Incongruence in doping related attitudes, beliefs and opinions in the context of discordant behavioural data: In which measure do we trust?

PLoS ONE

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2011, Pages

  Petróczi, Andrea ^a,b   Uvacsek, Martina ^c   Nepusz, Tamás ^a   Deshmukh, Nawed ^a   Shah, Iltaf ^a   Aidman, Eugene V ^d   Barker, James ^a   Tóth, Miklós ^c   Naughton, Declan P ^a  

^a KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION   (Hungary)

^d DEFENCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANISATION   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATHLETE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEFENSE MECHANISM; DIET SUPPLEMENTATION; DOPING; FEMALE; HAIR ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MALE; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PREVALENCE; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL COGNITION; ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; CHEMISTRY; COGNITION; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DRUG EFFECT; HAIR; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; TRUST;

PERFORMANCE ENHANCING SUBSTANCE;

ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; CULTURE; DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS; DOPING IN SPORTS; FEMALE; HAIR; HUMANS; MALE; PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING SUBSTANCES; SELF REPORT; TRUST; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955619091     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018804     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Backhouse S, McKenna J, Robinson S, Atkin A, (2007) Attitudes, behaviours, knowledge and education - Drugs in sport: past, present and future. Available:http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/Backhouse_et_al_Full_Report.pdf.
2. Goldberg L, Elliot DL, (2005) Preventing substance use among high school athletes. The ATLAS and ATHENA Programs. J Appl School Psychol 21 (2): 63-87.
3. Elliot DL, Goldberg L, Moe EL, DeFrancesco CA, Durham MB, et al. (2008) Long-term outcomes of the ATHENA (Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise & Nutrition Alternatives) Program for female high school athletes. J Alcohol Drug Educ 52 (2): 73-92.
4. Elliot DL, Moe EL, Goldberg L, DeFrancesco CA, Durham MB, Hix-Small H, (2006) Definition and outcome of a curriculum to prevent disordered eating and body-shaping drug use. J School Health 76 (2): 67-73.
5. Ranby KW, Aiken LS, Mackinnon DP, Elliot DL, Moe EL, et al. (2009) A mediation analysis of the ATHENA intervention for female athletes: prevention of athletic-enhancing substance use and unhealthy weight loss behaviors. J Pediatr Psychol 34 (10): 1069-1083.
6. Gucciardi DF, Jalleh G, Donovan RJ, (2010) Does social desirability influence the relationship between doping attitudes and doping susceptibility in athletes? Psych Sport Exerc 11 (6): 479-486.
7. Petróczi A, Nepusz T, (2011) Methodological considerations regarding response bias effect in substance use research: is correlation sufficient? Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 6: 1.
8. Petróczi A, Aidman EV, Hussain I, Deshmukh N, Nepusz T, et al. (2010) Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping. PLoS One 5 (5): e10457.
9. Sobell LC, Sobell MB, (1992) Timeline Follow-back: a technique for assessing self-reported ethanol consumption. In: Allen J, Litten RZ, editors. Measuring alcohol consumption: psychosocial and biological methods Totowa, NJ Humana Press pp. 41-72.
10. Sobell LC, Brown J, Leo GI, Sobell MB, (1996) The reliability of the Alcohol Timeline Followback when administered by telephone and by computer. Drug Alcohol Depend 42: 49-54.
11. Carney MA, Tennen H, Affleck G, Del Boca FK, Kranzler HR, (1998) Levels and patterns of alcohol consumption using Timeline Follow-Back, Daily Diaries and Real-Time "Electronic Interviews. J Studies Alcohol 59: 447-457.
12. Copersion ML, Meade CS, Bigelow GE, Brooner RK, (2010) Measurement of self-reported HIV risk behaviors in injection drug users: Comparison of standard versus timeline follow-back administration procedures. J Subst Abuse Treatment 38: 60-65.
13. Hoeppner BB, Stout RL, Jackson KM, Barnett NP, (2010) How good is fine-grained Timeline Follow-back data? Comparing 30-day TLFB and repeated 7-day TLFB alcohol consumption reports on the person and daily level. Addictive Behav 35: 1138-1143.
14. Day E, Best D, Cantillano V, Gaston RL, Nambamali A, Keaney F, (2008) Measuring the use and career histories of drug users in treatment: reliability of the Lifetime Drug Use History (LDUH) and its data yield relative to clinical case notes. Drug Alcohol Rev 27: 171-177.
15. Napper LE, Fisher DG, Johnson ME, Wood MM, (2010) The reliability and validity of drug users' self reports of amphetamine use among primarily heroin and cocaine users. Addictive Behav 35: 350-354.
