Using response-time latencies to measure athletes’ doping attitudes: the brief implicit attitude test identifies substance abuse in bodybuilders

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy

Detlef Thieme²  Wanja Wolff¹  Ralf Brand¹ 

[1] Department of Sport and Exercise Psychology, University of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 10, 14469 Potsdam, Germany;Institute of Doping Analysis and Sports Biochemistry Dresden, WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) accredited doping control laboratory, Dresdner Str. 12, 01731 Kreischa, Germany

关键词: Biochemical profiles;    Doping tests;    Psychology;    Steroid use;   

Others  :  1139653
DOI  :  10.1186/1747-597X-9-36

 received in 2014-05-23, accepted in 2014-09-05,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Knowing and, if necessary, altering competitive athletes’ real attitudes towards the use of banned performance-enhancing substances is an important goal of worldwide doping prevention efforts. However athletes will not always be willing to reporting their real opinions. Reaction time-based attitude tests help conceal the ultimate goal of measurement from the participant and impede strategic answering. This study investigated how well a reaction time-based attitude test discriminated between athletes who were doping and those who were not. We investigated whether athletes whose urine samples were positive for at least one banned substance (dopers) evaluated doping more favorably than clean athletes (non-dopers).

Methods

We approached a group of 61 male competitive bodybuilders and collected urine samples for biochemical testing. The pictorial doping Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT) was used for attitude measurement. This test quantifies the difference in response latencies (in milliseconds) to stimuli representing related concepts (i.e. doping–dislike/like–[health food]).

