Although many people report favourable attitudes towards organ donation, Hong Kong has one of the lowest rates of organ donation globally. The present study examined behavioural intention towards organ donation. A convenience sample of 225 Hong Kong Chinese adults (118 = female) aged 18–82 years were recruited to an online survey. Behavioural intention, attitudes, subjective norms, self-efficacy, knowledge and altruism were examined. ANOVA was conducted to examine key differences based on behavioural intention, regression then examined predictors of behavioural intention to donate before exploratory analysis examined the mediating role of subjective norms on the relationship between self-efficacy and behavioural intention. Findings revealed over one third (38%) of respondents were actively registered as organ donors. Women were significantly more likely to be registered as organ donors. Subjective norms and self-efficacy were strong predictors of behavioural intention to donate, and subjective norms significantly mediated the relationship between self-efficacy and behavioural intention to donate.
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50: 179–211.
2.
AjzenIFishbeinM (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
AlbarracínDJohnsonBTFishbeinM, et al (2001) Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin127: 142–161.
4.
BanduraA (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review84: 191–215.
5.
BlokGAMortonJMorleyM, et al (2004) Requesting organ donation: The case of self-efficacy. Advances in Health Sciences Education9: 261–282.
6.
BresnahanMJGuanXWangX, et al (2008) The culture of the body: Attitudes toward organ donation in China and the US. Chinese Journal of Communication1: 181–195.
7.
BrugJVugtMVvan Den BorneB, et al (2000) Predictors of willingness to register as an organ donor among Dutch adolescents. Psychology and Health15: 357–368.
8.
Census & Statistics Department (2019) Thematic household survey report no. 68. Available at: https://www.statistics.gov.hk (accessed January 2021).
9.
ChenJXZhangTMLimFL, et al (2006) Current knowledge and attitudes about organ donation and transplantation among Chinese university students. Transplantation Proceedings38: 2761–2765.
10.
ConnerMSparksP (2005) Theory of planned behaviour and health behaviour. In: ConnerMNormanP (eds) Predicting Health Behaviour. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp.121–162.
11.
CookeRFrenchDP (2008) How well do the theory of reasoned action and theory of planned behaviour predict intentions and attendance at screening programmes? A meta-analysis. Psychology and Health23: 745–765.
Department of Health (2021b) Milestones of Hong Kong organ transplantation. Available at: https://www.organdonation.gov.hk/eng/ (accessed January 2022).
15.
HaggerMSChatzisarantisNLDBiddleSJH (2002) A meta-analytic review of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior in physical activity: Predictive validity and the contribution of additional variables. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology24: 3–32.
LiAHMcArthurEMacleanJ, et al (2015) Deceased organ donation registration and familial consent among Chinese and South Asians in Ontario, Canada. PLoS One10: e0124321.
22.
LiuSLiuCCaoX, et al (2013) The difference in the attitude of Chinese and Japanese college students regarding deceased organ donation. Transplantation Proceedings45: 2098–2101.
23.
LiuYTsaiJYChenY (2019) Beyond altruism: Framing organ donation in a 19-year review of Chinese news coverage. Journal of Health Communication24: 878–888.
24.
MoorlockGIvesJDraperH (2014) Altruism in organ donation: An unnecessary requirement?Journal of Medical Ethics40: 134–138.
25.
MorganSMillerJ (2002) Communicating about gifts of life: The effect of knowledge, attitudes, and altruism on behavior and behavioral intentions regarding organ donation. Journal of Applied Communication Research30: 163–178.
26.
NaderiGAzadfarAYahyazadehSR, et al (2020) Impact of the donor-recipient gender matching on the graft survival from live donors. BMC Nephrology21: 5.
27.
PuotiFRicciANanni-CostaA, et al (2016) Organ transplantation and gender differences: A paradigmatic example of intertwining between biological and sociocultural determinants. Biology of Sex Differences7: 35.
28.
ReubsaetABrugJNijkampMD, et al (2005) The impact of an organ donation registration information program for high school students in the Netherlands. Social Science & Medicine60: 1479–1486.
29.
SharpCRandhawaG (2014) Altruism, gift giving and reciprocity in organ donation: A review of cultural perspectives and the challenges of concepts. Transplantation Reviews28: 163–168.
30.
SteinmanJL (2006) Gender disparity in organ donation. Gender Medicine3: 246–252.
31.
TangCSKChuaZJiaqingO (2010) A gender perspective on Chinese social relationships. In: BondMH (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Chinese Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.532–553.
32.
TeohJYLauBSFarNY, et al (2020) Attitudes, acceptance, and registration in relation to organ donation in Hong Kong: A cross-sectional study. Hong Kong Medical Journal26: 192–200.
33.
TongACraigJCWongG, et al (2012) “It was just an unconditional gift.” Self reflections of non-directed living kidney donors. Clinical Transplantation26: 589–599.
WuAMS (2008) Discussion of posthumous organ donation in Chinese families. Psychology Health & Medicine13: 48–54.
37.
WuAMSLuLS (2011) Cognitive obstacles against organ donation: The influence of negative attitudes, norms, and traditional beliefs on Chinese people’s intention to donate organs after death. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology21: 87–93.
38.
WuAMSTangCS (2009) The negative impact of death anxiety on self-efficacy and willingness to donate organs among Chinese adults. Death Studies33: 51–72.
39.
WuAMSTangCSYogoM (2013) Death anxiety, altruism, self-efficacy, and organ donation intention among Japanese college students: A moderated mediation analysis. Australian Journal of Psychology65: 115–123.
