Despite the societal importance of activism, the understanding of activist intentions remained limited (Liebert, Leve, & Hu, 2011; Klar & Kasser, 2009). The current study used the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to examine two structural models of low-risk activist intentions and high-risk activist intentions (Ajzen, 1991). The traditional TPB model was tested against a hybrid commitment model that also assessed past activist behaviors and activist identity. Participants (N = 383) were recruited through social media, professional list-serves, and word of mouth. Results indicated a good model fit for both the traditional TPB model (CFI = .98; RMSEA = .05; SRMR = .03; χ2(120) = 3760.62, p < .01) and the commitment model (CFI = .97; RMSEA = .05; SRMR = .04; χ2(325) = 7848.07, p < .01). The commitment model accounted for notably more variance in both low-risk activist intentions (78.9% in comparison to 26.5% for the traditional TPB model) and high-risk activist intentions (58.9% in comparison to 11.2% for the traditional TPB model). Despite this, the traditional TPB model was deemed the better model as the higher variance explained in the commitment model was almost entirely due to the inclusion of past low-risk activist behaviors and past high-risk activist behaviors. A post-hoc analysis that incorporated sexual orientation and religious affiliation as covariates into the traditional model also led to a good-fitting model (CFI = .98; RMSEA = .04; SRMR = .04; χ2(127) = 217.18, p < .01) and accounted for increased variance in low-risk activist intentions (29.7%) and high-risk activist intentions (18.7%) compared to the traditional model. The merits of each of the structural models and the practical implications for practice and research were discussed