This research provides insight into the drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Behavioral reasoning theory (BRT) is used as the framework for this investigation. First, in BRT, attitudes directly predict behavior and behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 2008; Ranganathan & Henley, 2008; Webb, Green, & Brashear, 2000; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006). Second, attitudes influence the relationship between \"reasons\" and behavioral intentions as demonstrated in several studies by Westaby (2005a, 2005b, 2006). Third, the reasons construct has two components: reasons for and reasons against a behavior (Westaby, 2006). Westaby (2005a,2005b) and Briggs. Peterson, and Gregory (2010) empirically explore this construct and demonstrate that it directly and positively influences attitudes. Finally, reascons directly and positively influence behaviors and behavioral intentions (e.g., Costa-Font, Rudisill, & Mossialos, 2008; Kim, Kim, Myoung, & Lee, 2010; Lee. Westaby, Chyou, & Purschwitz, 2007; Wagner & Westaby. 2009).
Drawing on behavioral reasoning theory research (Costa-Font et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2007; Sarif & Shiratuddin 2010; Wagner & Westaby, 2009; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006: Westaby & Fishbein. 1996), these essays build empirically based models that consider reasons as direct drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Essay 1 evaluates pre-service learning experience measures as reasons. Because behavioral reasoning theory includes a feedback loop from Behavior to reasons, Essay 2 compares two models using different postservice-learning experience measures as reasons and determines which model is the best driver of generosity behavioral intentions. Essays 1 and 2 also examine the role of attitudes in the relationship between reasons and behavioral intentions.
","abstract_html":"<p>This research provides insight into the drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Behavioral reasoning theory (BRT) is used as the framework for this investigation. First, in BRT, attitudes directly predict behavior and behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 2008; Ranganathan & Henley, 2008; Webb, Green, & Brashear, 2000; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006). Second, attitudes influence the relationship between "reasons" and behavioral intentions as demonstrated in several studies by Westaby (2005a, 2005b, 2006). Third, the reasons construct has two components: reasons for and reasons against a behavior (Westaby, 2006). Westaby (2005a,2005b) and Briggs. Peterson, and Gregory (2010) empirically explore this construct and demonstrate that it directly and positively influences attitudes. Finally, reascons directly and positively influence behaviors and behavioral intentions (e.g., Costa-Font, Rudisill, & Mossialos, 2008; Kim, Kim, Myoung, & Lee, 2010; Lee. Westaby, Chyou, & Purschwitz, 2007; Wagner & Westaby. 2009).</p> <p>Drawing on behavioral reasoning theory research (Costa-Font et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2007; Sarif & Shiratuddin 2010; Wagner & Westaby, 2009; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006: Westaby & Fishbein. 1996), these essays build empirically based models that consider reasons as direct drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Essay 1 evaluates pre-service learning experience measures as reasons. Because behavioral reasoning theory includes a feedback loop from Behavior to reasons, Essay 2 compares two models using different postservice-learning experience measures as reasons and determines which model is the best driver of generosity behavioral intentions. Essays 1 and 2 also examine the role of attitudes in the relationship between reasons and behavioral intentions.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Nicholls, Jeananne"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Steven White","Dr. Jill Maher","Dr. Brian Rutherford"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2012,"date_issued":"2012-04-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2012-04-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:42:45Z","subjects":["behavioral reasoning theory","service learning","generosity","behavioral intentions","volunteer","donation","Marketing"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/etd/502","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Steven White","Dr. Jill Maher","Dr. Brian Rutherford"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Nicholls, Jeananne"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2012-05-03T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["behavioral reasoning theory","service learning","generosity","behavioral intentions","volunteer","donation","Marketing"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/etd/502"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This research provides insight into the drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Behavioral reasoning theory (BRT) is used as the framework for this investigation. First, in BRT, attitudes directly predict behavior and behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 2008; Ranganathan & Henley, 2008; Webb, Green, & Brashear, 2000; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006). Second, attitudes influence the relationship between \"reasons\" and behavioral intentions as demonstrated in several studies by Westaby (2005a, 2005b, 2006). Third, the reasons construct has two components: reasons for and reasons against a behavior (Westaby, 2006). Westaby (2005a,2005b) and Briggs. Peterson, and Gregory (2010) empirically explore this construct and demonstrate that it directly and positively influences attitudes. Finally, reascons directly and positively influence behaviors and behavioral intentions (e.g., Costa-Font, Rudisill, & Mossialos, 2008; Kim, Kim, Myoung, & Lee, 2010; Lee. Westaby, Chyou, & Purschwitz, 2007; Wagner & Westaby. 2009).
Drawing on behavioral reasoning theory research (Costa-Font et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2007; Sarif & Shiratuddin 2010; Wagner & Westaby, 2009; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006: Westaby & Fishbein. 1996), these essays build empirically based models that consider reasons as direct drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Essay 1 evaluates pre-service learning experience measures as reasons. Because behavioral reasoning theory includes a feedback loop from Behavior to reasons, Essay 2 compares two models using different postservice-learning experience measures as reasons and determines which model is the best driver of generosity behavioral intentions. Essays 1 and 2 also examine the role of attitudes in the relationship between reasons and behavioral intentions.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Drivers of Future Generosity Behavioral Intentions of College Service-Learning Experience Participants"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Steven White","Dr. Jill Maher","Dr. Brian Rutherford"],"dc:creator":["Nicholls, Jeananne"],"dc:date.available":["2012-05-03T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This research provides insight into the drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Behavioral reasoning theory (BRT) is used as the framework for this investigation. First, in BRT, attitudes directly predict behavior and behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 2008; Ranganathan & Henley, 2008; Webb, Green, & Brashear, 2000; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006). Second, attitudes influence the relationship between \"reasons\" and behavioral intentions as demonstrated in several studies by Westaby (2005a, 2005b, 2006). Third, the reasons construct has two components: reasons for and reasons against a behavior (Westaby, 2006). Westaby (2005a,2005b) and Briggs. Peterson, and Gregory (2010) empirically explore this construct and demonstrate that it directly and positively influences attitudes. Finally, reascons directly and positively influence behaviors and behavioral intentions (e.g., Costa-Font, Rudisill, & Mossialos, 2008; Kim, Kim, Myoung, & Lee, 2010; Lee. Westaby, Chyou, & Purschwitz, 2007; Wagner & Westaby. 2009).
Drawing on behavioral reasoning theory research (Costa-Font et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2007; Sarif & Shiratuddin 2010; Wagner & Westaby, 2009; Westaby, 2005a, 2005b, 2006: Westaby & Fishbein. 1996), these essays build empirically based models that consider reasons as direct drivers of generosity behavioral intentions. Essay 1 evaluates pre-service learning experience measures as reasons. Because behavioral reasoning theory includes a feedback loop from Behavior to reasons, Essay 2 compares two models using different postservice-learning experience measures as reasons and determines which model is the best driver of generosity behavioral intentions. Essays 1 and 2 also examine the role of attitudes in the relationship between reasons and behavioral intentions.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/etd/502"],"dc:subject":["behavioral reasoning theory","service learning","generosity","behavioral intentions","volunteer","donation","Marketing"],"dc:title":["The Drivers of Future Generosity Behavioral Intentions of College Service-Learning Experience Participants"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:42:45Z"}