Objectives: The present study examined the role of moral identity, self-regulatory efficacy and moral disengagement on athletes' doping likelihood in situations representing potential benefits and costs for themselves. Design: Using a cross-sectional design, doping likelihood was assessed indirectly via hypothetical scenarios. Method: Athletes (N = 262) indicated their likelihood of doping in hypothetical situations and completed measures of moral identity, doping self-regulatory efficacy, and doping moral disengagement. Results: Doping was more likely in benefit situations than in cost situations. Doping likelihood was negatively correlated moral identity, negatively correlated with self-regulatory efficacy, and positively correlated with moral disengagement in both situations. The coefficients were higher for moral identity in cost situations, self-regulatory efficacy in benefit situations, and moral disengagement in benefit situations. Process analyses indicated that moral identity was directly related to doping likelihood only in cost situations and indirectly related to doping likelihood via increased self-regulatory efficacy only in benefit situations. Moral identity was indirectly related to doping likelihood via decreased moral disengagement and via increased self-regulatory efficacy and decreased moral disengagement in both situations. Conclusions: By showing that doping likelihood is associated with personal and situational factors our findings provide support for a social cognitive model of doping based on Bandura's theory of moral thought and action and Aquino's model of moral identity.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Applied Psychology