Attitudes Toward and Susceptibility to Doping in Spanish Elite and National-Standard Track and Field Athletes: An Examination of the Sport Drug Control Model

Abstract

The Sport Drug Control Model (SDCM) is likely to be the model which most explicitly represents the theoretical paradigm of the psychological study of the use of doping in sport. This model can be further developed through its analysis in different populations and cultures. The main aim of this study was to empirically test the SDCM while analyzing for the first time the intentions and attitudes toward doping in Spanish track and field athletes. A secondary aim was to assess the extent to which the variables in the model together predict attitude, susceptibility, and behavior toward the use of performance-enhancing substances. Participants were 281 Spanish elite and national-standard track and field athletes from whom 80.1% were 18-28 years old and 49.5% were females. Participants completed the SDCM questionnaire measuring morality, legitimacy, benefits appraisal, threat appraisal, self-efficacy to refrain from doping, reference groups' endorsement of doping methods/substances, use of legal supplements, availability and affordability of doping, attitudes toward doping, susceptibility to doping and, self-reported use of banned performance-enhancing substances or methods. Structural equation modeling supported a good fitness of the SDCM and confirmed that positive attitudes toward doping predicted high susceptibility to doping (β = 0.55, p < 0.001), which is in turn associated with the use of prohibited substances and methods (β = 0.12, p < 0.05). The factors that have most influence on attitudes toward doping are morality (β = 0.46, p < 0.001) and reference group opinion (β =0.62, p <0.001). Self-reported doping use was 9.6%. These findings confirm SDCM reproducibility and variability (as it accounts for several variables) in Spanish track and field competitive athletes. It is recommended to implement preventive programs which allow athletes to acquire a strong moral stance against doping and coaches to employ the tools required to instill and educate their athletes in rejecting these illegal practices that corrupt the integrity of competitive sport.

Moral Identity and Attitudes towards Doping in Sport: Whether Perception of Fair Play Matters

“…A larger sample of athletes, especially involving those in a wider variety of sports branches, would allow one to examine the extent to which the interrelationships between moral identities, perception of fair play, and doping attitudes occur depending on the sport. This claim corresponds with recent research that attempted to analyze attitudes and views on doping in particular sports such as track and field [ 57 ] or, more specifically, elite distance running [ 58 ]. Such analyses are also encouraged by doping control test findings showing that detected banned substances in anti-doping control tests differ depending on the sports discipline [ 5 ].…”

Comparison of social phobia in athletes with doping history in comparison with general population

“…The study by Mazzeo and colleagues [16] revealed that use of doping substances would result in less social phobia in athletes. Another study by García et al [17] showed that attitudes, normative beliefs, situational temptation, and behavioral control significantly predicted doping intentions that all these were as a social cognition.…”

Moral Disengagement, Social Norms, and Motivational Profiles Influence Attitudes Toward Doping Among Spanish Athletics Coaches

“…Coaches strongly influence athletes' attitudes toward doping and can shape athlete's beliefs, behaviors, and decisions to be for or against doping (Barkoukis et al, 2019 ; García-Grimau et al, 2021 ). The impact of the athlete's entourage on attitudes toward doping has been reported in different studies (Backhouse and McKenna, 2012 ; Mazanov et al, 2014 ; Engelberg and Moston, 2016 ) and the coach is considered part of the Athlete Support Personnel (ASP) as well as parents/guardians, physiotherapists and other professionals supporting and working directly with athletes, as defined by the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) (World Anti-Doping Agency, 2021a ).…”

“…Findings from a cluster randomized controlled trial reported that coaches adopting a motivational climate reduced athlete willingness to dope (Ntoumanis et al, 2021 ). In addition, moral disengagement was strongly correlated with doping attitudes and intentions toward doping in athletes (Kavussanu et al, 2019 ; García-Grimau et al, 2021 ) and plays an important role in coaching style and climate (Hodge and Lonsdale, 2011 ; Chen et al, 2017 ). Moreover, recent qualitative evidence (Patterson and Backhouse, 2018 ; Barkoukis et al, 2019 ) reported that displacement and diffusion of responsibility, which are considered two of the mechanisms involved in the moral disengagement construct (Bandura et al, 1996 ), influence coaches' opinions and behavior toward doping.…”

“…The SDCM analyzes several factors influencing athletes' attitudes toward and susceptibility to doping: morality, legitimacy, benefits and threat appraisals, motivational profiles, beliefs about reference groups' endorsement of doping methods/substances, use of legal supplements, beliefs about the availability of PES and relevant authorities' control over trafficking of doping methods/substances, beliefs about the affordability of doping methods/substances, attitudes toward doping, susceptibility to doping, and self-reported use of banned PES or methods (PESM). The World Anti-Doping Agency integrated this model as a guideline for anti-doping organizations (World Anti-Doping Agency, 2015 ) and it has been tested in athletes (Gucciardi et al, 2010 ; Jalleh et al, 2013 ; García-Grimau et al, 2021 ) showing validity and reliability. Jalleh et al ( 2013 ) and García-Grimau et al reported that the most influential factors were morality, reference group opinion, and legitimacy.…”