↓ Skip to main content

Empathic and Self-Regulatory Processes Governing Doping Behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Empathic and Self-Regulatory Processes Governing Doping Behavior
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01495
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian D. Boardley, Alan L. Smith, John P. Mills, Jonathan Grix, Ceri Wynne

Abstract

Evidence associating doping behavior with moral disengagement (MD) has accumulated over recent years. However, to date, research examining links between MD and doping has not considered key theoretically grounded influences and outcomes of MD. As such, there is a need for quantitative research in relevant populations that purposefully examines the explanatory pathways through which MD is thought to operate. Toward this end, the current study examined a conceptually grounded model of doping behavior that incorporated empathy, doping self-regulatory efficacy (SRE), doping MD, anticipated guilt and self-reported doping/doping susceptibility. Participants were specifically recruited to represent four key physical-activity contexts and consisted of team- (n = 195) and individual- (n = 169) sport athletes and hardcore- (n = 125) and corporate- (n = 121) gym exercisers representing both genders (nmale = 371; nfemale = 239); self-reported lifetime prevalence of doping across the sample was 13.6%. Each participant completed questionnaires assessing the aforementioned variables. Structural equation modeling indicated strong support for all study hypotheses. Specifically, we established: (a) empathy and doping SRE negatively predicted reported doping; (b) the predictive effects of empathy and doping SRE on reported doping were mediated by doping MD and anticipated guilt; (c) doping MD positively predicted reported doping; (d) the predictive effects of doping MD on reported doping were partially mediated by anticipated guilt. Substituting self-reported doping for doping susceptibility, multisample analyses then demonstrated these predictive effects were largely invariant between males and females and across the four physical-activity contexts represented. These findings extend current knowledge on a number of levels, and in doing so aid our understanding of key psychosocial processes that may govern doping behavior across key physical-activity contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Master 6 10%
Lecturer 5 8%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 19 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 27%
Sports and Recreations 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 20 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,171,007
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,274
of 31,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,961
of 319,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#115
of 585 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,458 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 319,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 585 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.