Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.

<h4>Background</h4>Social science studies of doping practices in sport rely predominantly on self-reports. Studies of psychoactive drug use indicate that self-reporting is characterised by under-reporting. Likewise doping practice is likely to be equally under-reported, if not more so. T...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Andrea Petróczi, Eugene V Aidman, Iltaf Hussain, Nawed Deshmukh, Tamás Nepusz, Martina Uvacsek, Miklós Tóth, James Barker, Declan P Naughton
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2010
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3da338e4d5c94e1e9bb9b24901fd3bd7
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3da338e4d5c94e1e9bb9b24901fd3bd7
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3da338e4d5c94e1e9bb9b24901fd3bd72021-12-02T20:21:52ZVirtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0010457https://doaj.org/article/3da338e4d5c94e1e9bb9b24901fd3bd72010-05-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/20463978/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>Social science studies of doping practices in sport rely predominantly on self-reports. Studies of psychoactive drug use indicate that self-reporting is characterised by under-reporting. Likewise doping practice is likely to be equally under-reported, if not more so. This calls for more sophisticated methods for such reporting and for independent, objective validation of its results. The aims of this study were: i) to contrast self-reported doping use with objective results from chemical hair analysis and ii) to investigate the influence of the discrepancy on doping attitudes, social projection, descriptive norms and perceived pressure to use doping.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>A doping attitudes questionnaire was developed and combined with a response latency-based implicit association test and hair sample analysis for key doping substances in 14 athletes selected from a larger sample (N = 82) to form contrast comparison groups. Results indicate that patterns of group differences in social projection, explicit attitude about and perceived pressure to use doping, vary depending on whether the user and non-user groups are defined by self-report or objectively verified through hair analysis. Thus, self-confessed users scored higher on social projection, explicit attitude to doping and perceived pressure. However, when a doping substance was detected in the hair of an athlete who denied doping use, their self-report evidenced extreme social desirability (negative attitude, low projection and low perceived pressure) and contrasted sharply with a more positive estimate of their implicit doping attitude.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>Hair analysis for performance enhancing substances has shown considerable potential in validating athletes' doping attitude estimations and admissions of use. Results not only confirm the need for improved self-report methodology for future research in socially-sensitive domains but also indicate where the improvements are likely to come from: as chemical validation remains expensive, a more realistic promise for large scale studies and online data collection efforts is held by measures of implicit social cognition.Andrea PetrócziEugene V AidmanIltaf HussainNawed DeshmukhTamás NepuszMartina UvacsekMiklós TóthJames BarkerDeclan P NaughtonPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 5, Iss 5, p e10457 (2010)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Andrea Petróczi Eugene V Aidman Iltaf Hussain Nawed Deshmukh Tamás Nepusz Martina Uvacsek Miklós Tóth James Barker Declan P Naughton Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
description	<h4>Background</h4>Social science studies of doping practices in sport rely predominantly on self-reports. Studies of psychoactive drug use indicate that self-reporting is characterised by under-reporting. Likewise doping practice is likely to be equally under-reported, if not more so. This calls for more sophisticated methods for such reporting and for independent, objective validation of its results. The aims of this study were: i) to contrast self-reported doping use with objective results from chemical hair analysis and ii) to investigate the influence of the discrepancy on doping attitudes, social projection, descriptive norms and perceived pressure to use doping.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>A doping attitudes questionnaire was developed and combined with a response latency-based implicit association test and hair sample analysis for key doping substances in 14 athletes selected from a larger sample (N = 82) to form contrast comparison groups. Results indicate that patterns of group differences in social projection, explicit attitude about and perceived pressure to use doping, vary depending on whether the user and non-user groups are defined by self-report or objectively verified through hair analysis. Thus, self-confessed users scored higher on social projection, explicit attitude to doping and perceived pressure. However, when a doping substance was detected in the hair of an athlete who denied doping use, their self-report evidenced extreme social desirability (negative attitude, low projection and low perceived pressure) and contrasted sharply with a more positive estimate of their implicit doping attitude.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>Hair analysis for performance enhancing substances has shown considerable potential in validating athletes' doping attitude estimations and admissions of use. Results not only confirm the need for improved self-report methodology for future research in socially-sensitive domains but also indicate where the improvements are likely to come from: as chemical validation remains expensive, a more realistic promise for large scale studies and online data collection efforts is held by measures of implicit social cognition.
format	article
author	Andrea Petróczi Eugene V Aidman Iltaf Hussain Nawed Deshmukh Tamás Nepusz Martina Uvacsek Miklós Tóth James Barker Declan P Naughton
author_facet	Andrea Petróczi Eugene V Aidman Iltaf Hussain Nawed Deshmukh Tamás Nepusz Martina Uvacsek Miklós Tóth James Barker Declan P Naughton
author_sort	Andrea Petróczi
title	Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
title_short	Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
title_full	Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
title_fullStr	Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
title_full_unstemmed	Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
title_sort	virtue or pretense? looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2010
url	https://doaj.org/article/3da338e4d5c94e1e9bb9b24901fd3bd7
work_keys_str_mv	AT andreapetroczi virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT eugenevaidman virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT iltafhussain virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT naweddeshmukh virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT tamasnepusz virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT martinauvacsek virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT miklostoth virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT jamesbarker virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping AT declanpnaughton virtueorpretenselookingbehindselfdeclaredinnocenceindoping
_version_	1718374100898938880

Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping.

Ejemplares similares