Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Comprehensive action determination model

Comprehensive action determination model:
What is the CADM and how can it be applied to understanding human motivation?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

Figure 1: Water footprint Scenario A psychology researcher is exploring how university students’ water use habits relate to their broader attitudes towards sustainability. They are curious about the internal and external factors that influence water use habits, like whether students are unaware of the environmental impact of their actions, or if they just don’t prioritize sustainability in their daily routines. Additionally, They want to investigate how their broader attitudes toward the environment influence their actions. Coming across an “integrated model” of behaviour they chose to utilize it. They think this model could be useful for investigating water usage behaviours in university students.

The Comprehensive action determination model is a theoretical framework designed to explain human behaviour. It proposes that behaviour is directly predicted by three processes: habitual, situational, and intentional, and indirectly influenced by normative processes. This complex model can aid research in understanding human motivation by breaking down the processes, evaluating the outcomes, and examining the underlying context behind behaviour.

Focus questions What is motivation? What is the Comprehensive Action Determination Model (CADM)? What are the underpinning theories behind the CADM? How can the CADM be applied to understanding human motivation?

What is motivation?

Figure 2: Pyramid depicting the structure of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Motivation is the "why" behind behaviour the reasons underlying why people act in certain ways. Theorists explain motivation as the attribute that moves us to do or not to do something (Lai, 2011). The word motivation comes from the Latin verb movere, meaning "to move" (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2021). Motivation has three important components that drive behaviour direction, intensity, and persistence. Direction refers to how motivation shapes peoples choices and goals. Intensity is how motivation affects the effort people put in. Persistence is how motivation influences how long people keep working toward our goals. (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2021). Many theories have been developed to understand motivation, these include Herzberg's Two-factor theory (Herzberg et al., 1959; Herzberg et al., 2011), Self-determination theory (Deci, 1972, 2000), and Maslow's hierarchy of needs (Figure 2) (Maslow, 1943). Theorists argue that it is unrealistic to create an elaborate super-theory to understand motivation due to its complexity and the countless variables that affect it. They argue that the complexity of motivation cannot be understood through a single theory or model (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2021).

Comprehensive action determination model

The Comprehensive action determination model (CADM) was first proposed by Klöckner and Blöbaum in 2010 (Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010). They argue that one of the main goals of environmental psychology is to understand what determines people's actions, in relation to environmental influences. Klöckner and Blöbaum also note that several well-established models have been proposed, however none of these models provide an adequate representation of the multiple factors that determine behaviour (Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010). They further argue that integrated approaches combining two models, the Theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) and the Norm-activation model (Schwartz, 1977), have shown promise (Liu et al., 2017, Onwezen et al., 2013), especially when the concept of habit is also incorporated (Klöckner et al., 2003). Additionally, Klöckner and Blöbaum highlight that the Ipsative theory of behaviour offers a valuable perspective on the situational determination of behaviour (Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010). However, these theories (the Theory of planned behaviour and the Norm-activation model) have proven successful in specific domains, they exhibit limitations in other areas (Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010). The CADM unifies the Theory of planned behaviour, the Norm-activation model, the Ipsative theory of behaviour, and the concept of habit into one integrated framework. Klöckner and Blöbaum (2010) propose that combining these existing theories into a single model may result in a more universally applicable framework that accounts for all relevant factors and influences affecting behaviour. (Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010).

Underpinning theories

To understand the CADM, an understanding of the underpinning models, theories and theoretical concepts is required: the theory of planned behaviour, the Norm-activation model, the Ipsative theory of behaviour and the theoretical concept of habit.

Theory of planned behaviour

Figure 3: Flow diagram of the Theory of Planned Behaviour

The Theory of planned behaviour was first proposed by Ajzen in 1991 (Ajzen, 1991). The theory consists of three constructs: behavioural intention, attitude toward behaviour, and subjective norms. Behavioural intention refers to the motivation behind a behaviour, the stronger the intention, the more likely the behaviour is to be performed. Attitudes refers to how positively or negatively a person evaluates a specific behaviour. Subjective norms refer to the social pressures to perform or not perform a given behaviour. Perceived behavioural control is also a key construct in the Theory of Planned Behaviour, and it refers to how a person perceives the difficulty of performing a specific behaviour (Asare, 2015). The theory suggests that attitudes toward the behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control all influence behavioural intention, which in turn leads to behaviour, as depicted in Figure 3. Klockner and Blobaum (2010) argue that the Theory of planned behaviour focuses too much on intention while neglecting the role of objective situational constraints, habits, and personal norms.

