Athletes’ and coaches’ perceptions of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use

Stephen MOSTON, Terry Engelberg, James Skinner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Policies to prevent performance-enhancing drug use in sport are implicitly based on a form of deterrence theory, whereby the threat of sanctions deters prohibited behaviour. While deterrents generally fail to deter serious criminal actions, criminological research suggests that deterrents can be effective with certain types of offences or offenders. This study explored the perceptions of elite athletes (n = 488) and coaches (n = 92) of two forms of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use (legal and material loss sanctions) and a range of other anti-doping policy issues. There were marked differences in the perceived deterrent effect for athletes and coaches, with coaches consistently seeing deterrents as less credible than athletes. Both groups endorsed sanctions for the coaches and clubs of doping athletes and expressed support for the withdrawal of commercial and government sponsorship for such athletes. Findings are discussed in relation to the increasing focus of anti-doping campaigns towards elite coaches rather than athletes.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)623-636
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Sport Policy
Volume7
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

coach
athlete
drug use
drug
sanction
performance
elite
action research
sport
sponsorship
clubs
deterrence
withdrawal
deterrent
Coach
Drug use
offender
Sports
campaign
offense

Cite this

MOSTON, Stephen ; Engelberg, Terry ; Skinner, James. / Athletes’ and coaches’ perceptions of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use. In: International Journal of Sport Policy. 2015 ; Vol. 7, No. 4. pp. 623-636.
@article{a160ea5909ce4065ba74a30d28bd789f,
title = "Athletes’ and coaches’ perceptions of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use",
abstract = "Policies to prevent performance-enhancing drug use in sport are implicitly based on a form of deterrence theory, whereby the threat of sanctions deters prohibited behaviour. While deterrents generally fail to deter serious criminal actions, criminological research suggests that deterrents can be effective with certain types of offences or offenders. This study explored the perceptions of elite athletes (n = 488) and coaches (n = 92) of two forms of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use (legal and material loss sanctions) and a range of other anti-doping policy issues. There were marked differences in the perceived deterrent effect for athletes and coaches, with coaches consistently seeing deterrents as less credible than athletes. Both groups endorsed sanctions for the coaches and clubs of doping athletes and expressed support for the withdrawal of commercial and government sponsorship for such athletes. Findings are discussed in relation to the increasing focus of anti-doping campaigns towards elite coaches rather than athletes.",
keywords = "Australia, deterrence theory, doping, sanctions",
author = "Stephen MOSTON and Terry Engelberg and James Skinner",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1080/19406940.2014.936960",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "623--636",
journal = "International Journal of Sport Policy",
issn = "1940-6940",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

Athletes’ and coaches’ perceptions of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use. / MOSTON, Stephen; Engelberg, Terry; Skinner, James.

In: International Journal of Sport Policy, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2015, p. 623-636.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Athletes’ and coaches’ perceptions of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use

AU - MOSTON, Stephen

AU - Engelberg, Terry

AU - Skinner, James

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Policies to prevent performance-enhancing drug use in sport are implicitly based on a form of deterrence theory, whereby the threat of sanctions deters prohibited behaviour. While deterrents generally fail to deter serious criminal actions, criminological research suggests that deterrents can be effective with certain types of offences or offenders. This study explored the perceptions of elite athletes (n = 488) and coaches (n = 92) of two forms of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use (legal and material loss sanctions) and a range of other anti-doping policy issues. There were marked differences in the perceived deterrent effect for athletes and coaches, with coaches consistently seeing deterrents as less credible than athletes. Both groups endorsed sanctions for the coaches and clubs of doping athletes and expressed support for the withdrawal of commercial and government sponsorship for such athletes. Findings are discussed in relation to the increasing focus of anti-doping campaigns towards elite coaches rather than athletes.

AB - Policies to prevent performance-enhancing drug use in sport are implicitly based on a form of deterrence theory, whereby the threat of sanctions deters prohibited behaviour. While deterrents generally fail to deter serious criminal actions, criminological research suggests that deterrents can be effective with certain types of offences or offenders. This study explored the perceptions of elite athletes (n = 488) and coaches (n = 92) of two forms of deterrents to performance-enhancing drug use (legal and material loss sanctions) and a range of other anti-doping policy issues. There were marked differences in the perceived deterrent effect for athletes and coaches, with coaches consistently seeing deterrents as less credible than athletes. Both groups endorsed sanctions for the coaches and clubs of doping athletes and expressed support for the withdrawal of commercial and government sponsorship for such athletes. Findings are discussed in relation to the increasing focus of anti-doping campaigns towards elite coaches rather than athletes.

KW - Australia

KW - deterrence theory

KW - doping

KW - sanctions

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84943451254&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/19406940.2014.936960

DO - 10.1080/19406940.2014.936960

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 623

EP - 636

JO - International Journal of Sport Policy

JF - International Journal of Sport Policy

SN - 1940-6940

IS - 4

ER -