Athletes’ Beliefs About and Attitudes Towards Taking Banned Performance-Enhancing Substances: A Qualitative Study

Elite athletes’ beliefs about, and attitudes toward, taking banned performance enhancing substances were explored in 8 focus-group discussions with 57 athletes from 7 different sports. Discussion was initiated by 3 broad open-ended questions pertaining to 3 important themes likely to affect beliefs and attitudes toward banned performance enhancing substances. Thematic content analysis of interview transcripts revealed 9 lower-order themes emerging under the 3 global themes: personal attitudes (reputation and getting caught, health effects, and financial incentives and rewards), social influences (coaches, parents, and medical staff and sport scientists), and control beliefs (i.e., insufficiency of doping testing, resource availability, and sport level and type). Findings provide insight into the beliefs and attitudes that likely underpin motives and intentions to take banned performance-enhancing substances. Results are generally consistent with, and complement, research adopting quantitative approaches based on social– cognitive models examining the beliefs and attitudes linked to taking banned performance-enhancing substances

Self-Control, Self-Regulation, and Doping in Sport: A Test of the Strength-Energy Model

We applied the strength-energy model of self-control to understand the relationship between self-control and young athletes’ behavioral responses to taking illegal performance-enhancing substances, or “doping.” Measures of trait self-control, attitude and intention toward doping, intention toward, and adherence to, doping-avoidant behaviors, and the prevention of unintended doping behaviors were administered to 410 young Australian athletes. Participants also completed a “lollipop” decision-making protocol that simulated avoidance of unintended doping. Hierarchical linear multiple regression analyses revealed that self-control was negatively associated with doping attitude and intention, and positively associated with the intention and adherence to doping-avoidant behaviors, and refusal to take or eat the unfamiliar candy offered in the “lollipop” protocol. Consistent with the strength-energy model, athletes with low self-control were more likely to have heightened attitude and intention toward doping, and reduced intention, behavioral adherence, and awareness of doping avoidance

The spirit of sport: the case for criminalisation of doping in the UK

This article examines public perceptions of doping in sport, critically evaluates the effectiveness of current anti-doping sanctions and proposes the criminalisation of doping in sport in the UK as part of a growing global movement towards such criminalisation at national level. Criminalising doping is advanced on two main grounds: as a stigmatic deterrent and as a form of retributive punishment enforced through the criminal justice system. The ‘spirit of sport’ defined by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) as being based on the values of ethics, health and fair-play is identified as being undermined by the ineffectiveness of existing anti-doping policy in the current climate of doping revelations, and is assessed as relevant to public perceptions and the future of sport as a whole. The harm-reductionist approach permitting the use of certain performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) is considered as an alternative to anti-doping, taking into account athlete psychology, the problems encountered in containing doping in sport through anti-doping measures and the effect of these difficulties on the ‘spirit of sport’. This approach is dismissed in favour of criminalising doping in sport based on the offence of fraud. It will be argued that the criminalisation of doping could act as a greater deterrent than existing sanctions imposed by International Federations, and, when used in conjunction with those sanctions, will raise the overall ‘price’ of doping. The revelations of corruption within the existing system of self-governance within sport have contributed to a disbelieving public and it will be argued that the criminalisation of doping in sport could assist in satisfying the public that justice is being done and in turn achieve greater belief in the truth of athletic performances

Self-determined motivation in sport predicts anti-doping motivation and intention: A perspective from the trans-contextual model

Objectives: Motivation in sport has been frequently identified as a key factor of young athletes’ intention of doping in sport, but there has not been any attempt in scrutinizing the motivational mechanism involved. The present study applied the trans-contextual model of motivation to explain the relationship between motivation in a sport context and motivation and the social-cognitive factors (attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention) from the theory of planned behavior (TPB) in an anti-doping context. Design: A cross-sectional survey was conducted. Methods: Questionnaire data was collected from 410 elite and sub-elite young athletes in Australia (Mean age [17.7 ± 3.9 yr], 55.4% male, Years in sport [9.1 ± 3.2]). We measured the key model variables of study in relation to sport motivation (Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire), and the motivation (adapted version of the Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire) and social cognitive patterns (the theory of planned behavior questionnaire) of doping avoidance. The data was analyzed by variance-based structural equation modeling with bootstrapping of 999 replications. Results: The goodness-of-fit of the hypothesized model was acceptable. The bootstrapped parameter estimates revealed that autonomous motivation and amotivation in sport were positively associated with the corresponding types of motivation for the avoidance of doping. Autonomous motivation, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control in doping avoidance fully mediated the relationship between autonomous motivation in sport and intention for doping avoidance. Conclusions: The findings support the tenets of the trans-contextual model, and explain how motivation in sport is related to athletes’ motivation and intention with respect to anti-doping behaviors