Results

Prohibited substances were found in 43% of all tested urine samples. Dopers had more lenient attitudes to doping than non-dopers (Hedges’s g = -0.76). D-scores greater than -0.57 (CI95 = -0.72 to -0.46) might be indicative of a rather lenient attitude to doping. In urine samples evidence of administration of combinations of substances, complementary administration of substances to treat side effects and use of stimulants to promote loss of body fat was common.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that athletes’ attitudes to doping can be assessed indirectly with a reaction time-based test, and that their attitudes are related to their behavior. Although bodybuilders may be more willing to reveal their attitude to doping than other athletes, these results still provide evidence that the pictorial doping BIAT may be useful in athletes from other sports, perhaps as a complementary measure in evaluations of the effectiveness of doping prevention interventions.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Brand et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Anti-Doping Agency: Testing figures. 2012. https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/WADA-2012-Anti-Doping-Testing-Figures-Report-EN.pdf webcite
• [2]Sottas PE, Robinson N, Fischetto G, Dollé G, Alonso JM, Saugy M: Prevalence of blood doping in samples collected from elite track and field athletes. Clin Chem 2011, 57:762-769.
• [3]Kraus SJ: Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Pers Soc Psychol B 1995, 21:58-75.
• [4]Lazuras L, Barkoukis V, Rodafinos A, Tzorbatzoudis H: Predictors of doping intentions in elite-level athletes: a social cognition approach. J Sport Exercise Psy 2010, 32(5):694-710.
• [5]Whitaker L, Long J, Petróczi A, Backhouse SH: Using the prototype willingness model to predict doping in sport. Scand J Med Sci Spor 2013. published online 31 Oct 2013
• [6]Barkoukis V, Lazuras L, Tsorbatzoudis H, Rodafinos A: Motivational and social cognitive predictors of doping intentions in elite sports: an integrated approach. Scand J Med Sci Spor 2013, 23(5):E330-E340.
• [7]Ntoumanis N, Ng J, Barkoukis V, Backhouse S: A statistical synthesis of the literature on personal and situational variables that predict doping in physical activity settings. 2013. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/education-and-awareness/a-statistical-synthesis-of-the-literature-on-personal-and#.VBMhLksWnbQ webcite
• [8]Spector P: Social Desirability Bias. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Edited by Lewis-Beck MS, Bryman A, Liao TF. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004:1045-1046.
• [9]Gucciardi DF, Jalleh G, Donovan RJ: Does social desirability influence the relationship between doping attitudes and doping susceptibility in athletes? Psychol Sport Exerc 2010, 11:479-486.
• [10]Fazio R, Olson M: Implicit measures in social cognition research: their meaning and use. Annu Rev Psychol 2003, 54:297-327.
• [11]Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JLK: Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. J Pers Soc Psychol 1998, 74:1464-1480.
• [12]Kim DY: Voluntary controllability of the implicit association test (IAT). Soc Psychol Quart 2003, 66(1):83-96.
• [13]De Houwer J, Teige-Mocigemba S, Spruyt A, Moors A: Implicit measures: a normative analysis and review. Psychol Bull 2009, 135:347-368.
• [14]Collins AM, Loftus EF: A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol Rev 1975, 82:407-428.
• [15]De Houwer J: Using the implicit association test does not rule out an impact of conscious propositional knowledge on evaluative conditioning. Learn Motiv 2006, 37:176-187.
• [16]Hughes S, Barnes-Holmes D, De Houwer J: The dominance of associative theorizing in implicit attitude research: propositional and behavioral alternatives. Psychol Rec 2011, 61:465-496.
• [17]Gawronski B, Bodenhausen GV: Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: an integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychol Bull 2006, 132:692-731.
• [18]De Houwer J, Moors A: Implicit Measures: Similarities and Differences. In Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications. Edited by Gawronski B, Payne BK. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2010:176-196.
• [19]Petróczi A, Aidman EV, Nepusz T: Capturing doping attitudes by self-report declarations and implicit assessment: a methodology study. Subst Abuse Treat Pr 2008, 3:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [20]Brand R, Melzer M, Hagemann N: Towards an implicit association test (IAT) for measuring doping attitudes in sports. Data-based recommendations developed from two recently published tests. Psychol Sport Exerc 2011, 12:250-256.
• [21]Lotz S, Hagemann N: Using the implicit association test to measure athletes’ attitude toward doping. J Sport Exerc Psychol 2007, 29(Suppl 3):183-184.
• [22]Petróczi A, Aidman EV, Hussain I, Deshmukh N, Nepusz T, Uvacsek M, Tóth M, Barker J, Naughton DP: Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping. PLoS One 2010, 5(5):e10457.
• [23]Sriram N, Greenwald AG: The brief implicit association test. Exp Psychol 2009, 56:283-294.
