Interdependent versus independent inconsistency: Cultural differences in how East Asian and Western people attribute hypocrisy

Humans worldwide have long deplored hypocrisy, a concept that has been mentioned in texts dating back 100-1,000 years (e.g., the Analects of Confucius, the Tao Te Ching, the Bible, and the Qur'an). However, what influences the extent of hypocrisy attribution or counts as hypocrisy may differ as a function of culture. Previous studies have shown that Westerners attribute greater hypocrisy for within-person attitude-behavior inconsistency than East Asians. Building on this, we predict that East Asians' (vs. Westerners') hypocrisy attribution is more heavily influenced by social relationships. Consistent with past research, this can lead to greater leniency. However, as we show, this can also result in the novel finding we present that attributions of mild-to-moderate hypocrisy are made even when no explicit within-person attitude-behavior inconsistency is present. Across six experiments, we found that Koreans (vs. participants from the United States) attributed more hypocrisy to attitude-contradicting behavior when the person enacting the behavior was not the person who stated the attitude but was someone who shared social bonds with that person (i.e., cross-person, within-relationship attitude-behavior inconsistency; "relational hypocrisy"). Specifically, Koreans attributed more hypocrisy than Americans when a child's behavior contradicted their parent's views (Experiments 1a and 1b) or when attitude-contradicting behavior was enacted by the child of a close friend (Experiment 2). Experiments 3-5 replicated the findings from Experiments 1-2 using additional social contexts (e.g., a spousal relationship). Supplementary analyses showed that differences in hypocrisy attribution between Americans and Koreans were mediated by cultural differences in their perceptions of shared responsibility within relationships.