Health Belief Model vs. Theory of Planned Behavior: Understanding Risky Driving in Young Adults
Faculty Mentor
Dr James Thomas
Location
Russell Union Ballroom
Type of Research
On-going
Session Format
Poster Presentation
College
Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health
Department
Health policy and Community Health
Abstract
Reckless driving and low use of safety gear among young adults contribute substantially to preventable injuries and deaths. Indeed, motor vehicle crashes remain the leading cause of unintentional death among Americans aged 15–24, with drivers ages 15–20 accounting for a disproportionate share of fatal crashes—in 2023 alone, crashes involving young drivers killed 5,588 people, a 4.2% increase from the prior year (National Safety Council, 2024). Understanding the psychological factors shaping these behaviors is essential for designing effective interventions. This study compares the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to evaluate their usefulness in explaining reckless driving, seatbelt use, and helmet use among young adults. The analysis focuses on theoretical differences, construct performance, and implications for behavior‑change strategies.
A comparative review of empirical studies applying HBM and TPB to traffic safety behaviors was conducted. Evidence from quantitative, qualitative, and meta‑analytic research was synthesized to assess construct fidelity, predictive validity, and relevance to young adult populations. Particular attention was given to studies examining perceived risk, social norms, perceived behavioral control, and barriers to safety gear use.
HBM findings indicate that perceived benefits, barriers, and self‑efficacy are the strongest predictors of safety behaviors, while perceived susceptibility and severity show inconsistent effects among young adults who often underestimate risk. TPB demonstrates stronger predictive validity overall, with attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control explaining substantial variance in intentions and behavior. Peer influence emerges as a dominant factor in risky driving, highlighting TPB’s advantage in capturing social pressures. Integrated approaches combining constructs from both models show enhanced predictive power and offer promising guidance for multilevel interventions targeting individual beliefs, peer norms, and environmental barriers.
Program Description
.
Start Date
4-23-2026 10:00 AM
End Date
4-23-2026 12:00 PM
Recommended Citation
Obianyo, Chekwube Martin; Ayo-Farai, Oluwatoyin; Ezeamii, Victor; Menefield, Ragonda; Mosley, Sarah; and Thomas, James, "Health Belief Model vs. Theory of Planned Behavior: Understanding Risky Driving in Young Adults" (2026). GS4 Student Scholars Symposium. 40.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/research_symposium/2026/2026/40
Health Belief Model vs. Theory of Planned Behavior: Understanding Risky Driving in Young Adults
Russell Union Ballroom
Reckless driving and low use of safety gear among young adults contribute substantially to preventable injuries and deaths. Indeed, motor vehicle crashes remain the leading cause of unintentional death among Americans aged 15–24, with drivers ages 15–20 accounting for a disproportionate share of fatal crashes—in 2023 alone, crashes involving young drivers killed 5,588 people, a 4.2% increase from the prior year (National Safety Council, 2024). Understanding the psychological factors shaping these behaviors is essential for designing effective interventions. This study compares the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to evaluate their usefulness in explaining reckless driving, seatbelt use, and helmet use among young adults. The analysis focuses on theoretical differences, construct performance, and implications for behavior‑change strategies.
A comparative review of empirical studies applying HBM and TPB to traffic safety behaviors was conducted. Evidence from quantitative, qualitative, and meta‑analytic research was synthesized to assess construct fidelity, predictive validity, and relevance to young adult populations. Particular attention was given to studies examining perceived risk, social norms, perceived behavioral control, and barriers to safety gear use.
HBM findings indicate that perceived benefits, barriers, and self‑efficacy are the strongest predictors of safety behaviors, while perceived susceptibility and severity show inconsistent effects among young adults who often underestimate risk. TPB demonstrates stronger predictive validity overall, with attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control explaining substantial variance in intentions and behavior. Peer influence emerges as a dominant factor in risky driving, highlighting TPB’s advantage in capturing social pressures. Integrated approaches combining constructs from both models show enhanced predictive power and offer promising guidance for multilevel interventions targeting individual beliefs, peer norms, and environmental barriers.
