Self-Regulatory Mechanisms of Doping Intentions in Elite Athletes: The Role of Self-Determined Motivation in Sport

Abstract

Objective: Although research on the personal and psychosocial predictors of doping has been extensive, the factors related to the socio-cognitive self-regulatory mechanisms of doping remain unexplored. The aim of this study was to test an integrated multi-theory model examining the role of self-determined motivation in sport in the selfregulatory mechanisms of doping intentions in elite athletes. Methods:A cross-sectional survey was employed. Two hundred and sixty-four elite athletes completed a survey that included measures of self-determination (autonomous vs. controlled), affective self-regulatory efficacy, resistive self-regulatory efficacy, moral disengagement, and doping intentions.Results: Structural equation modeling showed that the model predicted 47.3% of the variance in doping intentions and indicated that both autonomous and controlled motivations were indirectly associated with doping intentions through the mediating role of affective self-regulatory efficacy, resistive self-regulatory efficacy, and moral disengagement. Conclusion:Self-determination theory provides insight into how motivation in sport influences athletes' doping intentions through its impact on socio-cognitive self-regulatory mechanisms.

Effects of personal and situational factors on self-referenced doping likelihood

“…Accordingly, doping self-regulatory efficacy, which reflects confidence in the ability to resist doping when faced with tempting situations, such as financial rewards (e.g., Huybers & Mazanov, 2012;Ring et al, 2018), can be expected to prevent doping. In line with theoretical predictions, doping self-regulatory efficacy has been identified as a deterrent of doping intention (i.e., ratings of doping intention, likelihood, and temptation) in previous research (e.g., Barkoukis et al, 2013;Corrion et al, 2017;Lazuras et al, 2010;2015;Lucidi et al, 2008;Mallia et al, 2016;Ring & Kavussanu, 2018a). expected that higher self-regulatory efficacy would be associated with lower doping likelihood, whereas higher moral disengagement would be associated with higher doping likelihood.…”

“…This indirect pathway suggests that the greater the perceived capacity to resist temptation the less mechanisms of moral disengagement are used to justify unethical conduct. Recent research has provided evidence to support this indirect pathway in the context of doping (e.g., Boardley et al, 2017;Corrion et al, 2017;Kavussanu & Ring, 2017;Ring & Kavussanu, 2018a). The current study evaluated this pathway in situations associated with potential benefits and costs for the athlete.…”

“…Evidence from qualitative (e.g., Engelberg, Moston, & Skinner, 2015;Erickson et al, 2015;Kirby, Moran, & Guerin, 2011) and quantitative (e.g., Ntoumanis et al, 2014) research has implicated morality as an important predictor of doping by athletes. Bandura's (1991) theory of moral thought and action provides a theoretical framework to understand the psychology of doping (e.g., Corrion, Scoffier-Mériaux, & d'Arripe-Longueville, 2017;Kavussanu 2016Kavussanu , 2017Lucidi et al, 2008;Zelli et al, 2016). According to this theory, our actions are guided by our moral standards and we are personally responsible for our actions: we are self-regulating moral agents (Bandura, 2018).…”

The effects of moral disengagement mechanisms on doping likelihood are mediated by guilt and moderated by moral traits

“…A large body of evidence has established that moral disengagement is associated with increased doping in sport (e.g., Corrion et al, 2017;Hodge, Hargreaves, Gerrard, & Lonsdale, 2013;Kavussanu & Ring, 2017;Lucidi et al, 2004;Mallia et al, 2016). It is worth noting that all of the previous studies assessed moral disengagement using measurement scales that yielded a global index of moral disengagement.…”

High‐level athletes’ motivation for sport and susceptibility to doping: The mediating role of eating behaviours

“…Several studies have documented the associations between self-determined motivation 9 and doping behaviours in athletes (e.g., Chan et al, 2018a;Corrion et al, 2017; Hodge et al, 17 behaviours such as the use of performance-enhancing substances. Self-determination theory…”