Commitment and the hypocrisy paradigm are two models used to convince people to adopt proenvironmental behaviors. The aim of the present study is to compare the effect of those interventions with a delay between the intervention and the observation of the behavior as this has not been investigated yet. People in a Parisian supermarket were asked to commit themselves by signing a poster advocating the target behavior: no use of plastic bags (commitment condition). Some of them were also asked to remember past transgressions to arouse cognitive dissonance (hypocrisy condition). Attention was paid to whether participants took free plastic bags. Our results showed that participants in the commitment condition were more likely to change their behavior than the participants in the control condition and in the hypocrisy condition. In a final section, implications for the two models are discussed.
AronsonE.FriedC. B.StoneJ. (1991). Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. American Journal of Public Health, 81, 1636-1638.
2.
BachmanW.KatzevR. (1982). The effects of non-contingent free bus tickets and personal commitment on urban bus ridership. Transportation Research Part A: General, 16, 103-108.
3.
BeauvoisJ.-L.JouleR.-V. (1999). A radical point of view on dissonance theory. In Harmon-JonesE.MillsJ. (Eds.), Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology (pp. 43-70.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4.
BeauvoisJ.-L.JouleR.-V.BrunettiF. (1993). Cognitive rationalization and act rationalization in an escalation of commitment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 1-17.
5.
Commissariat Général au Plan. (2003). Rapport sur la politique du service public des déchets ménagers [Report on politics concerning public utility of household waste]. Paris, France: 7ème Assises nationales des déchets.
DenizeauM.GoslingP.OberléD. (2009). L’effet de l’ordre et du délai sur l’usage de trois modes de réduction de la dissonance cognitive: Le changement d’attitude, la trivialisation et le déni de responsabilité [The effects of order and delay on the use of three modes of dissonance reduction: Attitude change, trivialization and denial of responsibility]. L’Année Psychologique, 109, 629-654.
8.
DickersonC. A.ThibodeauR.AronsonE.MillerD. (1992). Using cognitive dissonance to encourage water conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 841-854.
9.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Oxford, UK: Row, Peterson.
10.
FointiatV. (2004). “I know what I have to do, but.” When hypocrisy leads to behavioral change. Social Behavior and Personality, 32, 741-746.
11.
FointiatV. (2008). Being together in a situation of induced hypocrisy. Current Research in Social Psychology, 13, 145-153.
12.
FointiatV.GrosbrasJ. M.MichelS.SomatA. (2001, May10-12). Encouraging young adults to drive carefully. The use of the hypocrisy paradigm. Paper presented at the Promoting Public Health, Chambéry, France.
13.
FointiatV.MorisotV.PakuszewskiM. (2008). Effects of past transgressions in an induced hypocrisy paradigm. Psychological Reports, 103, 625-633.
14.
GirandolaF. (2003). Psychologie de l’engagement et de la persuasion [Psychology of commitment and persuasion]. Besançon: PUFC (Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté).
15.
GirandolaF.RoussiauN. (2003). L’engagement comme source de modifications à long terme [Commitment as source of long-term modification]. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 57, 83-101.
16.
GoslingP.DenizeauM.OberléD. (2006). Denial of responsibility: A new mode of dissonance reduction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 722-733.
17.
JouleR.-V.BeauvoisJ.-L. (2006). La soumission librement consentie [Free will compliance] (5th ed.). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. (Original work published 1998)
18.
JouleR.-V.BernardF.Halimi-FalkowiczS. (2008). Promoting ecocitizenship: In favor of binding communication. International Scientific Journal for Alternative Energy and Ecology, 6, 214-218.
19.
JouleR.-V.GirandolaF.BernardF. (2007). How can people be induced to willingly change their behavior? The path from persuasive communication to binding communication. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 493-505.
20.
KatzevR.BachmanW. (1982). Effects of deferred payment and fare manipulations on urban bus ridership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 83-88.
21.