Inside athletes' minds: Preliminary results from a pilot study on mental representation of doping and potential implications for anti-doping

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the growing body of literature and putative links between the use of ergogenic nutritional supplements, doping and illicit drugs, it remains unclear whether, in athletes' minds, doping aligns with illicit behaviour or with functional use of chemical or natural preparations. To date, no attempt has been made to quantitatively explore athletes' mental representation of doping in relation to illegality and functionality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A convenience sample of student athletes from a large South-Eastern Australian university responded to an on-line survey. Competitive athletes (n = 46) were grouped based on self-reported use as follows: i) none used (30%), ii) supplement only (22%), iii) illicit only (26%) and iv) both supplements and illicit drug use (22%). Whereas no athlete reported doping, data provided on projected supplement-, doping- and drug use by the four user groups allowed evaluation of doping-related cognition in the context of self-reported supplement- and illicit drug taking behaviour; and comparison between these substances.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A significantly higher prevalence estimation was found for illicit drug use and a trend towards a biased social projection emerged for supplement use. Doping estimates by user groups showed mixed results, suggesting that doping had more in common with the ergogenic nutritional supplement domain than the illicit drug domain.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Assessing the behavioural domain to which doping belongs to in athletes' mind would greatly advance doping behaviour research toward prevention and intervention. Further investigation refining the peculiarity of the mental representation of doping with a larger study sample, controlling for knowledge of doping and other factors, is warranted.</p

Conduites dopantes chez les jeunes cyclistes du milieu amateur au milieu professionnel.

Dans le cyclisme professionnel, il existe une véritable 'culture du dopage', le dopage faisant partie intégrante de ce milieu. Mais qu'en est-il avant d'intégrer le milieu professionnel ? Le passage dans le milieu professionnel est considéré comme un moment clé dans l'évolution des conduites dopantes. Dans une approche psychosociale, nous cherchons à comprendre les conduites dopantes de jeunes espoirs suisses en attente de contrat professionnel ou devenus récemment professionnels. Ces jeunes cyclistes sont pour la plupart tentés par le dopage ; ils ne sont pas contre le fait de prendre un jour des produits dopants, mais seulement quand ils seront professionnels. Les influences sociales, les discours tenus autour du dopage poussent les jeunes cyclistes à attendre d'intégrer le milieu professionnel avant d'utiliser des produits dopants. Le dopage est accepté comme une " sous-culture " dans le cyclisme professionnel, mais pas dans le cyclisme amateur de haut niveau

Can we measure accurately the prevalence of doping?

Questionnaires are used in the majority of the studies ondoping prevalence in sport. Nevertheless, prevalence is noteasy to evaluate and previous epidemiologic studies demonstrateda wide variance. This variance has mostly beenexplained by sample differences. The way to evaluate dopingprevalence in the survey is questioned in this paper. Aquestionnaire was administered to 1810 amateur athletes(993 males, 817 females). Doping use was ascertained invarious ways, using different definitions of doping and typesof question in the survey. Depending on the definition ofdoping and the type of question used, the prevalence ofdoping obtained can differ enormously, between 1.3 and39.2% of athletes. Marijuana and drugs for asthma were thetwo banned substances most used. The majority of athletesoften ignored the banned list and did not use prohibitedsubstances to dope. Using various ways to question athletes,observing the usage of substances, cross checking the data,taking into account the aim of substances uses and thevarious definitions of doping are necessary to give morereliable prevalence of doping. Moreover, doping at anamateur level seems to be less of a sport problem than asocial problem