The relationship between attitudes and behaviors ppt (1)


Published on

Published in: Sports, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The relationship between attitudes and behaviors ppt (1)

  2. 2. INTRODUCTION OF THE PROBLEM  Doping has been around for centuries. Some ate brains, hearts and livers of animals, while others consumed figs, wine, cheese, and even mushrooms to later improve their performance at their Olympic Games as far back as 3 B.C.  Stimulants were added to alcohol in the Roman era to help gladiators recover more quickly from fatigue and injuries.  Some South American countries coca leaves were eaten to increase endurance in competitions.  Performance enhancing substances were introduced through the diet for hundreds of years, but it was not until the early 1900’s that substances like strychnine were given to long distance runners.  It was not until 1963 that evidence was presented that drug restrictions were needed and France was the first to enact the first anti-doping legislation.
  3. 3. INTRODUCTION CONT.  The International Olympic Committee (IOC) published the first list of doping classes in 1967 which paved the way for drug testing to be introduced on a wide scale.  A substance or method will be prohibited if it meets any two of the following criteria: (1) has the potential to enhance sports performance; (2) represents a potential health risk to the athlete; (3) violates the spirit of the sport.  Athletes are encouraged to stand for fair play and health. It is the rules and laws which are violated when performance enhancing drugs are used and it becomes clear that doping is cheating and cheating is against the rules of all sport.  The responsibility rests on the shoulders of the athletes to make the ethical choices and compete responsively while becoming role models for drug-free sports and lifestyles.
  4. 4. INTRODUCTION CONT. Doping is defined as the use of a drug or blood product to artificially enhance physical performance. Stimulants (4) Steroids (12) Other (6) Amphetamines Anavar Dianabol Clomid Clenbuterol Andriol Equipoise Creatine Ephedra The Clear Primobolan EPO Modafinil The Cream Prohormones HCG Deca Durabolin Stanozolol Human Growth Hormone Depo-Testosterone Testosterone IGF-1 Insulin
  5. 5. INTRODUCTION CONT. Athletes should be made aware of the consequences that result from participation in the doping practices found in the sports industry. Health consequences: Minor joint pain Cardiac disease Cerebral or pulmonary embolism Death Social consequences: Loss of sponsorship Loss of income Permanently damaged reputations, credibility and careers When performance-enhancing drugs have the power to affect the physical wellbeing of the athletes, and defy the law of natural talent, it is then that doping poses the greatest threat to the athlete and to the moral integrity of the true spirit of the sport.
  6. 6. PROBLEM The problem is that even though most young athletes will admit that doping is dishonest, unhealth y and risky, would they sacrifice it all for the “thrill of victory” and use banned substances to improve their performance?
  7. 7. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Focus of this study: To survey middle school, high school and college athletes to determine the attitude of each group from the responses that would indicate the age group’s willingness to use banned substances to improve their performance.
  8. 8. RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS/QUESTIONS  Why dope?  Does doping compromise the sense of fair play and good sportsmanship?  At what cost to future young athletes or the spirit of the sport are these young athletes willing to sacrifice for the “thrill of victory”?  Have the sports industry’s and media’s fixation on winning at all costs driven many athletes to search out what will give them the winning edge and unfortunately create a market for all types of performance-enhancing substances?  What are performance enhancing drugs?  Do attitudes differ about the use of performance enhancing drugs among different age groups?  It was hypothesized that the middle school and high school students would respond differently than the college aged athlete.
  9. 9. OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS/ASSUMPTIONS Operational Definitions  The independent variable is the three different age groups of athletes: Middle school High school College level  The dependent variable is the scores on the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale.  The population of the study is middle school, high school, and college athletes in Richmond, KY and Fresno, CA. Assumptions In the research, background knowledge of the content being studied is assumed. A strong foundation of knowledge is required to build on variables that affect the outcomes of data being collected.
  10. 10. LIMITATIONS/DELIMITATIONS Limitations  Limitations of the study would include the sample of male athletes at three separate levels and facilities representing secondary education ranging from middle school athletes to college athletes.  Another limitation would include the number of participants that drop out due to the intrusiveness of the questions.  The third limitation would be those that do participate, but do not answer the survey questions honestly, is based on the sensitivity of the questions. Delimitations  Only male athletes 11 to 24 years old participated in the study.  The participants were male athletes participating in the various sports at the middle school level, high school level and college level.  Results can be generalized for the regions in which the respondents live.  Data collection was completed between September and October of 2013.
