Self‐admitted behavior and perceived use of performance‐enhancing vs psychoactive drugs among competitive athletes

Uvacsek, Martina; Nepusz, Tamás; Naughton, Declan P.; Mazanov, Jason; Ránky, Márta; Petróczi, Andrea

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.01041.x

Cited by 75 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Questionnaire-based evidence indicates that approximately 10%-15% of elite and sub-elite athletes reported using doping substances in the past [6]. The use of indirect measures (e.g., Implicit Association Test or the Randomized Response Technique) indicates that the prevalence of doping use in competitive sport can be as high as 30% [7][8][9]. The Athlete Biological Passport paradigm has also provided estimates of the prevalence of blood doping.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal and Psychosocial Predictors of Doping Use in Physical Activity Settings: A Meta-Analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key points-A meta-analysis including 63 independent datasets was conducted.-Use of legal supplements, perceived social norms, and positive attitudes towards doping were strong positive correlates of doping intentions and behaviors.-Morality and self-efficacy to refrain from doping were negatively associated with doping intentions and behaviors. AbstractBackground: There is a growing body of empirical evidence on demographic and psychosocial predictors of doping intentions and behaviors utilizing a variety of variables and conceptual models. However, to date there has been no attempt to quantitatively synthesize the available evidence and identify the strongest predictors of doping. Objectives:Using meta-analysis, we aimed to (i) determine effect sizes of psychological (e.g., attitudes), social-contextual factors (e.g., social norms), and demographic (e.g., sex and age) variables on doping intentions and use, (ii) examine variables which moderate such effect sizes, and (iii) test a path analysis model, using the meta-analyzed effect sizes, based on variables from the Theory of Planned Behavior.Data sources: Articles were identified from online databases, by contacting experts in the field, and searching the World Anti-Doping Agency website.Study eligibility criteria and participants: Studies that measured doping behaviors and/or doping intentions, and at least one other demographic, psychological, or social-contextual variable were included. We identified 63 independent datasets. Study appraisal and synthesis method: Study information was extracted by using predefined data fields and taking into account study quality indicators. A random effects meta-analysis was carried out, correcting for sampling and measurement error, and Running head: PERSONAL AND PSYCHOSOCIAL PREDICTORS OF DOPING 2 identifying moderator variables. Path analysis was conducted on a sub-set of studies that utilized the Theory of Planned Behavior.Results: Use of legal supplements, perceived social norms, and positive attitudes towards doping were the strongest positive correlates of doping intentions and behaviors. In contrast, morality and self-efficacy to refrain from doping had the strongest negative association with doping intentions and behaviors. Furthermore, path analysis suggested that attitudes, perceived norms, and self-efficacy to refrain from doping predicted intentions to dope, and indirectly, doping behaviors. Limitations:Various meta-analyzed effect sizes were based on a small number of studies, which were correlational in nature. This is a limitation of the extant literature. Conclusions:This review identifies a number of important correlates of doping intention and behavior, many of which were measured via self-reports and were drawn from an extended theory of planned behavior framework. Future research might benefit from embracing other conceptual models of doping behavior and adopting experimental methodologies that will test some of the identified correlates in an effort to develop targeted anti-doping policies and programs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal and Psychosocial Predictors of Doping Use in Physical Activity Settings: A Meta-Analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social scientists have also made attempts to use psychometric measures in lieu of analytical approaches in doping and beyond (Agosta & Sartori, 2013;Uvacsek et al, 2011). Despite the promising preliminary results, a wide range of limitations has been identified outside clinical application (Brand, Wolff, & Thieme, 2014;Takarangi, Strange, Shortland, & James, 2013;Vargo, Petróczi, Shah, & Naughton, 2014) that impedes the use of these methodologies in field settings.…”

Section: Cognitive Indicators Of Doping Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With two exceptions (Brand, Wolff, et al, 2014;Uvacsek et al, 2011), psychometric assessments related to doping, so far, have not established any cut-off or threshold criteria that could distinguish dopers from non-dopers. Even when some threshold value is set for separating doping users from the clean athletes, these values serve as guidance for future research studies at group level assessments, not for forensic diagnostics of individual athletes.…”

Section: Lack Of Established Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A call for policy guidance on psychometric testing in doping control in sport

