160 MOTIVATION AND BEHAVIOUR
Implementation intention formation
A variety of factors that affect the enactment of intentions have been investigated
including personality traits, self-efficacy and planning. For example, we noted in
Chapter 6 that conscientious individuals may possess skills that help them to enact
their intentions (see Chapter 8 for more on self-efficacy and Chapter 9 for more on
planning). However, another factor may relate to the nature of the intention formed.
Gollwitzer (1993, 1999) makes the distinction between goal intentions and
implementa tion intentions. While the former is concerned with intentions to perform
a behaviour or achieve a goal (i.e. ‘I intend to do X’), the latter is concerned with if-
then plans, which specify an environmental prompt or context that will determine
when the action should be taken (i.e. ‘I intend to initiate the goal-directed behaviour
X when situation Y is encountered’). The important point about implementation
intentions is that they commit the individual to a specific course of action when certain
environmental conditions are met. Sheeran et al. (2005: 280) note that:
Impact of socio-economic status on the intention–behaviour
gapA variety of studies have reported that as socio-economic status increases
engagement with health-enhancing behaviours like exercise also increases while
engagement with health-risking behaviours like smoking decreases. This could be
because of weaker intentions to engage in health enhancing and stronger
intentions to engage in health-risk behaviours in lower socio-economic status
groups, although there is little evidence to support this view. A more interesting
possibility is that lack of available resources in lower socio-economic status groups
interferes with their ability to translate healthy intentions into health behaviours
(e.g. intending to exercise more or smoke less). This would be a moderating effect
of socio-economic status on the intention–behaviour relationship and would help
explain the large intention–health behaviour gap in lower socio-economic status
groups. Conner et al. (2013a) showed such a moderation effect for physical activity,
breastfeeding and smoking initiation, in each case the intention–behaviour
relationship was significantly weaker in the lower socio-economic status group
compared to the high socio-economic status group. This finding would suggest that
interventions targeting intentions in lower socio-economic status groups need to be
supplemented by interventions designed to tackle the problems have in enacting
such intentions (e.g. by providing better access to exercise facilities).
If you were trying to increase physical activity in lower socio-economic status
groups what strategies would you use to try to increase intentions to exercise and
reduce the intention–behaviour gap?FOCUS 7.4