Perceived Coach-Created Empowering and Disempowering Climate Effects on Athletes’ Intentions to Use Doping: The Mediational Role of Self-Regulatory Efficacy and Attitudes towards Doping

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between perceived coach-created empowering and disempowering motivational climate and doping likelihood among athletes and whether the attitudes towards doping and doping self-regulatory efficacy mediates these relationships. Methods: Athletes (N = 948; 50% male; mean age, 20.32, SD = 2.45) recruited from a variety of sports completed questionnaires assessing their perceptions of coach-created motivational climate, attitudes towards doping, doping self-regulatory efficacy, and doping likelihood. Results: The study’s results showed significant negative direct effects of a perceived empowering climate on doping likelihood (β = −0.50) and attitudes towards doping (β = −0.48), and a positive effect on self-regulatory efficacy (β = 0.48). On the contrary, a disempowering climate had positive direct effects on doping likelihood (β = 0.53) and attitudes towards doping (β = 0.45), and a negative effect on self-regulatory efficacy (β = −0.49). Significant indirect effects on doping likelihood via attitudes and self-regulatory efficacy were found. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that athletes who perceive a more empowering climate created by the coach are less likely to use banned substances due to their more negative attitudes towards doping and stronger belief in their ability to resist the temptation to use doping.

Dispositional Goal Orientation and Perceptions of Coach Motivational Climate on Attitudes towards Doping among Kenyan Endurance Runners

“…Moreover, the findings revealed that mastery climate was negatively associated with doping attitudes, while a performancefocused climate was positively correlated with doping attitudes. This findings aligns with previous studies that have found athletes high in mastery climate and low in performance climate associated with negative attitudes towards doping and performance climates with positive doping attitudes (Allen et al, 2015;Bae et al, 2017;Hoppen & Sukys, 2024).…”

“…Motivational climate refers to the situational goal structure affecting athletes’ task and ego involvement in sports (Ames, 1992). Coaches play a significant role in creating the motivational climate for athletes (Allen et al, 2015;Hoppen & Sukys, 2024;Newton et al, 2000). Coach created mastery climate emphasizes on cooperation, personal improvement, and effort, while performance climate emphasizes competition, intra-team rivalry, punishment for mistakes, unequal recognition of athletes, and winning at all costs (Newton et al, 2000).…”

“…Coach created mastery climate emphasizes on cooperation, personal improvement, and effort, while performance climate emphasizes competition, intra-team rivalry, punishment for mistakes, unequal recognition of athletes, and winning at all costs (Newton et al, 2000). Empirical evidence has shown that coach created motivational climate that empowers athletes and a mastery climate created by coaches can lead to prosocial behavior, respect for the game, and anti-doping attitudes, while a performance climate and coach controlling style and disempowering climate can lead to anti-social behavior and pro-doping attitudes (Allen et al, 2015; Bae et al, 2017; Hoppen & Sukys, 2024).…”