Trusting Measures of Doping Attitudes: Explicit vs. Implicit Assessments
Author Information
Author(s): Petróczi Andrea, Uvacsek Martina, Nepusz Tamás, Deshmukh Nawed, Shah Iltaf, Aidman Eugene V., Barker James, Tóth Miklós, Naughton Declan P.
Primary Institution: School of Life Sciences, Kingston University London
Hypothesis
Self-reports align with self-declared use, and the doping BIAT aligns better with user grouping based on hair analysis.
Conclusion
The study shows that self-reports on doping behavior may be biased, while implicit measures provide a more reliable assessment.
Supporting Evidence
- 12% of athletes tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs despite none admitting to use.
- Self-reports showed a pattern consistent with self-reported doping use.
- Implicit measures were consistent with hair analysis results.
Takeaway
This study found that athletes might lie about using performance-enhancing drugs, but tests that measure their hidden feelings can reveal the truth.
Methodology
The study used a mixed method design combining self-reported questionnaires, implicit association tests, and hair analysis for doping detection.
Potential Biases
Response bias may affect self-reported data, leading to discrepancies between declared and actual doping behavior.
Limitations
The study used convenience sampling and the overlap between self-reports and hair analysis results is uncertain.
Participant Demographics
The sample consisted of 82 athletes (52.4% female, mean age: 21.48 years) from 30 sports.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website