina State University] at 10:32 28 February 2013

Vaske, J. J., & Donnelly, M. P. (1999). A value-attitude-behavior model predicting wildland preservation voting intentions. Society & Natural Resources, 12(6), 523 537.
Vaske, J. J., Fedler, A. J., & Graefe, A. R. (1986). Multiple determinants of satisfaction from a speci c
waterfowl hunting trip. Leisure Sciences, 8, 149 166.
Zinn, H. C., Manfredo, M. J., Vaske, J. J., & Wittmann, K. (1998). Using normative beliefs to determine
the acceptability of wildlife management actions. Society & Natural Resources, 11, 649 662.