Norm-activation model

The Norm-activation model was first proposed by Schwartz in 1977. The model suggests that behaviour is predicted by personal norms. Schwartz (1977) defines personal norms as “feelings of moral obligation, not as intentions” (Onwezen et al., 2013). The model posits that personal norms are influenced by two factors: awareness of consequences and awareness of needs (sometimes referred to as the ascription of responsibility). Awareness of consequences refers to the understanding that performing or not performing a certain behaviour leads to specific outcomes. Awareness of needs involves the feeling of responsibility to perform a particular behaviour (Onwezen et al., 2013; Klöckner & Blöbaum, 2010). As depicted in Figure 4, both awareness of consequences and awareness of needs predict personal norms, which in turn predict behaviour. Klockner and Blobaum (2010) identify limitations of the model, stating that “The Norm-activation model focuses on personal norms but underestimates the roles of habits, intentions, attitudes, and the situational context.”

Figure 4: Flow diagram of the Norm-Activation Model

Ipsative theory of behaviour

The Ipsative theory of behaviour was proposed by Frey (1988). The theory suggests that a person's behaviour can be limited or obstructed by the absence of genuine or perceived opportunities, influenced by both internal and external circumstances (Tanner, 1999). The theory consists of three presumptions about human behaviour. Firstly, objective constraints are assumed to influence behaviour. These constraints determine what a person can do, what they ought to do, or what they are permitted to do within a specific society. These variables make up the "objective possibility set," which limits or hinders people's ability to engage in certain activities (Tanner, 1999). Secondly, ipsative constraints prevent the activation of alternative behaviours. Ipsative constraints form the "ipsative possibility set," which individuals regard as relevant to their behavioural decisions (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010, Tanner, 1999). Finally, subjective constraints are believed to directly affect preferences rather than determining participation in specific actions, they influence a person's willingness to act (Tanner, 1999). Klockner and Blobaum (2010) argue that while the Ipsative theory of behaviour effectively outlines the objective and subjective aspects of situations as predictors of behaviour, it overlooks intentional, habitual, and normative processes.

Habits

The theoretical concept of habit was incorporated into the CADM to address limitations found in the Theory of planned behaviour and the Norm-activation model in predicting repetitive behaviours (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010). Habits can be defined as learned tendencies to repeat previous behaviours. They are activated by contextual elements that are often linked to past performances, such as specific locations, preceding actions in a sequence, and particular individuals (Woods & Neal, 2007). The concept of habit was added to account for structural differences between actions that are frequent and those that are rare or performed for the first time. When decisions are frequently made with satisfying outcomes, the influence of decision-making in given situations decreases, resulting in more automated behavioural patterns (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010, Triandis, 1979). Klockner and Blobaum (2010) note that although the concept of habit recognises the interaction between intentions and habits, it does not fully account for non-automatic situational facilitation, constraints on behaviour, or normative processes.

How does the CADM work?

The Comprehensive action determination model proposes that behaviour is determined by three possible direct sources or processes: habitual, intentional, and situational as depicted in figure 5. Habitual processes include schemata, heuristics, and associations of behaviour. Intentional processes include attitudes and intentions behind behaviour and situational processes include both objective and subjective constraints on behaviour. A fourth process, the normative process, is also present, but it does not directly affect behaviour. Instead, it influences intentional and habitual processes. The normative process includes social norms, personal norms, and awareness of needs and consequences. Klockner and Blobaum (2010) explain that attitudes, subjective constraints (e.g., perceived behavioural control), and personal and social norms are used to generate intentions. They further explain that attitudes reflect cognitive and emotional beliefs about behaviour, while perceived behavioural control represents beliefs about the degree of control or determination one has over their actions. Additionally, personal and social norms shape the moral framework that guides the decision-making process leading to behaviour. Personal norms are rooted in an individual’s value system and can be seen as the motivations behind decision-making (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010). However, the normative process also influences habits, as it has higher temporal stability compared to attitudes and perceived behavioural control. Situational processes and perceived behavioural control are also thought to activate personal norms by creating awareness of needs and consequences, which then generate intentions. Habitual and situational processes are believed to interfere with intentional processes and can moderate the influence of intentions on behaviour. Perceived behavioural control is essential for activating both normative and intentional processes. As a result, situational influences affect both normative and intentional processes. Furthermore, habits are said to form through the successful execution of behaviour in specific situations, meaning situational processes also influence habitual behaviours. Finally, behaviour influences changes in personal norms, and habits, in turn, affect future behaviour (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010).

