Hypocrisy and Behavior Change
Walden University

Hypocrisy and Behavior Change The hypocrisy paradigm is a strategy used to resolve the tension of dissonance through motivation and self-regulation. The hypocrisy takes place as we try to bring our behaviors in line with our attitudes as well as our rational thoughts and beliefs. According to Festinger (1957), people tend to change the cognitions that are least resistant to change, and in most cases those tend to be our attitudes rather than our behaviors (Brock & Green, 2005). The difference between the dissonance in the induced-compliance paradigm and that of the hypocrisy paradigm may be defined by how a person reduces the tension of their dissonance. In the induce compliance studies a person whose attitude is contrary to his or her beliefs can reduce their dissonance by changing their attitudes about a task by lying, which causes the cognitive discrepancy. In that study participants were ask to lie about a dull task and proclaim that it was interesting and exciting to reduce their dissonance, they had to change their attitudes about the actuality of the task to reduce their dissonance (Brock & Green, 2005). On the other hand, the hypocrisy paradigm might be seen as having a vantage point in determining the pros and cons of positive and negative courses of action (Brock & Green, 2005). The nature of change can be defined as our motivations to understand the complex constructs we use in defining why we do what we do and say what we say. Some researchers have argued that hypocrisy makes people change their behaviors rather than their attitudes because people think about their attitudes by observing their behaviors in the situations in which their behaviors affect their attitudes. Self-perception theory states that a person’s action influences their attitudes because people cognitively think about their attitudes by observing their behavior in situations where their behavior occurs (Brock & Green, 2005). Therefore, our behaviors are an important part in determining our attitudes because they influence each other. How our actions influence our behaviors to depend on how we process information through our self-perception processes. Researchers test the effects of hypocrisy on behavior changes by understanding that fear does not always trigger rational problem-solving behavior. People underestimate their vulnerability when they are afraid going into denial that unfortunate events can happen to them (Stone, Aronson, Crain, Winslow & Fried, 1994). Fallacious thinking can be linked to distortions in cognitive dissonance as a means to motivate self-persuasion because most college students believe that they should use condoms to prevent AID but do not always behave according to those beliefs. By using social validation as a means of social influences, one may be able to use the inconsistencies of thought to encourage hypocrisy to cause dissonance by increasing the awareness of this risky behavior (Stone, Aronson, Crain, Winslow & Fried, 1994). In the initial in the induction of the hypocrisy, Aronson, Fried and Stone, 1991, used self-reported intentions to measure the use of condoms but found that hypocrisy made people more aware of their failures to use condoms in the past. The study measured inconclusive without being in bed with the participants leading to an intermediate measurement of condom use based on mindful and committed (hypocrisy), committed only, mindful only, and unmindful and uncommitted. (Stone, Aronson, Crain, Winslow, & Fried, 1994). The hypocrisy conditions could not substantiate the use of condoms without being in the bedroom with the participant observing the act of their lovemaking. Furthermore, the suggestion that the induction of hypocrisy used to motivate people towards practicing safe sex is simply speculation and not substantiated because even if the participants brought condoms does not mean that they used them. Furthermore, the variables of public commitment and mindfulness are inconsistent and hard to measure based on an individual’s self-reporting procedures. Likewise, since the act of intimacy is such a private act the participants probably lied to reduce one's dissonance by changing their attitudes about that task at that moment. Participants may have complied with the study and practice induce compliance because the use of condoms was contrary to their beliefs. Participants may have reduced their dissonance by changing their attitudes to bring them more in line with the content of their statement (Brock & Green, 2005). People use sunscreen more often when they spend time in the sun, but the feeling of hypocrisy occurs when their attitudes and beliefs cause discrepancy with their past behaviors leading to cognitive dissonance. To reduce their discomfort, a person’s attitude and behaviors must begin to line up with their words and actions about the importance of using sunscreen. According to the self-standards model, people act and then decide whether their actions were good or bad, worthy or unworthy, competent or incompetent because they need a standard of comparison by which to assess the meaning of their behavior. Otherwise, the evaluation has no meaning (Brock & Green, 2005). In a design experiment conducted at Walden University, ten middle age Caucasian women were asked to participate in a brief explanation as to the importance of using sunscreen in reducing the risk of skin cancer. Half of the participants were told that only a handful of women were being asked to report their past failures in using sunscreen while the other half was told thousands of women were reporting their past failures. The first group of women who were asked to recall only two past events of using sunscreen, while another group of women asked to recall five-time where using sunscreen failed to keep them from being affected by the sun. The results revealed that the group of women who were asked to recall only two past failures in using sunscreen were able to use hypocrisy to affect change in their behavior by resolving the tension of dissonance through motivation and self-regulation. According to Rotter, (1966), people with this orientation are said to have an external locus of control and believe that they are responsible for their outcomes in life (Brock & Green, 2005). While the other group of women who were asked to recall five failures were not able to use hypocrisy to affect change in their behavior. People with this orientation according to Rotter, (1996), are said to have an internal locus of control because their experiences of dissonance are presumed to be controlled by others (Brock & Green, 2005). Overall, the experiences of hypocrisy are affected by not only the meaning a person contributes to their experiences of the past but also on the cognitive associations, they attribute to their past behaviors as well. In the first group, the reduction of dissonance can be measured by arguing that the first group women may associate with reducing cognitive dissonance from the view of an individualistic culture. On the other hand, the second group of woman may associate with the interdependent cultures, which tend to see themselves as connected to others and, therefore, their discrepancies might not generate the amount of cognitive dissonance or motivation needed to reduce their tension (Brock & Green, 2005). The measurement of both groups could also suggest that vicarious dissonance functions as a mean to reduce tension because we all feel related to social groups whether they are from a collectivistic or individualistic society.
References
Brock, T. C., & Green, M. C. (2005). Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stone, J., Aronson, E., Crain, A. L., Winslow, M. P., & Fried, C. B. (1994). Inducing hypocrisy as a means of encouraging young adults to use condoms.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(1), 116–128.