Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Merging elaboration and the theory of planned behavior to understand bear spray behavior of day hikers in Yellowstone National Park

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research empirically merges together two related theories: the elaboration likelihood model and the theory of planned behavior. A structural equation modeling approach is used to evaluate the relationship between the two theories and their collective impacts on behavioral intentions. The results suggest elaboration predicts the components of the theory of planned behavior (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavior control), which in turn all predicted behavior intentions. Furthermore, results showed that the components of the theory of planned behavior partially meditated the relationship between elaboration and behavioral intentions, indicating that elaboration works mostly through the components of the theory of planned behavior to impact behavioral intentions. This study represents an improved understanding of the influence of communication techniques on visitor behaviors in sustainable tourism settings. Additionally, the discussion exemplifies how these techniques can be used to improve communications and evaluate communication strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50:179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I, Driver BL (1991) Prediction of leisure participation from behavioral, normative, and control beliefs: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Leis Sci 13:185–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Armitage CJ, Conner M (2001) Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Social Psychol 40(4):471–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown TJ, Ham SH, Hughes M (2010) Picking up litter: an application of theory-based communication to influence tourist behaviour in protected areas. J Sustain Tour 18(7):879–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne M, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen K, Long J (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, p 136–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne BM (2001) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis R (2003) Scale development: theory and applications. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Gay LR (1991) Educational evaluation and measurement: competencies for analysis and application. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham JM (2006) Congeneric and (essentially) tau-equivalent estimates of score reliability: what they are and how to use them. Educ Psychol Meas 66(6):930–944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall TE, Ham SH, Lackey BK (2010) Comparative evaluation of the attention capture and holding power of novel signs aimed at park visitors. J Interpret Res 15(1):15–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham S (2013) Interpretation: making a difference on purpose. Fulcrum Publishing, Golden

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham SH, Brown TJ, Curtis J, Weiler B, Hughes M, Poll M (2009) Promoting persuasion in protected areas: a guide for managers who want to use strategic communication to influence visitor behaviour, 1st edn. Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre, Gold Coast

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham SH, Krumpe EE (1996) Identifying audiences and messages for nonformal environmental education - a theoretical framework for interpreters. J Interpret Res 1(1):11–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham SH, Weiler B, Hughes M, Brown T, Curtis J, Poll M (2008) Asking visitors to help: research to guide strategic communication for protected area management. Cooperative Research Center for Sustainable Tourism, Gold Coast

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrubes D, Ajzen I, Daigle J (2001) Predicting hunting intentions and behavior: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Leis Sci 23(3):165–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1998) Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol Methods 3:424–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline P (1994) An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline RB (2011) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 3rd edn. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Klockars AJ, Hancock GR (1993) Manipulations of evaluative ratings. Psychol Rep 73:1059–1066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick JA, Petty RE (1995) Attitude strength: an overview. In: Petty RE, Krosnick JA, et al. (ed) Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Mahwah, p 1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Lackey BK, Ham SH (2003) Assessment of communication focused on human-black bear conflict at Yosemite National Park. J Interpret Res 8(3):25–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden TJ, Ellen PS, Ajzen I (1992) A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 18(1):3–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfredo MJ (2008) Who cares about wildlife? Social science concepts for exploring human-wildlife relationships and conservation issues. Spring Science & Business Media, LLC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning R (2003) Emerging principles for using information/education in wilderness management. Int J Wilderness 9(1):20–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning R (2011) Studies in outdoor recreation: search and research for satisfaction, 3rd edn Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin SR, McCurdy K (2009) Wilderness food storage in Yosemite: using the theory of planned behavior to understand backpacker canister use. Human Dimens Wildl 14(3):206–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micerri T (1989) The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychol Bull 105:156–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller MB (1995) Coefficient alpha: a basic introduction from the perspectives of classical test theory and structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Model 2:255–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller ZD (2017) The enduring use of the theory of planned behavior. Human Dimens Wildl 22(6):583–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller ZD, Freimund W, Powell RB (2018a) Measuring elaboration and evaluating its influence on behaviors. J Interpret Res 23(1):27–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller ZD, Freimund W, Metcalf E, Nickerson N (2018b) Targeting your audience: wildlife value orientations and the relevance of messages about bear safety. Human Dimens Wildl 23(3):3. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2017.1409371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munshi J (2014) A method for constructing Likert scales. SSRN Electronic J (April) 1–12

  • NPS (2017a) Yellowstone National Park: visitation statistics. http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/visitationstats.htm

  • NPS (2017b) Bear-inflicted human injuries and fatalities in Yellowstone. http://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/injuries.htm

  • NPS (2017c) Bear safety. Yellowstone National Park. https://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/bearsafety.htm

  • Penteriani V, Delgado MDM, Pinchera F, Naves J, Fernández-Gil A, Kojola I, López-Bao JV (2016) Human behaviour can trigger large carnivore attacks in developed countries. Sci Rep 6(1432):20552

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson RA, Wilson WR (1992) Measuring customer satisfaction: fact and artifact. J Acad Mark Sci 20(1):61–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty RE, Cacioppo JT, Goldman R (1981) Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. J Pers Soc Psychol 41(5):847–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 19. Academic Press, San Diego, p 123–205

  • Petty RE, McMichael S, Brannon LA (1992) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion: applications in recreation and tourism. In: Manfredo MJ (ed) Influencing human behavior: theory and applications in recreation, tourism, and natural resources management. Sagamore Publishing, Champaign, p 77–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty RE, Wegener DT, Fabrigar LR (1997) Attitudes and attitude change. Annu Rev Psychol 48:609–47

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz PW (2011) Conservation means behavior. Conserv Biol 25(6):1080–1083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha SK, Burns RC, Pierskalla CD, Selin S (2012) Predicting deer hunting intentions using the theory of planned behavior: a survey of Oregon big game hunters. Human Dimens Wildl 17:129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teel TL, Dietsch AM, Manfredo MJ (2015) A (soci al) psychology approach in conservation. In: Bennett NJ, Roth R (eds) The conservation social sciences: What?, How?, and Why. Vancouver, B.C.: Canadian Wildlife Federation and Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability

  • Teng S, Khong KW, Goh WW (2014) Conceptualizing persuasive messages using ELM in social media. J Internet Commer 13(1):65–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vezeau SL, Powell RB, Stern MJ, Moore DD, Wright BA (2015) Development and validation of two scales to measure elaboration and behaviors associated with stewardship in children. Environ Educat Res (January):1–22

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Zachary D. Miller

  2. Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

    Wayne Freimund & Robert B. Powell

  3. Department of Society and Conservation, The University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA

    Elizabeth Covelli Metcalf & Norma Nickerson

Authors
  1. Zachary D. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wayne Freimund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elizabeth Covelli Metcalf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Norma Nickerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert B. Powell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zachary D. Miller.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Miller, Z.D., Freimund, W., Metcalf, E.C. et al. Merging elaboration and the theory of planned behavior to understand bear spray behavior of day hikers in Yellowstone National Park. Environmental Management 63, 366–378 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01139-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01139-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation