Final answer:
The assertion that behavior change is more successful without participant involvement in goal formulation is false; involvement typically leads to increased commitment. Majority rule can fail in multiple-choice scenarios, leading to collective dilemmas.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement suggests that changing behavior works best when people are not allowed to participate in formulating new behavioral goals. This is generally false. In most cases, involving individuals in the process of setting goals that require a change in behavior leads to better commitment and adherence to those goals. This is because personal involvement usually increases motivation and the sense of ownership over the change. Excluding individuals from goal setting can lead to a lack of commitment on their part to change their thinking and behaviors.
Majority rule may indeed fail to produce a single preferred outcome when there are more than two choices. This situation is known as a collective dilemma, where participants have motivations that may be contrary to the group's goals or agree on a goal but not on how to obtain it. Additionally, changing behavior to please an authority figure or to avoid negative consequences might not result in genuine or lasting behavioral change.