• [24]Petróczi A, Uvacsek M, Nepusz T, Deshmukh N, Shah I, Aidman EV, Barker J, Tóth M, Naughton DP: Incongruence in doping related attitudes, beliefs and opinions in the context of discordant behavioral data: in which measure do we trust? PLoS One 2011, 6(4):e18804.
• [25]Brand R, Heck P, Ziegler M: Illegal performance-enhancing drugs and doping in sport: a picture-based brief implicit association test for measuring athletes’ attitudes. Subst Abuse Treat Pr 2014., 9(7)
• [26]Perry PJ, Lund BC, Deninger MJ, Kutscher EC, Schneider J: Anabolic steroid use in weightlifters and bodybuilders. An internet survey of drug utilization. Clin J Sport Med 2005, 15:326-330.
• [27]Delbeke FT, Desmet N, Debackere M: The abuse of doping agents in competing body builders in Flanders (1988–1993). Int J Sport Med 1995, 16:66-70.
• [28]World Anti-Doping Agency: International standard for laboratories. 2012. http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-IS-Laboratories/ISL/WADA_Int_Standard_Laboratories_2012_EN.pdf webcite
• [29]Greenwald AG, Nosek B, Banaji MR: Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. J Pers Soc Psychol 2003, 85:197-216.
• [30]World Anti-Doping Agency: The world anti-doping code. The 2013 prohibited list. International standard. 2012. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/files/wadaintstandardlaboratories2012enpdf webcite
• [31]World Anti-Doping Agency: WADA Technical Document – TD2010IDCR. Identification criteria for qualitative assays, incorporating column chromatography and mass spectrometry. 2012. https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/WADA_TD2010IDCRv1.0_Identification%20Criteria%20for%20Qualitative%20Assays_May%2008%202010_EN.doc.pdf webcite
• [32]World Anti-Doping Agency: WADA Technical Document – TD2013MRPL. Minimum required performance levels for detection and identification of non-threshold substances. 2012. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/files/wada-td2013mrpl-minimum-required-performance-levels-v1-2012-enpdf webcite
• [33]Thieme D, Hemmersbach P: Doping in Sports. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2010.
• [34]Kazlauskas R: Designer Steroids. In Doping in Sports. Edited by Thieme D, Hemmersbach P. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2010:155-188.
• [35]Singh V, Rudraraju M, Carey EJ, Byrne TJ, Vargas HE, Williams JE, Balan V, Douglas DD, Rakela J: Severe hepatotoxicity caused by a methasteron-containing performance-enhancing supplement. J Clin Gastroen 2009, 43(3):287-287.
• [36]Becchi M, Aguilera R, Farizon Y, Flament MM, Casabianca H, James P: Gas chromatography/combustion/isotope-ratio mass spectrometry analysis of urinary steroids to detect misuse of testosterone in sport. Rapid Commun Mass Sp 1994, 8(4):304-308.
• [37]Uvacsek M, Nepusz T, Naughton DP, Mazanov J, Ránky MZ, Petróczi A: Self-admitted behavior and perceived use of performance-enhancing vs psychoactive drugs among competitive athletes. Scand J Med Sci Spor 2011, 21:224-234.
• [38]Roehner J, Schroeder-Abe M, Schuetz A: Exaggeration is harder than understatement, but practice makes perfect! Faking success in the IAT. Exp Psychol 2011, 58(6):464-472.
• [39]Goldberg L, Elliot DL, Bosworth E, Bents R: Boomerang effects of drug prevention programs. Pediatrics 1991, 88:1079.
• [40]Goldberg L, MacKinnon DP, Elliot DL, Moe EL, Clarke G, Cheong J: The adolescents training and learning to avoid steroids program: preventing drug use and promoting health behaviors. Arch Pediat Adol Med 2000, 154:332-338.
• [41]Mareck U, Geyer H, Opfermann G, Thevis M, Schänzer WJ: Factors influencing the steroid profile in doping control analysis. Mass Spectrom 2008, 43:877-891.
• [42]Blanton H, Jaccard J: Arbitrary metrics in psychology. Am Psychol 2006, 61:27-41.
• [43]Socas L, Zumbado M, Perez-Luzardo O, Ramos A, Perez C, Hernandez JR, Boada LD: Hepatocellular adenomas associated with anabolic androgenic steroid abuse in bodybuilders: a report of two cases and a review of the literature. Brit J Sport Med 2005, 39(5):e27.
• [44]Morente-Sanchez J, Mateo-March M, Zabala M: Attitudes towards doping and related experience in spanish national cycling teams according to different olympic disciplines. Plos One 2013, 8(8):e70999.
• [45]De Houwer J, Moors A: How to Define and Examine Implicit Processes. In Implicit and Explicit Processes in the Psychology of Science. Edited by Proctor R, Capaldi J. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2012:183-198.
• [46]Greenwald AG, Poehlmann T, Uhlmann EL, Banaji MR: Understanding and using the implicit association test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. J Pers Soc Psychol 2009, 97:17-41.
• [47]Lentillon-Kaestner V: The development of doping use in high-level cycling: from team-organized doping to advances in the fight against doping. Scand J Med Sci Spor 2013, 23(2):189-197.
• [48]Whitaker L, Backhouse SH, Long J: Reporting doping in sport: national level athletes’ perceptions of their role in doping prevention. Scand J Med Sci Spor 2014. doi:10.1111/sms.12222
• [49]Goldberg L, Elliot DL: Preventing substance use among high school athletes: the ATLAS and ATHENA programs. J Appl School Psychol 2005, 21:63-87.
• [50]Mazanov J, McDermott V: The case for a social science of drugs in sport. Sport in Society 2009, 23:276-295.