Petróczi¹,

Backhouse²,

Barkoukis³

et al. 2015

International Journal of Drug Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the fundamental challenges in anti-doping is identifying athletes who use, or are at risk of using, prohibited performance enhancing substances. The growing trend to employ a forensic approach to doping control aims to integrate information from social sciences (e.g., psychology of doping) into organised intelligence to protect clean sport. Beyond the foreseeable consequences of a positive identification as a doping user, this task is further complicated by the discrepancy between what constitutes a doping offence in the World Anti-Doping Code and operationalized in doping research. Whilst psychology plays an important role in developing our understanding of doping behaviour in order to inform intervention and prevention, its contribution to the array of doping diagnostic tools is still in its infancy. In both research and forensic settings, we must acknowledge that (1) socially desirable responding confounds self-reported psychometric test results and (2) that the cognitive complexity surrounding test performance means that the response–time based measures and the lie detector tests for revealing concealed life-events (e.g., doping use) are prone to produce false or non-interpretable outcomes in field settings. Differences in social-cognitive characteristics of doping behaviour that are tested at group level (doping users vs. non-users) cannot be extrapolated to individuals; nor these psychometric measures used for individual diagnostics. In this paper, we present a position statement calling for policy guidance on appropriate use of psychometric assessments in the pursuit of clean sport. We argue that, to date, both self-reported and response-time based psychometric tests for doping have been designed,tested and validated to explore how athletes feel and think about doping in order to develop a better understanding of doping behaviour, not to establish evidence for doping. A false ‘positive’ psychological profile for doping affects not only the individual ‘clean’ athlete but also their entourage, their organisation and sport itself. The proposed policy guidance aims to protect the global athletic community against social, ethical and legal consequences from potential misuse of psychological tests, including erroneous or incompetent applications as forensic diagnostic tools in both practice and research

show abstract

“…Petróczi and D.P. Naughton et al 2006, Petróczi et al 2008c, Uvacsek et al 2011. These figures, although not directly comparable to those of WADA, suggest that doping is more widespread in sport than is indicated by the official statistics.…”

Section: Assessing Contributing Factors: Understanding Doping Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…Setting personality dimensions aside, these areas are the key to primary anti-doping prevention and/or intervention. To date, the focus of these research endeavours has been on the antecedents of doping behaviour, with particular attention to social cognitive determinants such as attitudes, beliefs, social projection, interpersonal appraisal, motivation and selected personality traits such as susceptibility (Lucidi et al 2004, Alaranta et al 2006, Petroczi 2007, Dodge and Jaccard 2008, Lucidi et al 2008, Mazanov et al 2008, Petróczi et al 2008c, Sas-Nowosielski and Swiatkowska 2008, Wiefferink et al 2008, Breivik et al 2009, Barkoukis et al 2010, Gucciardi et al 2010, Zelli et al 2010, Uvacsek et al 2011.…”

Section: Assessing Contributing Factors: Understanding Doping Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of multidisciplinary research on advancing anti-doping efforts

Petróczi

Naughton

2011

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research outputs indicate that despite the considerable efforts exerted in social science to estimate, and potentially eliminate, the social desirability (SD) effect in researching socially sensitive issues, doping research has mainly overlooked the distorting effect of dishonesty. As the SD effect is a result of the interplay between personality and contextual contingencies, it varies greatly between individuals and from one situation to another. Similarly, the drugtesting regime for the most widely abused performance-enhancing substance, anabolic androgenic steroids, does not take into account individual genetic variations that can have profound effects on doping test results. The aims of this article are to highlight some major impediments in doping research and anti-doping strategies; to map the impact our research has made on doping research; and to highlight future directions to advance anti-doping efforts. Our multidisciplinary research effort, benefitting from the synergy between\ social and natural sciences, has created a unique platform for anti-doping research with the view of aiding not only detection, but also harm reduction, intervention and prevention. Benefitting from the synergy between social and analytical sciences, our results have drawn attention to the distorting effect of SD but also made progress in identifying methods to overcome the limitations associated with the sole use of the self-report methodology. These advances in behavioural approaches coupled with improved hair-based analytical methods provide an opportunity to coalesce disparate analytical and social approaches and build on the strengths in each approach and thus inform and strengthen each other.

show abstract

Self‐admitted behavior and perceived use of performance‐enhancing vs psychoactive drugs among competitive athletes

Cited by 75 publications

References 34 publications

Personal and Psychosocial Predictors of Doping Use in Physical Activity Settings: A Meta-Analysis

Personal and Psychosocial Predictors of Doping Use in Physical Activity Settings: A Meta-Analysis

A call for policy guidance on psychometric testing in doping control in sport

Impact of multidisciplinary research on advancing anti-doping efforts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About