Do vulnerability factors for doping vary depending on the team sport played? A Canadian clinical study

Summary

Athletes’ vulnerability to doping results from a complex interaction between intrinsic, extrinsic, and situational factors. Despite sustained prevention efforts, several challenges remain, including the accurate identification of vulnerability factors and the creation of a climate of psychological safety that allows athletes to speak openly and honestly about their use of performance-enhancing substances. The literature remains limited regarding variations in these vulnerabilities according to the type of sport practiced. This study draws on the Life Cycle Model of Performance Enhancement (Petróczi, 2008) to examine the prevalence of different vulnerability factors across sports disciplines.

The objectives of this research are: (1) to identify validated measurement tools for assessing vulnerability factors and doping intent; (2) to examine differences in vulnerability between contact and non-contact sports; and (3) to explore the associations between these factors, supplement use, and attitudes toward doping among college athletes.

Methodology

A cross-sectional review of the social sciences and health literature identified validated questionnaires addressing vulnerability to doping and intention to dope. Following a critical analysis of their strengths and limitations, the most relevant instruments were selected. The questionnaires (approximately 20 items; administration time of about 20 minutes) were administered to athletes aged 18 to 25, recruited from university teams within the Quebec Student Sports Network (RSEQ). The final sample comprised 195 athletes from three universities (Université de Sherbrooke, Université de Montréal, Concordia University). Recruitment and clinical supervision were provided by physicians from the research team and partner clinics.

Results

There are marked differences between types of sports. Athletes participating in contact sports report motivations related to improving strength, body mass, and recovery. Those involved in non-contact sports place greater emphasis on energy, endurance, and recovery. Supplement use does not differ significantly between the groups, but it is strongly associated with attitudes toward doping. Beliefs regarding supplements also show a significant association with this attitude. Conversely, the level of knowledge about doping has no effect on athletes’ attitudes, regardless of sport type. Recreational drug use shows a weak correlation with supplement use, with no significant link to attitudes toward doping.

Significance for Clean Sport

The findings highlight distinct vulnerability profiles across different sports, an aspect that has received little attention in the scientific literature on doping. The observed links between supplement use, associated beliefs, and attitudes toward doping underscore the importance of targeting these dimensions in prevention strategies. Further research is needed to deepen our understanding of variations in vulnerability across sports and to strengthen interventions targeting college athletes.

Final report is currently available in French only.