  11. 11. DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS  The instrument for this research study was given to a total population of 180 participants made up of middle school, high school, and college aged male student athletes.  Group A or the experimental group for the pilot study 90 male student participants  Group B or the control group for the actual study 90 male student participants  The population in each group will consist of: 90 male student athletes made up of three specific aged groups of athletes 1. 30 middle school male student athletes ranging from ages 11 years 3 months to 13 years 9 months 2. 30 high school male student athletes ranging from ages 14 years 3 months to 17 years 11 months 3. 30 college aged male student athletes ranging from ages 18 years 0 months to 22 years 11 months
  12. 12. DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS CONT.  The control group was made up of 90 male student athletes from Richmond, KY. The participants included 30 middle school and 30 high school student athletes from Madison County Schools and 30 college age student athletes from Eastern Kentucky University.  The experimental group who participated in the pilot study was made of 90 male student athletes from the Clovis Diving Club (60 participants), Clovis, CA, and Fresno State University student athletes (30 participants) from Fresno, CA.  Permission for the athletes under the age of eighteen years was secured through a letter of explanation to the parents giving them the opportunity to sign a refusal to participate form if the parents should choose not to let their child participate in the study. Copies of this letter were sent to the parents of all participants under the age of eighteen in both the experimental and control groups. Risk factors (none), benefits, the aim of the study, survey conditions, and the promise of confidentiality were some of the areas explained to the parents in the letter.
  13. 13. DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS CONT.  The same version of the letter was given to parents with optional wording such as school/club or teacher/coach from which to choose.  An informed consent form was given to all participants so as to understand their involvement, the purpose of the study, their anonymity, and recourse if concerns arise following the completion of the study or during that would negate their participation at the time of the administration of the instrument.  All participants were informed of the purpose of the study and that participation was not only voluntary, but anonymous.  No elite athletes were chosen for the purpose of this particular study.
  14. 14. INSTRUMENT (RELIABILITY/VALIDITY)  The instrument selected to be used to survey the participants in this study is the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale (PEAS). Petroczi and Aidman (2009) developed a seventeen item Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale (PEAS) to understand participants’ attitudes and perceptions toward doping/performance enhancing drugs (PED). The survey was scored using a Likert scale with 6 responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).  When analyzing the reliability of the scale, Cronbach’s alpha values ranged from .71 to .91, which indicated that the instrument is reliable. These findings suggest the PEAS is a valid and reliable scale for determining athletes’ attitudes toward doping (Petroczi & Aidman 2009).
  15. 15. PROCEDURES  Hard copies of the survey in format were given to each group by a research assistant for the distribution, completion and collection of the individual’s surveys.  Approval to administer the survey was obtained from the Athletic Director at each school or a senior representative from the Clovis Diving Club.  All participants were instructed to complete the survey individually in a closed setting which was returned at the end of 30 minutes to an envelope provided by the research assistant who was monitoring the administration of the instrument.  A pilot study of the survey was given to three groups of participants in Clovis, CA and at Fresno State in CA to mimic the control group that was surveyed in Richmond, KY and at Eastern Kentucky University. The results of the pilot study were used to indicate if there were any questions that needed to be eliminated or that were too invasive to evoke truthful responses from the participants in the control group. Some questions were omitted or reworded after examination of the results of the pilot study to ensure all questions would be answered within the control group.  The data collection took place between September and October of 2013.
  16. 16. CONCLUSION  It was hypothesized that the middle school and high school students would respond differently than the college aged athlete.  The results from the pilot study indicated that the majority of all the participants (88.6%) strongly agreed they would “never” engage in the use of PEDs and the remaining participants (11.4%) strongly agreed they would “sometimes or always” engage in the use of PEDs. Even though the main independent variable was the use of 3 different age groups, there seemed to be no significant difference in their responses.  Similar results were obtained from the control group as well.  Therefore, the hypothesis was not proven as there seemed to be no significant differences in the responses from the 3 different age groups.