Theoretical analysis of approaches to defining the phenomenon of hypocrisy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/BPSY.2026.1(23).4Keywords:
hypocrisy, moral behavior, worldview, self-image, double standards, social interactionAbstract
Background. The phenomenon of hypocrisy is a multidimensional psychological phenomenon that is actively studied in modern science, but has not received a single agreed definition and requires further comprehensive theoretical understanding. The aim was to identify and theoretically analyze the main approaches to defining the phenomenon of hypocrisy in psychology.
Methods. The study used theoretical methods: analysis, generalization and systematization of scientific research on the problem of hypocrisy; comparative analysis of approaches to its understanding; conceptual modeling of the structure of the phenomenon in the context of an individual worldview.
Results. The main approaches to interpreting the phenomenon of hypocrisy in modern scientific discourse were analyzed. The essence of the key components of hypocritical behavior is revealed: inconsistency between words (position) and subsequent behavior, the presence of motivation to obtain personal benefit from hypocritical behavior, a sense of superiority and the presence of a system of double standards – for oneself and others. Some criteria for distinguishing hypocritical behavior are described: the presence of an intention to deceive others, the likelihood of weak will and self-deception on the part of the subject, the manifestation of greater criticality in assessing other people's actions and condemning others for violating norms, the criterion of the aftereffects of hypocrisy (whether harm was caused to others, etc.). It is established that hypocrisy can perform an adaptive function, in particular as a mechanism for maintaining a positive self-image and social status.
The author's vision of hypocrisy is proposed through the prism of the structural components of the individual worldview of the individual – world beliefs, world values, and worldview. The key elements involved in the dynamics of hypocritical behavior are identified: cognitive (the presence of beliefs, contradictory positions), emotional-value (experiences and evaluation), behavioral (the act of hypocrisy itself, inconsistency between words and actions).
Conclusions. Hypocrisy is a multicomponent psychological phenomenon that arises as a result of the discrepancy between the postulated beliefs, positions and behavior of the individual. Hypocritical behavior can act not only as a manifestation of moral inconsistency, but also as a mechanism for regulating self-esteem and social interaction.
Downloads
References
Грузинова, К. М. (2024). Індивідуальний світогляд як чинник пси-хологічного благополуччя особистості. Габітус, 68, 124–130. https://doi.org/10.32782/2663-5208.2024.68.21
Гуляєва, А. С. (2017). Роль системи переконань у житті особис-тості. Проблеми сучасної психології, 36, 31–40.
Кондрук, А. Ю. (2018). Поняття "нещирість" та "лицемірство". Нау-кові записки Острозької академії, 4(72), 120–123.
Тофтул, М. Г. (2014). Сучасний словник з етики. ЖДУ ім. І. Фран-ка.
Alicke, M. D., & Davis, T. L. (1989). The role of a posteriori victim information in judgments of blame and sanction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(4), 362–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(89)90028-0
Alicke, M., Gordon, E., & Rose, D. (2013). Hypocrisy: What counts? Philosophical Psychology, 26(5), 673–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09515089.2012.677397
Batson, C. D. (2008). Moral hypocrisy: Appearing moral without being so. Social Justice Research, 21(2), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0068-8
Bocian, K., Baryla, W., & Wojciszke, B. (2016). When dishonesty leads to trust: Moral judgments biased by self-interest are truly believed. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 47(3), 366–372. https://doi.org/10.1515/ppb-2016-0043
Carey, B. (2024). Hypocrisy and epistemic injustice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 27(3), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-024-10442-3
Crockett, M. J., Kim, J. S., & Shin, Y. S. (2024). Intuitive theories and the cultural evolution of morality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(4), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241245412
Cunningham, A. (2025). Epistemically hypocritical blame. Episteme, 22, 541–559. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2024.12
Dong, M. (2021). Understanding moral hypocrisy: Behavioral antecedents and social consequences [Doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219382
Dong, M., van Prooijen, J.-W., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2019). Self-enhancement in moral hypocrisy: Moral superiority and moral identity are about better appearances. PLoS ONE, 14(7), e0219382. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219382
Effron, D. A., Epstude, K., & Roese, N. J. (2024). Motivated counterfactual thinking and moral inconsistency. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(3), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1177 /09637214241242458
Effron, D. A., O'Connor, K., Leroy, H., & Lucas, B. J. (2018). From inconsistency to hypocrisy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.10.003
Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/ 9780198237907.001.0001
Friedman, M. (2013). How to blame people responsibly. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 47, 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-013-9377-x
Gu, D. (2023). Moral hypocrisy: The antecedents and outcomes. Communications in Humanities Research, 9(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/ 10.54254/2753-7064/9/20231110
Hallman, A., & Spiro, D. (2023). A theory of hypocrisy. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 211, 401–410. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jebo.2023.05.007
Kreps, T. A., Laurin, K., & Merritt, A. C. (2017). Hypocritical flip-flop. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(5), 730–752. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000103
Ladak, A., Loughnan, S., & Wilks, M. (2024). The moral psychology of artificial intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231205866
Lammers, J., Stapel, D. A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy. Psychological Science, 21(5), 737–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610368810
Laurent, S. M., Lönnqvist, J.-E., & Ruttan, R. L. (2014). Moral hypocrisy and self-image maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 703–722.
Monin, B., & Merritt, A. (2012). Moral hypocrisy, moral inconsistency, and the struggle for moral integrity. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil, 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1037/13091-009
Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.33
O'Connor, K., Effron, D. A., & Lucas, B. J. (2020). Moral cleansing as hypocrisy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(3), 540–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000195
Robertson, C. E., Akles, M., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2024). Preregistered replication and extension. Psychological Science, 35(7), 798–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241246552
Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2007). Moral hypocrisy. Psychological Science, 18(8), 689–690.
Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2008). The duality of virtue. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1334–1338. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.010
Yu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025). The relationship between dark personality traits and moral hypocrisy. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 551–561.
Zhang, H., et al. (2020). Effects of in-group and out-group presence on moral hypocrisy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 551625. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2020.551625
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Psychology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
