Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behavior

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Quebec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

The importance of the relevance of the issue to the group in voting intentions: The case of the Australian republic referendum

A questionnaire was distributed on the Australian republic issue to examine the interplay between norms and relevance of the issue to the group on voting intentions. Supporters of an Australian republic (N = 188) indicated the level of support for a republic within their peer Group, the relevance of the republic issue to the group, and measures designed to assess voting intentions and other attitude outcomes. Analysis revealed an interaction between normative support and relevance of the issue to the group. On the measure of intention, increasing normative support was associated with increased intention to vote in an attitude-consistent way at both relevance levels, but the effect was heightened when the issue was highly relevant to the group. On the outcomes of willingness to express opinion and perceived personal importance of the republic issue, normative support had a positive effect only when the issue was highly relevant to the group. Mediation analyses revealed that the impact of normative support and group relevance on intention were mediated through perceived personal importance of the republic issue.

The role of self-efficacy in predicting rule-following behaviors in shelters for homeless youth: A test of the theory of planned behavior

Through a prospective study of 70 youths staying at homeless-youth shelters, the authors tested the utility of I. Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behavior (TPB), by comparing the constructs of self-efficacy with perceived behavioral control (PBC), in predicting people's rule-following behavior during shelter stays. They performed the 1st wave of data collection through a questionnaire assessing the standard TPB components of attitudes, subjective norms, PBC, and behavioral intentions in relation to following the set rules at youth shelters. Further, they distinguished between items assessing PBC (or perceived control) and those reflecting self-efficacy (or perceived difficulty). At the completion of each youth's stay at the shelter, shelter staff rated the rule adherence for that participant. Regression analyses revealed some support for the TPB in that subjective norm was a significant predictor of intentions. However, self-efficacy emerged as the strongest predictor of intentions and was the only significant predictor of rule-following behavior. Thus, the results of the present study indicate the possibility that self-efficacy is integral to predicting rule adherence within this context and reaffirm the importance of incorporating notions of people's perceived ease or difficulty in performing actions in models of attitude-behavior prediction.