KatzevR.JohnsonT. (1983). A social-psychological analysis of residential electricity consumption: The impact of minimal justification techniques. Journal of Economic Psychology, 3, 267-284.
22.
KatzevR.JohnsonT. (1984). Comparing the effects of monetary incentives and foot-in-the-door strategies in promoting residential electricity conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 12-27.
23.
KatzevR.PardiniA. U. (1987-1988). The comparative effectiveness of reward and commitment approaches in motivating community recycling. Journal of Environmental Systems, 17, 93-112.
24.
KatzevR.WangT. H. (1994). Can commitment change behavior? A case study of environmental actions. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 13-26.
25.
KieslerC. A. (1971). The psychology of commitment: Experiments linking behavior to belief. New York, NY: Academic Press.
26.
KieslerC. A.SakumuraJ. (1966). A test of a model for commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 349-353.
27.
KollmussA.AgyemanJ. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?Environmental Education Research, 8, 239-260.
28.
LeippeM. R.EisenstadtD. (1994). Generalization of dissonance reduction: Decreasing prejudice through induced compliance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 395-413.
29.
LiégeoisA.YserbytV.CorneilleO. (2005, May27). I’m dirty as anyone else. So what? When attempts at inducing hypocrisy backfire. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Belgian Association for Psychological Sciences (BAPS), Ghent University, Belgium.
30.
LopezA.LassarreD.RateauP. (2010). Dissonance et engagement: Comparaison de deux voies d’intervention visant à réduire les ressources énergétiques au sein d’une collectivité territoriale [Dissonance and commitment: Comparison of two ways of intervention to reduce energy resources within a territorial administration]. Pratiques Psychologiques, 17, 263-284.
31.
MartinieM.-A.FointiatV. (2010). Enfreindre sans craindre: Tolérance à la dissonance dans le paradigme de l’hypocrisie induite [Breaking the rules, it doesn’t matter: Tolerance to dissonance in induced-hypocrisy paradigm]. Psychologie Française, 55, 41-47.
32.
PallakM. S.CookD. A.SullivanJ. J. (1980). Commitment and energy conservation. In BickmanL. (Ed.), Applied social psychology annual: Areas of application (Vol. 1, pp. 235-253). Beverley Hills, CA: SAGE.
33.
PardiniA. U.KatzevR. (1983-1984). The effect of strength of commitment on newspaper recycling. Journal of Environmental Systems, 13, 245-254.
34.
PrioloD.LiégeoisA. (2008). Prôner une norme et la transgresser: Le rôle des normes sociales dans le paradigme de l’hypocrisie induite [The role of social norms in the induced hypocrisy paradigm]. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 79, 19-32.
35.
RoussiauN.GirandolaF. (2002). Utilisation des technologies comportementales dans les économies d’énergie et dans la protection de l’environnement [Use of behavioral technology in energy conservation and environment protection]. In BonardiC.GirandolaF.RoussiauN.SoubialeN. (Eds.), Psychologie sociale appliquée: Environnement, santé et qualité de vie (pp. 39-57). Paris, France: In Press.
36.
SeghierC. (2005). L’interdiction des sacs et emballages plastiques à l’horizon 2010 fait débat [Plastic bags and wrappings ban in 2010 creates debate]. Retrieved from http://www.actu-environnement.com/ae/news/1297.php4
37.
Son HingL. S.LiW.ZannaM. P. (2002). Inducing hypocrisy to reduce prejudicial responses among aversive racists. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 71-78.
38.
StoneJ.AronsonE.CrainA. L.WinslowM. P.FriedC. B. (1994). Inducing hypocrisy as a means of encouraging young adults to use condoms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 116-128.
39.
StoneJ.WiegandA. W.CooperJ.AronsonE. (1997). When exemplification fails: Hypocrisy and the motive for self-integrity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 54-65.
40.
WangT. H.KatzevR. (1990). Group commitment and resource conservation: Two field experiments on promoting recycling. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 265-275.
