Doping Sanctions in Sport: Knowledge and Perception of (Legal) Consequences of Doping—An Explorative Study in Austria

Cornelia Blank,Katharina Gatterer,Verena Stühlinger,Elisabeth Happ,Wolfgang Schobersberger,Magdalena Flatscher-Thöni

doi:10.3390/jrfm14120603

Abstract

Anti-doping rule violations (ADRVs) can lead to sports-related and legal sanctions, thus, being knowledgeable is important. Research into this knowledge and how athletes and their support personnel (ASP) perceive the control mechanisms and the appropriateness of (legal) sanctions is still scarce. This explorative study aimed to examine the knowledge and perception of existing (legal) sanctions in Austria, by distributing a questionnaire to Austrian athletes and ASP covering the topics of knowledge related to legal and sports-related consequences associated with a specific ADRV presented in a case study, their trust and satisfaction with specific agencies (based on the European Social Survey (ESS)) and perceived efficiency and effectiveness of the doping control system. Data were analyzed descriptively. All respondents (N = 59) agreed on a ban from sport to be appropriate. Knowledge about legal consequences and the trust in the judiciary and the sport governing bodies was moderate (6.82 out of 10). Perceived appropriate consequences were on average higher than the likely sanctions to be faced. Future prevention should include trust building measures in the institutions and the control system, improvement in terms of access to law and education for the target group and critical reflection on the existence of social norms. Furthermore, the implementation of risk management aspects should be part of future approaches.

Highlights

Besides promoting peoples’ health, “sport has an educational dimension and plays a social, cultural and recreational role” (European Commission 2007, p. 3)
Anti-doping rule violations (ADRVs) can lead to sports-related and legal sanctions, being knowledgeable is important. Research into this knowledge and how athletes and their support personnel (ASP) perceive the control mechanisms and the appropriateness of sanctions is still scarce. This explorative study aimed to examine the knowledge and perception of existing sanctions in Austria, by distributing a questionnaire to Austrian athletes and ASP covering the topics of knowledge related to legal and sports-related consequences associated with a specific ADRV presented in a case study, their trust and satisfaction with specific agencies (based on the European Social Survey (ESS)) and perceived efficiency and effectiveness of the doping control system
The system of consequences for ADRVs is highly complex and is aligned to more than just the rules set out in the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), especially in a criminal and civil law context, in which strict procedural rules govern proceedings, including rules of evidence. This might lead to the outcome that athletes (or athlete support personnel (ASP)), who on first sight committed the same ADRV face completely different legal consequences

Summary

Introduction

Besides promoting peoples’ health, “sport has an educational dimension and plays a social, cultural and recreational role” (European Commission 2007, p. 3). Doping should be considered from a micro-level perspective as being unfair and a threat to athletes’ health It should be considered from a meso and macro level perspective as it poses a risk for the respective sport (federation) and (major) event organizers as doping cases in a certain sport and/or during a specific event can negatively affect the public image and perceived trustworthiness of that sport (Engelberg et al 2012) and/or event. The system of consequences for ADRVs is highly complex and is aligned to more than just the rules set out in the WADC, especially in a criminal and civil law context, in which strict procedural rules govern proceedings, including rules of evidence This might lead to the outcome that athletes (or athlete support personnel (ASP)), who on first sight committed the same ADRV face completely different legal consequences. The enforcement system could be perceived as not fully trustworthy and comprehensible, undermining its deterrent effect

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion