Deviant and criminal behavior in sport remains a significant problem because it threatens the rules, norms and culture that value fairness. The use of performance-enhancing substances (PED), also known as “doping”, is generally prohibited in sanctioned sports because they violate this philosophy. While previous research has documented the crucial role that coaches occupy in player’s deviancy, there is a lack of theoretical perspectives used to assess the relationship between coaches and athletes in decisions to engage in doping. The present study examines a sample of Iranian sports coaches (n = 374) using situational action theory and regression models. The results indicate that deviant coaching is a form of moral action that involves an interaction between characteristics of the coach.
AntonaccioO.BotchkovarE. V.HughesL. A. (2017). Ecological determinants of situated choice in situational action theory: Does neighborhood matter?Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(2), 208–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427816678908
BarkoukisV.LazurasL.TsorbatzoudisH.RodafinosA. (2013). Motivational and social cognitive predictors of doping intentions in elite sports: An integrated approach. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 23(5), 330–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12068
4.
BarnesL. T.PattersonL. B.BackhouseS. H. (2022). A systematic review of research into coach perspectives and behaviours regarding doping and anti-doping. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 59(1), 101780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101780.
5.
BoardleyI.GrixJ.HarkinJ. (2015). Doping in team and individual sports: A qualitative investigation of moral disengagement and associated processes. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 7(5), 698–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2014.992039
6.
BoardleyI.KavussanuM. (2009). The influence of social variables and moral disengagement on prosocial and antisocial behaviours in field hockey and netball. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27(8), 843–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410902887283
7.
BoardleyI.KavussanuM.RingC. (2008). Athletes’ perceptions of coaching effectiveness and athlete-related outcomes in rugby union: An investigation based on the coaching efficacy model. The Sport Psychologist, 22(3), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.22.3.269
8.
BowersL. D.PaternosterR. (2017). Inhibiting doping in sports: Deterrence is necessary, but not sufficient. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 11(1), 132–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2016.1261930
9.
BrauerJ. R.TittleC. R. (2017). When crime is not an option: Inspecting the moral filtering of criminal action alternatives. Justice Quarterly, 34(5), 818–846. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2016.1226937
10.
BurnettK. F.KleimanM. E. (1994). Psychological characteristics of adolescent steroid users. Adolescence, 29(113), 81–89.
11.
ChenZ.WangD.WangK.RonkainenN. J.HuangT. (2016). Effects of coaching style on prosocial and antisocial behavior among Chinese athletes. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 44(11), 1889–1900. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2016.44.11.1889
12.
ChoiP. Y.PopeH. G. (1994). Violence toward women and illicit androgenic-anabolic steroid use. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry: Official Journal of the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists, 6(1), 21–25. https://doi.org/10.3109/10401239409148835
13.
ChowG. M.MurrayK. E.FeltzD. L. (2009). Individual, team, and coach predictors of players' likelihood to aggress in youth soccer. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 31(4), 425–443. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.31.4.425
14.
CochranJ. K. (2016). Moral propensity, setting, and choice: A partial test of situational action theory. Deviant Behavior, 37(7), 811–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1145024
De HonO.KuipersH.van BottenburgM. (2015). Prevalence of doping use in elite sports: A review of numbers and methods. Sports Medicine, 45(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0247-x
17.
EiflerS.PetzoldK. (2019). Validity aspects of vignette experiments: Expected “what‐if” differences between reports of behavioral intentions and actual behavior. In Experimental methods in survey research: Techniques that combine random sampling with random assignment (pp. 393–416).
EngelbergT.MostonS. (2016). Inside the locker room: A qualitative study of coaches’ anti-doping knowledge, beliefs and attitudes. Sport in Society, 19(7), 942–956. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2015.1096244
20.
EngelbergT.MostonS.BlankC. (2019). Coaches’ awareness of doping practices and knowledge about anti-doping control systems in elite sport. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 26(1), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2017.1337724
21.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
22.
GallupeO.BaronS. W. (2014). Morality, self-control, deterrence, and drug use: Street youths and Situational Action Theory. Crime and Delinquency, 60(2), 284–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128709359661
23.
GouletC.ValoisP.BuistA.CôtéM. (2010). Predictors of the use of performance-enhancing substances by young athletes. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine: Official Journal of the Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine, 20(4), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0b013e3181e0b935
24.
HaarD. H.WikströmP. O. H. (2010). Crime propensity, criminogenic exposure and violent scenario responses: Testing situational action theory in regression and Rasch models. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 21(4–5), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956792510000161
HirtenlehnerH.PauwelsL. J.MeskoG. (2014). Is the effect of perceived deterrence on juvenile offending contingent on the level of self-control? Results from three countries. British Journal of Criminology, 54(1), 128–150. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azt053
27.
HirtenlehnerH.TreiberK. (2017). Can situational action theory explain the gender gap in adolescent shoplifting? Results from Austria. International Criminal Justice Review, 27(3), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057567717690199
28.
HodgeK.HargreavesE. A.GerrardD.LonsdaleC. (2013). Psychological mechanisms underlying doping attitudes in sport: Motivation and moral disengagement. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 35(4), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.35.4.419
29.
IjadunolaM. Y.OdiaB. O.AdepojuO. A.IgweK. O.JamesA. O.KoyenikanY. O.InyangU. J.KabiawuB. A. (2018). Perception of Nigeria university athletes about performance-enhancing substances and drug testing. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 10(3), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2018.1450772
30.
KabiriS.CochranJ. K.SeversonR.ShadmanfaatS. M.RahmatiM. M.SharepourM. (2018). Social and personal controls and performance enhancing drug use: Toward an explanation of doping activity among professional athletes in Rasht, Iran. Deviant Behavior, 39(11), 1483–1496. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2018.1486057
31.
KabiriS.CochranJ. K.StewartB. J.SharepourM.RahmatiM. M.ShadmanfaatS. M. (2018). Doping among professional athletes in Iran: A test of Akers’s social learning theory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(5), 1384–1410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16680043
32.
KabiriS.DonnerC. M. (2019). Examining the effect of ineffective parenting and low self-control on athletes’ PED use. International Criminal Justice Review, 1–27.
33.
KabiriS.DonnerC. M.ShadmanfaatS. M.RahmatiM. M. (2022). School bullying among Iranian Adolescents: Considering a higher moderation model in situational action theory. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-022-00147-5
34.
KabiriS.Masoomeh Shamila ShadmanfaatS.DonnerC. M.CochranJ. K.CochranJ. K. (2021). An integrated model of athletes’ PED use: A test of low self-control, opportunity, deviant peer Associations, and control deficit. Deviant Behavior, 42(10), 1313–1328. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2020.1738986
35.
KabiriS.ShadmanfaatS. M.DonnerC. M. (2019). Using control balance theory to examine sports doping among professional athletes in Iran. Journal of Drug Issues, 49(3), 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042619837757
36.
KabiriS.ShadmanfaatS. M.SmithH.CochranJ. (2020). A social learning model of antisocial coaching behavior. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 64(8), 860–879. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19899608
KirbyK.MoranA.GuerinS. (2011). A qualitative analysis of the experiences of elite athletes who have admitted to doping for performance enhancement. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 3(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2011.577081
39.
KlineR. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.
40.
KronebergC.SchulzS. (2018). Revisiting the role of self-control in situational action theory. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 56–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732189
41.
LiuW.QiuG.ZhangS. (2022). Situational action theory and school bullying: Rethinking the moral filter. Crime and Delinquency, 68(4), 572–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128720974318
42.
LolandS. (2018). Performance-enhancing drugs, sport, and the ideal of natural athletic performance. The American Journal of Bioethics: AJOB, 18(6), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1459934
43.
MaleteL.ChowG. M.FeltzD. L. (2013). Influence of coaching efficacy and coaching competency on athlete‐level moral variables in Botswana youth soccer. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(10), 2107–2119. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12164
44.
MatosicD.NtoumanisN.BoardleyI. D.StenlingA.SedikidesC. (2016). Linking narcissism, motivation, and doping attitudes in sport: A multilevel investigation involving coaches and athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 38(6), 556–566. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2016-0141
NtoumanisN.NgJ. Y.BarkoukisV.BackhouseS. (2014). Personal and psychosocial predictors of doping use in physical activity settings: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(11), 1603–1624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0240-4
47.
NunallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
48.
OverbyeM. (2017). Deterrence by risk of detection? An inquiry into how elite athletes perceive the deterrent effect of the doping testing regime in their sport. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 24(2), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2016.1182119
49.
OverbyeM.ElbeA.-M.KnudsenM. L.PfisterG. (2015). Athletes' perceptions of anti-doping sanctions: The ban from sport versus social, financial and self-imposed sanctions. Sport in Society, 18(3), 364–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2014.982539
50.
OverbyeM.KnudsenM. L.PfisterG. (2013). To dope or not to dope: Elite athletes’ perceptions of doping deterrents and incentives. Performance Enhancement and Health, 2(3), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peh.2013.07.001
51.
PauwelsL. (2012). How similar is the interaction between low self-control and deviant moral beliefs in the explanation of adolescent offending? An inquiry in sub groups by gender and immigrant background. In Psychology of morality (pp. 141–153). Nova Publishers.
52.
PauwelsL. (2018). Analysing the perception–choice process in situational action theory. A randomized scenario study. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 130–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732195
53.
PauwelsL. J.SvenssonR.HirtenlehnerH. (2018). Testing situational action theory: A narrative review of studies published between 2006 and 2015. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 32–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732185
54.
