Hypocrisy: What counts?

Alicke, Mark D.; Gordon, Ellen R.; Rosé, David

doi:10.1080/09515089.2012.677397

Cited by 65 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Philosophers have long debated how hypocrisy should be defined, but little research has examined what lay people think constitutes hypocrisy (Alicke, Gordon, & Rose, 2013). Most psychological research on judgments of hypocrisy has focused on situations in which individuals explicitly espouse certain moral values, or urge others to uphold such values -and then fail to uphold these values themselves (Barden et al, 2005;Effron & Monin, 2010;Gilbert & Jones, 1986;Powell & Smith, 2012).…”

Section: Theoretical and Applied Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypocrisy by association: When organizational membership increases condemnation for wrongdoing

Effron

Lucas

O’Connor

2015

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Theoretical and Applied Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypocrisy by association: When organizational membership increases condemnation for wrongdoing

Effron

Lucas

O’Connor

2015

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the components of hypocrisy are described as inconsistencies in attitudes and behavior, there are certain other factors that need to be addressed. Several elements such as the intent to deceive others, the weakness of will, and the level of self-deception affects the presence of hypocrisy (Alicke, Gordon and Rose, 2013). In this context, certain philosophers hypothesized that hypocrisy was associated inseparably with deliberately deceiving others (Szabados and Soifer, 1999).…”

Section: Components and Consequences Of Organizational Hypocrisymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intent to deceive component is the perception of the behavior of an individual as hypocritical when the individual does not keep his promises (Crisp and Cowton, 1994). Similarly, individuals could act inconsistent with their own values, could lose control and their will, which is also the foundation of hypocrisy (Alicke, Gordon and Rose, 2013). The deliberate contradiction of actions and previous discourse and values supports the self-deception, one of the key components of the concept of hypocrisy (Alicke, Gordon and Rose, 2013).…”

Section: Components and Consequences Of Organizational Hypocrisymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, certain philosophers hypothesized that hypocrisy was associated inseparably with deliberately deceiving others (Szabados and Soifer, 1999). Weakness of will and intent to deceive one's self are closely related to the concept of hypocrisy (Alicke, Gordon and Rose, 2013). The intent to deceive component is the perception of the behavior of an individual as hypocritical when the individual does not keep his promises (Crisp and Cowton, 1994).…”

Section: Components and Consequences Of Organizational Hypocrisymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A literature review would demonstrate that psychologists and philosophers discussed that hypocrisy was a complex and multi-faceted concept (Alicke, Gordon and Rose, 2013;Crisp and Cowton, 1994;McKinnon, 1991;Soifer, 1999, 2004). Although the components of hypocrisy are described as inconsistencies in attitudes and behavior, there are certain other factors that need to be addressed.…”

Section: Components and Consequences Of Organizational Hypocrisymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Organizational Hypocrisy and Integrity in Turkish Context: A Theoretical Analysis

Kılıçoğlu¹

2017

Educational Administration: Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the process of acquiring legitimacy and adaptation with organizational environment, there can be contradictions and discrepancy between statements and actual practices, and these paradoxical relations could pave the ground for the organizational behavior, which can be referred to as organizational hypocrisy. In educational institutions, hypocrisy means inconsistent individual values, benefits, opinions and actions at schools that affect the behavior of individuals. It could be concluded that hypocrisy at schools is observed when decisions are easily stated but not implemented. One of the mechanisms that can be used to eliminate negative results of organizational hypocrisy at schools is to ensure organizational integrity. For the sake of ensuring organizational integrity, it is expected from school administrators and other staff to be men of their word, to keep their promises, to internalize adopted values and reflect them in their actions, and not to ignore ethical principles in all educational and administrational processes. Limited number of theoretical and empirical studies that investigated which parameters are affected by organizational hypocrisy and what kind of outcomes it gave birth in schools caused difficulties in studying the term organizational hypocrisy. Besides, it was considered that studies related to how to deal with organizational hypocrisy at schools are limited in terms of their contribution to theoretical literature. Thus, the present study aims to evaluate organizational hypocrisy and organizational integrity, as opposed to hypocrisy, theoretically and to make some inferences based on the schools in Turkey. In the current study, organizational hypocrisy and integrity were discussed in Turkish context by examining these terms theoretically and providing recommendations for eliminating negative results of organizational hypocrisy.Keywords: Educational organizations, organizational hypocrisy, organizational integrity, Turkish education system ÖzÖrgütlerin işleyişinde söylem, karar ve eylem tutarlılığı gerek örgüt üyeleri gerekse örgütün örgütsel alanındaki imajı açısından son derece önemlidir. Örgütlerden ve özellikle de yöneticilerden genellikle söylemleri doğrultusunda hareket etmesi diğer bir deyişle vaat ettiği şeyleri yerine getirmesi beklenmektedir. Örgütlerin meşruiyet kazanma ve kurumsal çevreleriyle benzeşme sürecinde söylemleri ile gerçek uygulamaları uyumları arasında tezatlıklar veya çelişkiler yaşanabilmekte ve ortaya çıkan bu paradoksal ilişkiler örgütsel ikiyüzlülük olarak ifade edilen örgütsel davranışı hazırlayabilmektedir. Eğitim örgütleri açısından ikiyüzlülük, okuldaki bireylerin eylemlerini etkileyen sahip oldukları tutarsız değerler, çıkarlar, fikirler ve eylemler anlamına gelmektedir. Okullarda örgütsel ikiyüzlülüğün kararların kolayca ifade edildiği; ancak yerine getirilmediği zaman görüldüğü ifade edilebilir. Okullarda örgütsel ikiyüzlüğün olumsuz sonuçlarının ortadan kaldırılmasında kullanılabilecek mekanizmalardan biri örgütsel bütünlüğü sağlamadır. Örgüts...

show abstract

Experimental Philosophy Is Cognitive Science

Knobe¹

2016

A Companion to Experimental Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypocrisy: What counts?

Cited by 65 publications

References 9 publications

Hypocrisy by association: When organizational membership increases condemnation for wrongdoing

Hypocrisy by association: When organizational membership increases condemnation for wrongdoing

Organizational Hypocrisy and Integrity in Turkish Context: A Theoretical Analysis

Experimental Philosophy Is Cognitive Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About