16. Yudko E, Lozkhina O, Fouts A, (2007) A comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the Drug Abuse Screening Test. J Subst Abuse Treat 32: 189-198.
17. Dhalla S, Kopec JA, (2007) The CAGE Questionnaire for alcohol misuse: a review of reliability and validity studies. Clin Invest Med 30 (1): 33-41.
18. Bashford J, Flett R, Copeland J, (2010) The Cannabis Use Problems Identification Test (CUPIT): development, reliability, concurrent and predictive validity among adolescents and adults. Addiction 105: 615-625.
19. Delaney-Black V, Chiodo LM, Hannigan JH, Greenwald MK, Janisse J, et al. (2010) Just say "I don't": lack of concordance between teen report and biological measures of drug use. Pediatrics 126 (5): 887-893.
20. Legerwood DM, Goldberger BA, Risk NK, Lewis CE, Price RK, (2008) Comparison between self-report and hair analysis of illicit drug use in a community sample of middle-aged men. Addictive Behav 33: 1131-1139.
21. Musshoff F, Driever F, Lachenmeier K, Lachenmeier DW, Banger M, et al. (2006) Results of hair analyses for drugs of abuse and comparison with self-reports and urine tests Forensic Sci Int 156: 118-123.
22. Reinhard MJ, Hinkin CH, Barclay TR, Levine AJ, Marion S, et al. (2007) Discrepancies between self-report and objective measures for stimulant drug use in HIV: Cognitive, medication adherence and psychological correlate. Addictive Behav 32: 2727-2736.
23. Connor Gorber S, Tremblay M, Moher D, Gorber B, (2007) A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review. Obesity Rev 8: 307-326.
24. Rosay B, Skroban Najaka S, Hertz D, (2007) Differences in the validity of self-reported drug use across five factors: gender, race, age, type of drug, and offense seriousness. J Quantitative Criminol 23: 41-58.
25. Uziel L, (2010) Rethinking social desirability scales: from impression management to interpersonally oriented self-control. Perspect Psychol Sci 5: 243-262.
26. McCrae RR, Costa PT, (1983) Social desirability scales: more substance than style. J Consulting Clin Psychol 51 (6): 882-888.
27. Uvacsek M, Ránky M, Nepusz T, Naughton DP, Mazanov J, Petroczi A, (2011) Self-admitted behaviour and perceived use of performance enhancing versus psychoactive drugs among competitive athletes. Scand J Sci Med Sport 21 (2): 224-234.
28. Hebert JR, Ma Y, Clemow L Ockene IS, Saperia G, et al. (1997) Gender differences in social desirability and social approval bias in dietary self-report. Am J Epidemiol 146: 1046-1055.
29. Hebert JR, Hurley TG, Peterson KE, Resnicow K, Thompson FE, et al. (2008) Social desirability trait influences on self-reported dietary measures among diverse participants in a multicenter multiple risk factor trial. J Nutr 138: 226S-234S.
30. Levine TR, McCornack SA, Avery PB, (1992) Sex differences in emotional reactions to discovered deception. Communication Quarterly 40: 289-296.
31. DePaulo BM, Kashy DA, Kirkendol SE, Wyer MM, Epstein JA, (1996) Lying in everyday life. J Pers Soc Psychol 70: 979-995.
32. Serota KB, Levine TR, Franklin J, (2010) The prevalence of lying in America: three studies of self-reported lies. Human Communication Res 36 (1): 2-25.
33. Moshagen M, Musch J, Ostapczuk M, Zhao Z, (2010) Reducing socially desirable responses in epidemiologic surveys: an extension of the randomized-response technique. Epidemiology 21 (3): 379-382.
34. Kintz P, (1998) Hair testing and doping control in sport. Toxicol Lett 102-103: 109-113.
35. Sriram N, Greenwald AG, (2009) The Brief Implicit Association Test. Exp Psychol 56: 283-294.
36. Greenwald AG, Nosek BA, Banaji MR, (2003) Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. J Pers Soc Psychol 85: 197-216.
37. Petroczi A, Aidman EV, (2009) Measuring explicit attitude as an indicator of athletes' engagement in doping: Review of the psychometric properties of the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale. Psychol Sport Exerc 10: 390-396.
38. Deshmukh N, Hussain I, Barker J, Petroczi A, Naughton DP, (2010) Analysis of anabolic steroids in human hair using LC-MS/MS. Steroids 75 (10): 710-714.
39. Dunn M, Mazanov J, Sithartan G, (2009) Predicting future anabolic-androgenic steroid use intentions with current substance use: Findings from an Internet-based survey. Clin J Sports Med 19: 222-227.
40. Petróczi A, Mazanov J, Naughton DP, Inside athletes' minds: Preliminary results from a pilot study on mental representation of doping and implications for anti-doping (in press, Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy).
41. Smith ACT, Stewart B, Oliver-Bennetts S, McDonald S, Ingerson L, et al. (2010) Contextual influences and athlete attitudes to drugs in sport. Sp Management Rev 13: 181-197.
42. Bluemke M, Friese M, (2006) Do features of stimuli influence IAT effects? J Exp Soc Psychol 42: 163-176.
43. Payne BK, Gawronski B, (2010) A history of implicit social cognition: where is it coming from? Where is it going? In: Gawronski B, Payne K, editors. Handbook of implicit social cognition: measurement, theory, and applications New York, NY Guilford Press pp. 1-8.