How do you explain doping?

Performance-enhancing substance (PES) use in sport is most likely the chief source of distress ¹ facing sport in modern times ². According to Clisby ², the use of drugs to boost performance is common among athletes, despite strong efforts to hamper its use by sports organisations. The Olympic Charter’s vision of “friendship, solidarity and fair play” ³ has yet to become a reality in sport today as doping goes against this creed and its influence on sport has continued to grow ever since early civilisation has had a curiosity with performance-enhancing chemicals. Self-reported surveys propose that professional /elite athletes usually have negative attitudes regarding PES use in sport and hold to the attitude that doping tests should remain in sport ¹. In fact, most of these elite athletes indicate that additional educational initiatives would be welcome so that they are more informed of the issues facing doping ¹.

Literature and the sporting bodies worldwide have the opinion that proposes the attitudes of athletes are to blame for the abnormal behaviour of taking PESs to boost performance ^4,5. For example, literature shows that users of anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) were rated negative when compared to non-users in intellect, gladness, self-confidence, relaxation, social boldness and holistic optimistic effects ⁶. The users of AAS were shown to be negatively compared with non-users in dependability, rule-orientation, reliability, sincerity and self control ⁷. The literature proposes that users of AAS were shown to be related to users of cocaine ⁶.

Despite the dominant view that PES use is “fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport” ⁸, its use in sport has become common practice, with some individuals, including some scientists, expressing a liberal attitude to its use, disputing that it should be used for the efficiency of outcome ^9,10. For example, Melia et al (1996) ¹¹ revealed that 74% of participants were of the opinion that doping in sport was dishonest, which is supported by the discovery that 94% of subjects, which were high school athletes, reported that using drugs in sport is dishonest ¹².

The Theory of Planned Behaviour ¹³ model gave Lucidi and colleagues ¹⁴ the structural support to perform an investigation trying to find determinants of the intention to use doping substances among Italian adolescents. The researchers discovered that attitude was the most significant factor for intending to use PES in sport ¹⁴.

Investigations done in the area of PES use in sport show that most of the athletes have a strong attitude against the use of drugs in sport ¹⁵, however, some people believe that these attitudes may be the result of social desirability ¹⁶. This specifically means that athletes tend to report what the anti-doping agencies desire to hear and not the truth concerning their attitudes regarding PES use in sport.

The measurement of attitude towards PES use by sportspeople can be problematic due to the absence of important contributions by individuals with a backdrop in psychology or in particular psychometrics ¹⁷.

Doping has been shown to be a tool to achieve a target and not the ultimate target itself ^18,19. For example, one athlete may want to achieve a place on the “A” team while another may want to gain monetary rewards from winning. Therefore, if doping is a way of achieving goals, then doping behaviour should include attitudes towards this end goal and attitudes towards doping as a means to achieve these goals.

1. Carnegie Research Institute: Leeds Metropolitan University. Social Science Research Fund: International Literature Review: Attitudes, Behaviours, Knowledge and Education – Drugs in Sport: Past, Present and Future. Montreal: WADA International Review of Literature; 2007.

2. Clisby L. Drugs and the Athlete. In: Brukner P, Khan K (eds). Clinical Sports Medicine 2nd Edition. Sydney: McGraw-Hill, 2005.

3. International Olympic Committee. Olympic Charter <http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_122.pdf>. Accessed 2009 March 16. DidWeDo S.à.r.l., Lausanne, Switzerland, 2007.

4. Alaranta A, Alaranta H, Holmila J, Palmu P, Pietilä K, Helenius I. Self-reported attitudes of elite athletes toward doping: differences between type of sport. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2006;27:842 -6.

5. Hoberman J. How Drug testing fails: The politics of doping control. In: Wilson W, Derse E (eds). Doping in elite sport. Champaign, Illnois: Human Kinetics, 2001:241 – 74.

6. Schwerin MJ, K.J. C. What do people think of male steroid users? An experimental investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1992;22:833-40.

7. Grove JR, Paccagnella M. Tall poppies in sport: Attitudes and ascribed personality traits. Australian Psychologist. 1995;30:88 – 91.

8. Todd T. A history of the use of anabolic steroids in sport. In: Berryman JW, Park RJ (eds). Sport and Exercise Science Essays in the History of Sports Medicine. Urbana-Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

9. Koyser S, Mauren A, Miah A. Viewpoint legalization of performance enhancing drugs. Lancet. 2005;366:21.

10. Savulescu J, Faddy B, Clayton M. Why we should allow performance enhancing drugs in sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2004;38:666 -70.

11. Melia P, Pipe A, Greenberg L. The use of anabolic androgenic steroids by Canadian students. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine. 1996;6:9 – 14.

12. Laure P, Lecerf T, Friser A, Binsinger C. Drugs, recreational drug use and attitudes towards doping of high school athletes. international Journal of Sports Medicine. 2004;25:133 – 8.

13. Ajzen I, Madden TJ. Prediction of goal directed behaviour: Attitudes, intentions and perceived behavioural control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1986;22:453 – 74.

14. Lucidi F, Grano C, Leone L, Lombardo C, Pesce C. Determinants of the intention to use doping substances: an empirical contribution in a sample of Italian adolescents. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2004;35:133 – 48.

15. Mugford S. The value of sport, ethics, and the control of performance enhancing drugs: A study in the Australian sports community. Canberra, Australia: ASDA; 1993.

16. Petroczi A, Nepusz T. The effect of self-impression management in social science doping research. Paper presented at the Conference on Ethics and Social Science Research in Anti-Doping. Larnaca, Cyprus, 2006.

17. Mazanov J, O’Donnell T, Battley A. Psychology and drugs in sport: The annoyed, the inspired and the road ahead. Presentation to the 2006 Australian Psychological Society Annual Conference. Auckland, New Zealand, 2006.

18. Tangen JO. “Competitors influence each others drug use!” A heuristic use of discriminant analysis to predict drug abuse among Norvegian athletes. Corpus, Psyche et Societas. 1999;6:1 -20.

19. English G. A theoretical explanation of why athletes choose to use steroids, and the role of the coach in influencing behaviour. National Strength and Conditioning Association Journal. 1987;9:53 -6.