A Motivational Model of Performance-Enhancing Substance Use in Elite Athletes

Donahue, Eric G.; Miquelon, Paule; Valois, Pierre; Goulet, Claude; Buist, André; Vallerand, Robert J.

doi:10.1123/jsep.28.4.511

Cited by 52 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of interest, research by Donahue et al (2006) has shown that intrinsic motivation was positively, while extrinsic motivation negatively, related to sportspersonship that, in turn, was negatively related to cheating through the use of performanceenhancing substances. Chantal, Robin, Vernat, and Bernache-Assollant (2005) have found support for a similar model as pertains to aggressive behavior.…”

Section: Passion and Moral Behavior In Achievement Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On passion and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Passion and Moral Behavior In Achievement Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On passion and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Doping intention based on a selfreport questionnaire has inherent limitations relating to social desirability and underreporting (6). Self -report scales may be subject to response bias (34). The prevalence rate for doping was 1.23%-12.0% (NADA) and 1.1% -15.0% (PEAS) and fall into the ranges for previous studies (8, [29][30][31][32][33].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Social Determinants of Intention to Dope in Sports Clubs and Institutions

Nica-Badea¹

2016

Ann. Appl. Sport Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Doping is the use of drug for the purpose of improving performance in general and sports performance in particular. Rejection or acceptance of the use of banned substances by athletes is determined by internal factors that are subjective and external or social. Against this background, the present study examined social risk factors as determinants of intention (temptation) to use banned substances and explored the willingness of athletes at the national level, to report the use of substances that enhance performance. The survey method was a self-report questionnaire based on the Romanian National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) model of approaching risk factors associated with the use of prohibited substances, collection of demographic data and use of the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale (PEAS). The subjects were 171 athletes (mean age = 19.75, std. error = 0.103) and 30 coaches in sporting institutions and universities. The results reveal a complex distribution of environment-specific social-proximity influences of athletes, including the family, social class or professional institution, leisure group, sports team, sports clubs and social representation. The rate of prevalence for performance-enhancing drugs (PED) was 1.23% to 12.0% for NADA (p < 0.05) and 1.1% to 15.0% for the PEAS (p < 0.001) and fall into ranges reported by recent studies (1.2% to 25.8%). The approach used took into account the assumption that doping is a rational behavior and intentional. As such, it provides points of intervention that influence decision-making. The findings reveal the need to consider the contribution of several social support factors that contribute to the trend abuse drugs that increase performance.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, theory (e.g., Donahue, et al, 2006) and empirical evidence (e.g., Bahrke, 2012;Barkoukis, Lazuras, Tsorbatzoudis, & Rodafinos, 2011) has suggested that 'maladaptive behaviours' such as doping might be triggered by coaches fostering a 'win at all costs' environment. The potential influence of coaches through their 5 coaching climate is further reinforced by research indicating that the 'moral atmosphere' the coach creates and the relationship they have with their sportspeople has the potential to influence morality-related factors among sportspeople (Gonclaves, Coelho e Silva, Cruz, Torregrosa, & Cumming, 2010;Hardman, Jones, & Jones, 2010;Steinfeldt, Rutkowski, Vaughan, & Steinfeldt, 2011).…”

Section: 1the Importance Of Educating Coaches In Relation To Anti-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti-doping education for coaches: Qualitative insights from national and international sporting and anti-doping organisations

Patterson

Backhouse

Duffy

2016

Sport Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within anti-doping efforts, an emphasis has been placed on the importance of providing education programmes to key stakeholder groups, including coaches. Yet, very little is known about current coach education provision in the anti-doping domain across countries and sports. Therefore, this study aimed to: 1) establish the current status of antidoping education for coaches; 2) gain an understanding of the system through which antidoping education is provided to coaches; and, 3) explore the opportunities for future education provision. This was done through semi-structured interviews with thirteen individuals responsible for managing anti-doping education within national and international sporting and anti-doping organisations. Most stakeholders acknowledged the importance of providing education programmes for coaches; some already had provision in place and others were in the process of developing programmes. However, the current focus is on sportspeople and the degree to which sporting and anti-doping organisations are able to devise, implement and evaluate anti-doping education programmes for coaches is hindered by the contextual constraints they face. These include a lack of resources and limited interagency coordination, as well as challenges to overcome negative perceptions of 'anti-doping' efforts. Taken together, the findings indicate that policy expectations regarding anti-doping education for coaches are not being fully operationalised, and this situation is unlikely to change without: 1) greater direction and regulation of the system through which education is provided; 2) frequent and effective communication and cooperation between Code signatories; and, 3) increased fiscal and human capital investment at every level of the sporting hierarchy.Ultimately, until anti-doping education is shown to be a key priority for decision makers within sporting organisations (i.e., chief executives and board members), it is unlikely to become a central priority for coaches.

show abstract

A Motivational Model of Performance-Enhancing Substance Use in Elite Athletes

Cited by 52 publications

References 17 publications

On passion and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride

On passion and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride

Social Determinants of Intention to Dope in Sports Clubs and Institutions

Anti-doping education for coaches: Qualitative insights from national and international sporting and anti-doping organisations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About