Moral cleansing as hypocrisy: When private acts of charity make you feel better than you deserve.

O’Connor, Kieran; Effron, Daniel A.; Lucas, Brian J.

doi:10.1037/pspa0000195

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, privately engaging in good deeds can make you appear hypocritical, if your good deeds are inconsistent with your public transgressions. In a recent series of studies (O'Connor et al, 2020), subjects judged the founder of a pro-infidelity website to be hypocritical for privately remaining faithful to his wife. Or, in another scenario, subjects deemed a tobacco company executive hypocritical for secretly donating to anti-smoking causes.…”

Section: Does Moral Engagement Inevitably Create a Hypocrisy Liability?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent evidence that people see hypocrisy in the absence of false signaling would seem to pose a challenge to this false signaling theory. For example, recall that sin-industry promoters whose private behavior is virtuous-such as the founder of a pro-infidelity website who privately stays faithful to his wife or a tobacco company executive who privately donates to anti-smoking causes-are judged as hypocritical (O'Connor et al, 2020), even though their moral acts are not public and are thus unlikely to earn them undeserved reputational benefits. However, if one draws a distinction between hypocrisy and negative moral evaluation, it becomes clear that such examples do not necessarily negate the proposal that false signaling is the key to why people dislike hypocrites.…”

Section: The Role Of False Signalingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One interesting possibility is that the answer depends on whether he, by virtue of his hypocritical moral engagement, is judged to feel better than is merited. O'Connor et al (2020) suggest that people may interpret private good deeds that contradict public transgressions (e.g., the tobacco executive's donations to anti-smoking causes) as attempts at "moral cleansing". In other words, people may see inconsistent good deeds as a strategy through which transgressors attempt to alleviate their guilt and thereby feel more virtuous than is deserved.…”

Section: When Are Personal Moral Failings Evaluated Negatively?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

False Signaling and Personal Moral Failings: Two distinct pathways to hypocrisy with unequal moral weight

Jordan¹,

Sommers²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moral engagement is a key feature of human nature: we hold moral values, condemn those who violate those values, and attempt to adhere to them ourselves. Yet moral engagement can make us appear hypocritical if we fail to behave morally. When does moral engagement risk triggering ascriptions of hypocrisy? And when do hypocrites—moreso than ordinary wrongdoers—earn particular moral outrage? Across four studies (total n = 1,787), we provide evidence of two distinct pathways to hypocrisy: (1) violating a moral value that you have signaled to others that you adhere to (i.e., engaging in false signaling) and (2) violating a moral value that you genuinely hold (i.e., committing a personal moral failing). Furthermore, we show that these pathways have unequal moral weight, such that false signaling is evaluated more negatively. In Study 1, we confirm that paradigmatic hypocrites activate judgments associated with both pathways. In Studies 2-3, we investigate case studies designed to activate one pathway but not the other. We find evidence that both pathways are sufficient to trigger ascriptions of hypocrisy, but false signalers are more likely to be penalized for their hypocrisy (and thus deemed less moral than non-hypocritical transgressors). Finally, Study 4 demonstrates that a target who violates a stated value, but avoids activating either pathway, is judged as neither hypocritical nor immoral—confirming that at least one pathway is necessary for hypocrisy. Together, these findings suggest that false signaling and personal moral failings constitute two distinct pathways to hypocrisy with unequal moral weight.

show abstract

Section: Does Moral Engagement Inevitably Create a Hypocrisy Liability?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Role Of False Signalingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: When Are Personal Moral Failings Evaluated Negatively?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

False Signaling and Personal Moral Failings: Two distinct pathways to hypocrisy with unequal moral weight

Jordan¹,

Sommers²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, people's behavior often exhibits a positive effect on others. Furthermore, studies have reported that people's moral identity is threatened when moral standards conflict with self-interest (Valdesolo and Desteno, 2007;Monin et al, 2009;O'Connor et al, 2020). To reduce cognitive conflict, people often adopt different approaches: when encountering moral standards, people usually avoid MH behaviors; when these behaviors are not avoided, they lower their moral standards to rationalize their hypocritical behavior (López-Pérez and Spiegelman, 2013;Kish-Gephart et al, 2014;Abdai and Miklósi, 2016).…”

Section: Effects Of the Behavior Of In-group Or Out-group Strangers Omentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, people adopt harsher and stricter standards of moral judgment for others than those they adopt for themselves (Valdesolo and DeSteno, 2008;Lammers et al, 2010), and this type of hypocrisy occurs at the intrapersonal level. Second, at the interpersonal level, hypocrisy is manifested in people's morality standards, which are inconsistent with their actual behavior; that is, their actual behavior fails to meet their claimed moral requirements of behavior (Watson and Sheikh, 2008;O'Connor et al, 2020). Batson et al (1997) investigated hypocrisy and explained the cause for moral people apparently behaving immorally.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of the Presence and Behavior of In-Group and Out-Group Strangers on Moral Hypocrisy

Bian

Li²,

Xia

et al. 2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moral hypocrisy (MH) occurs when people fail to practice what they preach. Despite the prevalence of the effect of social identity on an individual's MH, few empirical studies have explored contextual factors that may help reduce MH. By conducting two experiments based on the research paradigm of real stranger presence, we examined how in-group and out-group strangers' presence and moral behavior may contribute to reducing MH. The results of experiment 1 demonstrated that compared with the presence of out-group strangers, the presence of in-group strangers could effectively inhibit MH (no significant difference between participants reported and actual donation proportions was obtained). The results of experiment 2 replicated and extended the results of experiment 1, first by showing that the presence of in-group strangers could effectively inhibit MH and then by revealing the influence of present strangers' behavior (moral or hypocritical) on MH. The results indicated that strangers' moral behavior could effectively eliminate participants' MH, especially in the presence of in-group strangers. However, when present strangers exhibited hypocritical behavior, they exhibited no effect on participants' MH, irrespective of the condition of in-group and out-group strangers. The current study provides empirical support for theories related to MH and moral decision-making and contributes to the literature on in-group and out-group effects on MH and decision-making.

show abstract

The general factor of personality and moral hypocrisy: A moderated mediation model

Yu,

Zhang

2023

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the relationship between the general factor of personality (GFP) and moral hypocrisy, the mediating effect of moral disengagement, and the moderating effect of system justification. Six hundred and four Chinese college students (59.9% female, Mage = 22.58, SD = 1.81) completed questionnaires assessing their personality and the levels of moral disengagement and system justification. The moral situation assessment paradigm was used to measure interpersonal moral hypocrisy (i.e., moral double standards). The task assignment paradigm was used to measure intrapersonal moral hypocrisy (i.e., misalignment between words and deeds). The results revealed that the GFP was negatively associated with moral hypocrisy, and moral disengagement mediated this relationship. In addition, this mediating effect of moral disengagement was moderated by system justification. That is, the mediation effect was stronger for students with a higher level of system justification. These findings provide educational suggestions for preventing and intervening in moral hypocrisy among college students.

show abstract

Moral cleansing as hypocrisy: When private acts of charity make you feel better than you deserve.

Abstract: Moral cleansing as hypocrisy: When private acts of charity make you feel better than you deserve.

Cited by 34 publications

References 118 publications

False Signaling and Personal Moral Failings: Two distinct pathways to hypocrisy with unequal moral weight

False Signaling and Personal Moral Failings: Two distinct pathways to hypocrisy with unequal moral weight

Effects of the Presence and Behavior of In-Group and Out-Group Strangers on Moral Hypocrisy

The general factor of personality and moral hypocrisy: A moderated mediation model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About