ATTITUDE-BEHAVIOR RELATIONSHIP REGARDING THE USE OF PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS AND/OR METHODS

Abstract

Athletes' attitudes have been used as a lay explanation for doping behavior in competitive sport. Yet, no empirical evidence supports the notion of the attitude-behavior relationship. PURPOSE To investigate the relationship between athletes' doping orientation, sport orientation, self-reported past experience and self-reported current use of performance enhancements. METHODS Data were collected via paper-and-pencil survey among competitive US college athletes (N = 79). Athletes's attitude toward doping was measured by the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale. Doping orientation was conceptualized as a composite latent variable of doping attitude and belief regarding allowing the use of performance enhancements for top level and all athletes. Sport orientation was measured by the Sport Orientation Questionnaire. The hypothesized model of doping was tested using covariance structure analysis (AMOS 4.0). RESULTS The model, including sport and doping orientation, showed a moderate fit to the data (κ2 = 29.95, df = 16, p = .018, κ2/df = 1.872, RMR = 1.310, TLI = 0.906, and RMSEA = 0.106). Standardized beta weight between sport orientation and doping experience was -.003 and non-significant. After eliminating sport orientation, the alternative model of doping showed a satisfactory fit. With a path added from doping orientation to current use, the respecified model showed further improvement (κ2 = 4.149, df = 4, p = .386, κ2/df = 1.037, RMR = 0.196, TLI = 0.997, and RMSEA = 0.022). The difference between the two nested models was statistically significant (κ2 difference = 5.985 >3.84) at .05 level. The path from doping experience and current use of doping was weak (.05) and did not show statistical significance (c.r. = 0.417). Doping orientation explained only 10% of variance in past and present use of doping. CONCLUSION The model in which attitude and past experience determines current behavior was not supported. Doping orientation, including doping specific attitude, provided only marginal explanation for past and current use of performance enhancements.