Figure 5: Simplified flow diagram of the Comprehensive Action Determination Model

The CADM in Figure 5 is a simplified version of the CADM, Klockner an Bloblaum delve into further detail on the individual aspects apart of different processes and how they affect one another. Figure 6 depicts the detailed CADM utilizing the example of water conservation behaviours for the scenario at the start of the chapter. According to Klockner and Blobaum (2010), behaviour is primarily predicted by intentions and perceived behavioural control. Intentions, in turn, are generated from perceived behavioural control, social norms, and attitudes. In this scenario, habitual processes, such as water usage habits, directly predict the likelihood of engaging in water conservation efforts and moderate the relationship between intention and conservation behaviour. Personal norms are identified as predictors of intention, they do not directly predict conservation behaviour. Personal norms are shaped by awareness of environmental needs and consequences and are activated through perceived behavioural control, which creates a sense of moral obligation. Furthermore, social norms influence personal norms, as they are internalized and are a part of the individual’s value system (Klockner & Blobaum, 2010). Personal norms also influence the formation of habits. Klockner and Blobaum (2010) indicate that both subjective constraints (perceived behavioural control) and objective constraints (access to water) are direct predictors of conservation behaviour. Since habits tend to demonstrate long-term stability, water usage habits should be influenced by perceived behavioural control and water access. Both perceived behavioural control and water access also act as mediators in the relationship between intention and water conservation behaviour. Finally, conservation behaviour feeds back onto personal norms and habits.

Figure 6: Detailed flow diagram of Comprehensive action determination model In context to water usage behaviours

Current research on the CADM

Since its proposal in 2010, the CADM has gained some traction in recent literature especially in environmental behaviour (Klockner, 2013). Environmental behaviour refers to actions, attitudes, and practices related to the environment. Current research applying the CADM include sustainable farming (Tan, 2024), food waste behaviour (Cheng et al., 2024), clothing consumption (Joanes et al., 2020), and recycling behaviours (Fang et al., 2021., Klockner & Oppedal, 2011., Ofstad et al., 2017). CADM has proven effective in predicting agricultural practices (Tan, 2024), food waste behaviours (Cheng et al., 2024), and recycling and consumption patterns (Joanes et al., 2020). Research conducted by Tan (2024) on sustainable farming found that the CADM was the most effective model for analysing and predicting persistent agricultural practices, contributing to a deeper understanding of behavioural determinants in sustainable agriculture. Although the CADM has shown notable success in recent applications and studies, it is important to recognise that the existing body of literature remains limited. There is need for further research to enhance the generalisability of these findings and ensure their applicability across a broader range of contexts

Limitations to the CADM

The CADM has two notable limitations, complexity and being data intensive. The model’s complex nature can be difficult to interpret initially, as it combines elements from the Theory of planned Behaviour, the Norm-activation model, the Ipsative theory of behaviour, and the concept of habit. This complexity is further compounded by the presence of numerous variables that not only influence each other but also interact, with some variables acting as mediators, moderators, or both. These interrelationships make it challenging to understand how each factor contributes to behaviour. Furthermore, the complex nature of the CADM may not be practical in situations where quick decisions are needed, as the analysis of CADM is typically too thorough for quick decision-making. Secondly, the model is limited by its data-intensive nature. The data analysis process can be viewed as time-consuming, labour-intensive and could be difficult to replicate.

CADM and understanding human motivation

Examining context

The CADM allows researchers to examine the context behind human behaviour. Examining the context behind behaviour helps researchers gain deeper insights into the motivations that drive specific behaviours. Furthermore, it allows researchers to assess the strength of the motivation in relation to the context. Additionally, Normative process such as personal norms and social norms are known to influence intentions which lead to behaviour. Based on the behaviour, researchers can identify if social norms have a stronger influence on intentions more than personal norms, even though it is said by Klockner and Blobaum (2010) that personal norms are affected by social norms. The use of the CADM in behavioural research provides a framework for breaking down the motivations underlying behaviour.

Evaluating outcomes

Using the CADM in longitudinal studies could help researchers explore how past behaviours influence future actions. By following participants over time, studies can offer insights into how behaviours, habits, and perceived control in specific situations shape future behaviour. The CADM allows researchers to track patterns and identify the motivations driving behaviour change. The CADM emphasises the role of feedback loops in behaviour change. Positive or negative outcomes from past behaviours can strengthen or weaken future actions. These feedback loops can either reinforce existing behaviours or lead to changes. The model allows researchers to track these feedback mechanisms and how they impact future behaviour. By using CADM in longitudinal studies, researchers can better understand how past behaviour’s motivate future actions. Evaluating outcomes can help develop more effective strategies for behaviour change and intervention, providing a deeper understanding of the factors that motivate long-term behaviour.

Understanding behavioural processes

The CADM offers a valuable framework for understanding human motivation by systematically breaking down the various behavioural processes that drive actions. This model allows researchers to analyse the factors influencing motivation at different stages, such as habitual and situational processes. By applying the CADM, studies can identify specific points in the model where motivation may excel such as during moments of goal accomplishment as well as areas where motivation may falter, such as in the face of adversity or lack of support. The CADM provides a deeper understanding of how different variables interact to either enhance or undermine motivation.