PiqueroA. R.JenningsW. G.DiamondB.FarringtonD. P.TremblayR. E.WelshB. C.GonzalezJ. M. R. (2016). A meta-analysis update on the effects of early family/parent training programs on antisocial behavior and delinquency. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12(2), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9256-0
55.
RingC.HurstP. (2019). The effects of moral disengagement mechanisms on doping likelihood are mediated by guilt and moderated by moral traits. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 40(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.09.001
56.
RingC.KavussanuM.SimmsM.MazanovJ. (2018). Effects of situational costs and benefits on projected doping likelihood. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 34(1), 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.09.012
57.
SchepersD. (2017). Causes of the causes of juvenile delinquency: Social disadvantages in the context of Situational Action Theory. European Journal of Criminology, 14(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370816649622
58.
SchepersD.ReineckeJ. (2018). Conditional relevance of controls: A simultaneous test of the influences of self-control and deterrence on criminal behaviour in the context of situational action theory. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732191
59.
SchilsN.PauwelsL. (2014). Explaining violent extremism for subgroups by gender and immigrant background, using SAT as a framework. Journal of Strategic Security, 7(3), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.7.3.2
60.
Serrano-MaílloA. (2018). Crime contemplation and self-control: A test of situational action theory’s hypothesis about their interaction in crime causation. European Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370817732193
61.
SongH.LeeS. S. (2020). Motivations, propensities, and their interplays on online bullying perpetration: A partial test of situational action theory. Crime and Delinquency, 66(12), 1787–1808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719850500
62.
StewartB.SmithA. C. (2008). Drug use in sport: Implications for public policy. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 32(3), 278–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723508319716
63.
SvenssonR. (2015). An examination of the interaction between morality and deterrence in offending: A research note. Crime and Delinquency, 61(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128713486068
64.
SvenssonR.PauwelsL.WeermanF. M. (2010). Does the effect of self-control on adolescent offending vary by level of morality? A test in three countries. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(6), 732–743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810366542
65.
TittleC. R.AntonaccioO.BotchkovarE.KranidiotiM. (2010). Expected utility, self-control, morality, and criminal probability. Social Science Research, 39(6), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.007
66.
UlrichR.PopeH. G.CléretL.PetrócziA.NepuszT.SchafferJ.KanayamaG.ComstockR. D.SimonP. (2018). Doping in two elite athletics competitions assessed by randomized-response surveys. Sports Medicine, 48(1), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0765-4
67.
WaddingtonI.MøllerV. (2019). WADA at twenty: Old problems and old thinking?International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 11(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2019.1581645
68.
WikströmP. H. (2004). Crime as alternative: Towards a cross-level situational action theory of crime cauSituational action theoryion. In McCordJ. (Ed.), Beyond empiricism: Institutions intentions in the study of crime (pp. 1–37). Transaction Publishers.
69.
WikströmP. H. (2014). Why crime happens: A situational action theory. In ManzoG. (Ed.), Analytical sociology: Actions and networks (pp. 74–94). John Wiley and Sons.
70.
WikströmP. H. (2017). Character, circumstances, and the causes of crime: Towards an analytical criminology. In LieblingA.MarunaS.McAraL. (Eds.), The oxford handbook of criminology (pp. 501–521). Oxford University Press.
71.
WikströmP. H.OberwittlerD.TreiberK.HardieB. (2012). Breaking rules: The social and situational dynamics of young people's urban crime. Oxford University Press.
72.
WikströmP.-O. H.TreiberK. (2017). Beyond risk factors: An analytical approach to crime prevention. In TeasdaleB.BradleyM. S. (Eds.), Preventing crime and violence (pp. 73–87). Springer.
73.
WikströmP. O. H. (2009). Crime propensity, criminogenic exposure and crime involvement in early to mid adolescence. Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 92(2–3), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1515/mks-2009-922-312
74.
WikströmP. O. H.SvenssonR. (2008). Why are English youths more violent than Swedish youths? A comparative study of the role of crime propensity, lifestyles and their interactions in two cities. European Journal of Criminology, 5(3), 309–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370808090835
75.
WikströmP. O. H.SvenssonR. (2010). When does self-control matter? The interaction between morality and self-control in crime cauSituational action theoryion. European Journal of Criminology, 7(5), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370810372132
76.
WikströmP. O. H.TseloniA.KarlisD. (2011). Do people comply with the law because they fear getting caught?European Journal of Criminology, 8(5), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370811416415
77.
YoshidaE. M.ErbS. R.ScudamoreC. H.OwenD. A. (1994). Severe cholestasis and jaundice secondary to an esterified testosterone, a non-C17 alkylated anabolic steroid. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, 18(3), 268–270. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004836-199404000-00036
