Incongruence in doping related attitudes, beliefs and opinions in the context of discordant behavioural data: in which measure do we trust?
- PMID: 21541317
- PMCID: PMC3082532
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018804
Incongruence in doping related attitudes, beliefs and opinions in the context of discordant behavioural data: in which measure do we trust?
Abstract
Background: Social psychology research on doping and outcome based evaluation of primary anti-doping prevention and intervention programmes have been dominated by self-reports. Having confidence in the validity and reliability of such data is vital.
Methodology/principal findings: The sample of 82 athletes from 30 sports (52.4% female, mean age: 21.48±2.86 years) was split into quasi-experimental groups based on i) self-admitted previous experience with prohibited performance enhancing drugs (PED) and ii) the presence of at least one prohibited PED in hair covering up to 6 months prior to data collection. Participants responded to questionnaires assessing a range of social cognitive determinants of doping via self-reports; and completed a modified version of the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT) assessing implicit attitudes to doping relative to the acceptable nutritional supplements (NS). Social projection regarding NS was used as control. PEDs were detected in hair samples from 10 athletes (12% prevalence), none of whom admitted doping use. This group of 'deniers' was characterised by a dissociation between explicit (verbal declarations) and implicit (BIAT) responding, while convergence was observed in the 'clean' athlete group. This dissociation, if replicated, may act as a cognitive marker of the denier group, with promising applications of the combined explicit-implicit cognitive protocol as a proxy in lieu of biochemical detection methods in social science research. Overall, discrepancies in the relationship between declared doping-related opinion and implicit doping attitudes were observed between the groups, with control measures remaining unaffected. Questionnaire responses showed a pattern consistent with self-reported doping use.
Conclusions/significance: Following our preliminary work, this study provides further evidence that both self-reports on behaviour and social cognitive measures could be affected by some form of response bias. This can question the validity of self-reports, with reliability remaining unaffected. Triangulation of various assessment methods is recommended.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures

Similar articles
-
Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.PLoS One. 2010 May 5;5(5):e10457. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010457. PLoS One. 2010. PMID: 20463978 Free PMC article.
-
Capturing doping attitudes by self-report declarations and implicit assessment: a methodology study.Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2008 Apr 21;3:9. doi: 10.1186/1747-597X-3-9. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2008. PMID: 18426575 Free PMC article.
-
Illegal performance enhancing drugs and doping in sport: a picture-based brief implicit association test for measuring athletes' attitudes.Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2014 Jan 30;9:7. doi: 10.1186/1747-597X-9-7. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2014. PMID: 24479865 Free PMC article.
-
Doping in sport: a review of elite athletes' attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge.Sports Med. 2013 Jun;43(6):395-411. doi: 10.1007/s40279-013-0037-x. Sports Med. 2013. PMID: 23532595 Review.
-
Education Interventions to Improve Knowledge, Beliefs, Intentions and Practices with Respect to Dietary Supplements and Doping Substances: A Narrative Review.Nutrients. 2021 Nov 3;13(11):3935. doi: 10.3390/nu13113935. Nutrients. 2021. PMID: 34836190 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Paper vs. Pixel: Can We Use a Pen-and-Paper Method to Measure Athletes' Implicit Doping Attitude?Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 12;8:876. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00876. eCollection 2017. Front Psychol. 2017. PMID: 28659837 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Personal and psychosocial predictors of doping use in physical activity settings: a meta-analysis.Sports Med. 2014 Nov;44(11):1603-24. doi: 10.1007/s40279-014-0240-4. Sports Med. 2014. PMID: 25138312 Review.
-
Prevalence of doping use in elite sports: a review of numbers and methods.Sports Med. 2015 Jan;45(1):57-69. doi: 10.1007/s40279-014-0247-x. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 25169441 Review.
-
Doping Prevalence in Competitive Sport: Evidence Synthesis with "Best Practice" Recommendations and Reporting Guidelines from the WADA Working Group on Doping Prevalence.Sports Med. 2021 Sep;51(9):1909-1934. doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01477-y. Epub 2021 Apr 26. Sports Med. 2021. PMID: 33900578
-
New non-randomised model to assess the prevalence of discriminating behaviour: a pilot study on mephedrone.Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2011 Aug 3;6:20. doi: 10.1186/1747-597X-6-20. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2011. PMID: 21812979 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Backhouse S, McKenna J, Robinson S, Atkin A. Attitudes, behaviours, knowledge and education – Drugs in sport: past, present and future. 2007. Available: http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/Backhouse_et_al_Full_Report.pdf.
-
- Goldberg L, Elliot DL. Preventing substance use among high school athletes. The ATLAS and ATHENA Programs. J Appl School Psychol. 2005;21(2):63–87.
-
- Elliot DL, Moe EL, Goldberg L, DeFrancesco CA, Durham MB, Hix-Small H. Definition and outcome of a curriculum to prevent disordered eating and body-shaping drug use. J School Health. 2006;76(2):67–73. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous