Theory  of  Trying

Bagozzi and Warshaw (1990) developed the Theory of Trying (TT) as a modification of the Theory of Reasoned Action. The model was developed in order to explain goal-directed behaviours. The model stems from the basic attitude models, however it has been developed to include other factors that are not accounted for in the TRA and TPB.

The TT proposes that attitude towards trying is a result of the attitude a consumer has toward the success or failure of trying weighted by the expectation of success or failure. This refers to achieving or not achieving a goal. In addition, attitude toward the process influences attitude toward trying (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990). This refers to the pleasures and pains experienced when trying to achieve a goal (Xie et al., 2008).

Attitude toward trying can be shown as in the following equation:

AT = ∑biei + ∑bjej + ∑bkek

Where biei = the attitude toward success bjej = the attitude toward failure bkek = the attitude toward the process

Equation 4: Attitude toward trying (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990)

Agarwal and Agarwal (2003) propose that behind the attitude toward success and failure and attitude toward the process there are several other factors such as outcome uncertainty, satisfaction with current behaviour, personal and environmental impediments, habits and inertia, lack of knowledge, information distortion, being self-reliant, self expression and deferred gratification that affect the outcome.

Intention to try is influenced by attitude toward trying and social norm toward trying in line with TRA and TPB. The social norm follows from the attitude theories. However, research has shown that past behaviour, in addition to attitudes and social norm, contribute to determine behavioural intention and behaviour (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990). Frequency of

past trying can be a determinant of both intention to try and trying. A consumer may decide to try a product or service, or, as in this thesis, try to visit a consumer fair for jewellery, based on past experiences. When a consumer does not have clear attitudes and intentions to try a product, a service or an action, the effects of frequency of past trying on intention to try will be strong (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990). This can occur when a consumer does not have a clear plan to perform an act, because the time for performing the reasoned behaviour appears distant to the consumer. Thus, it is likely that it is the expectation of behaviour a consumer has rather than intention that is reported when being questioned (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990).

Past trying and experiences can contribute to predict future trying, for instance when trying is not solely determined by intention to try. This may occur when factors that are missing or that constrains prevent intention to become actually trying to perform a type of behaviour. In addition, if the consumer is not certain about his or her intentions, then past experiences may be a predictor of trying either directly or indirectly through attitudes (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990). As Ouellette and Wood (1998) points out, past behaviour can affect attitudes, subjective norm or perceived behavioural control, which again will affect intentions. On the other side, in their study they find significant evidence that frequency of past behaviour directly predicts intention, independent of other variables such as attitudes and subjective norm (Ouellette and Wood, 1998).

When people form intentions, past behaviour is likely to be a determinant, together with attitudes, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991; Ouellette and Wood, 1998). Frequency of past behaviour can have an impact on the positive attitude toward a behaviour (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993; Ouellette and Wood, 1998).

In the TT framework, intention to try and frequency of past trying both determine actual trying, in addition to a third variable, recency of past trying. Past research by e.g. Bird and Ehrenberg (1966, as cited in Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990) has found recency of past trying to be moderately correlated to the frequency of past trying, however recency is expected to be an independent determinant of trying. Recency refers to a situation where a consumer has tried a product, service or an action recently, and therefore it is more likely that the consumer will try again. Ouellette and Wood (1998) investigated the impact of past behaviour in two situations, one stable/frequent and one unstable/infrequent. Their results show that intention

had stronger effect on behaviour than past behaviour for the unstable/infrequent context, while past behaviour had a stronger effect than intention in the stable/frequent context.

The theory of trying:

Model 3: Theory of Trying (Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1990)

The TT has been applied in different situations where consumers try to perform a type of behaviour. Xie et al. (2008) use a modified TT for investigating consumers trying to create value through prosumption. They removed expectations of success/failure and included self-efficiency as a predictor of intention. A study by Bay and Daniel (2003) investigated students pursuing a college education and studied the decision to try to achieve that goal.

The results show that attitude toward trying and social norm influence intentions to complete a college degree, while past behaviour does not have significant influence. A reason for this may be that respondents did not have a past behaviour to consider in their intention to try (Bay and Daniel, 2003).

3.3.3.1 Limitations and strengths

Bagozzi and Warshaw (1990) found in their study of the TT that by including the past experiences variables the explanatory power of the model increased. Frequency of past

trying was a significant predictor of intention to try, while recency of trying predicted future trying. A meta-analysis by Sheppard et al. (1988, as cited in Bay and Daniel, 2003) found past behaviour, measured as a single variable, to predict future behaviour, even after they controlled for the variables attitudes, subjective norm and intention. Ouellette and Wood (1998) found past behaviour to predict intentions after controlling for attitudes and subjective norm. A problem that occurred in the study by Bagozzi and Warshaw (1990) was connected to measuring frequency and recency. When they asked respondents about the past trying this may have led their thoughts about the past experiences to become more salient when respondents answered questions about other measures, and thus affecting them.

Bagozzi (2002, as cited in Bay and Daniel, 2003) suggested that a potential limitation in the theory of trying (as well as for the TPB) is the model(s) inability to predict situations where antecedent variables can have an effect. This means that the model cannot predict the behaviours and situations where past behaviour is expected to impact intentions.