Conclusion

Motivation is the fundamental "why" behind Behaviour; it is the core driver of behaviour, fuelling the pursuit of goals, overcoming challenges, and sustaining effort. Understanding motivation is important because it helps us identify the driving forces behind behaviour. The CADM explains how individuals make decisions in relation to habitual, intentional, situational and normative processes, all of which affect each other in complex ways. The CADM integrates pre-existing "action determination models," such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the Norm-Activation Model, the Ipsative Theory of Behaviour, and the theoretical concept of habit, into a comprehensive model. The CADM helps understand human motivation by analysing the context and underlying motives behind actions. It can also evaluate how past behaviour shapes future actions and where motivation may succeed or falter. The Comprehensive action determination model helps explain how motivation interacts with various factors like habits, intentions, and situational influences. By understanding this model, Researcher can gain insight into the underlying motives behind actions and improve decision-making, ultimately shaping future behaviour.

Quiz 1 What are the underlying theories of the CADM?: Norm-activation model, Ipsative theory of behaviour and habit. Theory of planned behaviour, Norm-activation model, Ipsative theory of behaviour and habit. Theory of planned behaviour, Norm-activation model, Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Theory of planned behaviour, Ipsative theory of behaviour and habit. 2 In The CADM, normative process predict which of the following processes: Habitual, situational and intentional. situational and intentional. Habitual and situational. Intentional and habitual. 3 What are two limitations of the CADM? Data availability, complexity. Data availability and generalisation Data intensive and generalisation. Complexity and data intensive. 4 In the literature, what field of psychology is the CADM most researched?: Clinical psychology in mental health issues, antisocial behaviour, attitudes and mood. Environmental psychology, in recycling behaviours, sustainable farming, food wastage and clothing consumption. Social psychology in social identity, interpersonal relationships, discrimination and social influence. Positive psychology in goal setting, positive emotions and optimism.

See also

• Environmental behaviour (Book chapter, 2013)
• Environmental cues and habits (Book chapter, 2024)
• Impulse buying motivation (Book chapter, 2018)

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Asare, M. (2015). Using the theory of planned behavior to determine the condom use behavior among college students. American Journal of Health Studies, 30(1), 43.

Cheng, X., Zhang, J., & Li, W. (2024). What shapes food waste behaviors? New insights from a comprehensive action determination model. Waste Management, 181, 188–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2024.04.017

Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030644

Fang, W.-T., Huang, M.-H., Cheng, B.-Y., Chiu, R.-J., Chiang, Y.-T., Hsu, C.-W., & Ng, E. (2021). Applying a comprehensive action determination model to examine the recycling behavior of Taipei City residents. Sustainability, 13(2), 490. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020490

Frey, B. S. (1988). Ipsative and objective limits to human behavior. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 17(4), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-5720(88)90012-5

Frey, B. S. (1992). An ipsative theory of human behaviour. In Economics as a science of human behaviour (pp. 179–191). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1374-0_12

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (2011). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). Transaction Publishers.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. John Wiley & Sons.

Joanes, T., Gwozdz, W., & Klöckner, C. A. (2020). Reducing personal clothing consumption: A cross-cultural validation of the comprehensive action determination model. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101396

Klöckner, C. A. (2013). A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour—a meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1028–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.014

Klöckner, C. A., Matthies, E., & Hunecke, M. (2003). Problems of operationalizing habits and integrating habits in normative decision-making models. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(2), 396–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01902.x

Klöckner, C. A., & Oppedal, I. O. (2011). General vs. domain-specific recycling behaviour: Applying a multilevel comprehensive action determination model to recycling in Norwegian student homes. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(4), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.12.009

Lai, E. R. (2011). Motivation: A literature review. Pearson Research Report.

Liu, Y., Sheng, H., Mundorf, N., Redding, C., & Ye, Y. (2017). Integrating the norm activation model and theory of planned behavior to understand sustainable transport behavior: Evidence from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(12), 1593. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14121593

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

Ofstad, S., Tobolova, M., Alim Nayum, & Klöckner, C. A. (2017). Understanding the mechanisms behind changing people’s recycling behavior at work by applying a comprehensive action determination model. Sustainability, 9(2), 204. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020204

Onwezen, M. C., Antonides, G., & Bartels, J. (2013). The norm activation model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.07.005

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5

Tan, J. J. H. (2024). Sustaining sustainable farming: An evaluation of the reasoned action and comprehensive action determination frameworks for persistence (Master's thesis, California Polytechnic State University). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database.

Tanner, C. (1999). Constraints on environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0121

Triandis, H. C. (1979). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 27, 195–259.

Wood, W., & Neal, D. T. (2007). A new look at habits and the habit-goal interface. Psychological Review, 114(4), 843–863. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.843

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2021). Teaching and researching motivation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351006743

External links

• Motivation (Healthdirect)
• Theory of planned behaviour (ScienceDirect)
• Norm-activation model (ScienceDirect)
• Water saving behaviours (NSW Government)