↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using response-time latencies to measure athletes’ doping attitudes: the brief implicit attitude test identifies substance abuse in bodybuilders
Published in
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1747-597x-9-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralf Brand, Wanja Wolff, Detlef Thieme

Abstract

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).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 86 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 25%
Sports and Recreations 13 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 25 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,780,031
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
#372
of 667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,671
of 238,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 238,994 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.