Modeling doping cognition from a dual process perspective

The Psychology of Doping in Sport

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 33-43

  Brand, Ralf ^a   Wolff, Wanja ^b   Baumgarten, Franz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

^b Columbia University Teacher’s College ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84954499696     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315761107-13     Document Type: Chapter

References (38)

1. Bargh, J. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In R. S. Wyer Jr. and T. K. Srull (eds.), Handbook of social cognition, Volume 1. (1-4). Hillsdale, NJ and UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Brand, R., Heck, P., and Ziegler, M. (2014a). Illegal performance enhancing drugs and doping in sport: A picture-based brief implicit association test for measuring athletes’ attitudes. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 9, 7.
3. Brand, R., Melzer, M., and Hagemann, N. (2011).Towards an implicit association test (IAT) for measuring doping attitudes in sports. Data-based recommendations developed from two recently published tests. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12 (3), 250-256.
4. Brand, R., Wolff, W., and Thieme, D. (2014b). 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, 9, 36.
5. De Houwer, J. (2006). Using the implicit association test does not rule out an impact of conscious propositional knowledge on evaluative conditioning. Learning Motivation, 37, 176-187.
6. De Houwer, J. and Moors, A. (2010). Implicit measures: Similarities and differences. In B. Gawronski and B. K. Payne (eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measure-ment, theory, and applications (176-196). New York: Guilford Press.
7. De Houwer, J., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Spruyt, A., and Moors, A. (2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347-368.
8. Evans, J. S. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
9. Evans, J. S. and Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223-241.
10. Fazio, R. A. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In M. P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (75-110). New York: Academic Press.
11. Fazio, R. H. and Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297-327.
12. Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., and Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013-1027.
13. Fiedler, K., Messner, C., and Bluemke, M. (2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 74-147.
14. Friese, M., Hofmann, W., and Wiers, R. W. (2011). On taming horses and strengthening riders: Recent developments in research on interventions to improve self-control in health behaviors. Self and Identity, 10, 336-351.
15. Gawronski, B. and Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692-731.
16. Greenwald, A. G. and Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, selfesteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4-27.
17. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., and Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
18. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., and Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197-216.
19. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., and Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17-41.
20. Gucciardi, D. F, Jalleh, G., and Donovan, R. J. (2010). Does social desirability influence the relationship between doping attitudes and doping susceptibility in athletes? Psy chology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 479-486.
21. Hofmann, W., Friese, M., and Strack, F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dualsystems perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 162-176.
22. Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., and De Houwer, J. (2011). The dominance of associative theorizing in implicit attitude research: Propositional and behavioral alternatives. Psy-chological Records, 61, 465-496.
23. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgement and choice. Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720.
24. Karpinski, A. and Steinman, R. B. (2006). The Single Category Implicit Association Test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16-32.
25. Kim, D. Y. (2003). Voluntary controllability of the implicit association test (IAT). Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 83-96.
26. Kruglanski, A. W., Erb, H. P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., and Chun, W. Y. (2006). On parametric continuities in the world of binary either ors. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 153-165.
27. Lotz, S. and Hagemann, N. (2007). Using the Implicit Association Test to measure athletes’ attitude toward doping. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 29 (Suppl.), 183-184.
28. Mathews, A. and MacLeod, C. M. (1985). Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 23, 563-569.
29. Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., and Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh (ed.), Automatic processes in social thinking and behavior (265-292). New York: Psychology Press.
30. Ntoumanis, N., Ng, J. Y., Barkoukis, V., and Backhouse, S. H. (2014). Personal and psychosocial predictors of doping use in physical activity settings: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44 (11), 1603-1624.
31. Petroczi, A. and Aidman, E. V. (2009). Measuring explicit attitude toward doping: Review of the psychometric properties of the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 390-396.
32. Petroczi, A., Aidman, E. V., and Nepusz, T. (2008). Capturing doping attitudes by selfreport declarations and implicit assessment: A methodology study. Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy, 3 (9).
33. Petroczi, A., Aidman, E. V., Hussain, I., Deshmukh, N., Nepusz, T., Uvacsek, M., Toth, M., Barker, J., and Naughton, D. P. (2010). Virtue or pretense? Looking behind selfdeclared innocence in doping. PLoS One, 5 (5): E10457.
34. Petroczi, A., Uvacsek, M., Nepusz, T., Deshmukh, N., Shah, I., Aidman, E. V., Barker, J., Toth, M., and Naughton, D. P. (2011). Incongruence in doping related attitudes, beliefs and opinions in the context of discordant behavioural data: In which measure do we trust? PLoS One, 6 (4): E18804.
35. Rothermund, K., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Gast, A., and Wentura, D. (2009). Minimizing the influence of recoding in the Implicit Association Test: The Recoding-Free Implicit Association Test (IAT-RF). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 84-98.
36. Schirlin, O., Rey, G., Jouvent, R., Dubal, S., Komano, O., Perez-Diaz, F., and Soussig- nan, R. (2009). Attentional bias for doping words and its relation with physical selfesteem in young adolescents. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 615-620.
37. Sriram, N. and Greenwald, A. G. (2009). The Brief Implicit Association Test. Experimental Psychology, 56, 283-294.
38. Strack, F. and Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220-247.