Cross-sectional study analyzes self-esteem and self-efficacy's role in doping intention in amateur athletes, suggesting psychoeducation as a preventive strategy.
Background Doping is a practice that poses a risk to the physical and mental health of those who exercise. Psychological variables such as self-esteem and self-efficacy have been shown to influence the intention to dope. The objective was to analyze the mediating effect of self-esteem and self-efficacy on susceptibility to doping in amateur athletes and exercisers. Method This study surveyed 392 participants who exercised regularly. It was a cross-sectional study with a descriptive correlational scope, and sequential mediation analysis. The assessment was based on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) research package scales of self-esteem, self-efficacy, intention, and susceptibility to doping and was supported by the Drug Control Model in Sport. Results The results indicate that the mediation model was approved, based on the inference that susceptibility to doping is positive associated with the intention to dope and, in this case, this susceptibility is mediated by self-esteem and self-efficacy. The direct effect (0.447) is slightly greater than the indirect effect (0.346), both of which are significant. These values indicate partial mediation: that is, susceptibility to doping is related to higher intention to dope, but when it passes through self-esteem and self-efficacy, its relationship is reduced. Conclusion These findings support the hypothesis that psychological variables can act as intermediate mechanisms in the relationship between susceptibility to doping and intention to dope. This suggests the need to increase preventive strategies that promote psychoeducation of psychological variables such as self-esteem and self-efficacy, which reinforce the protective factor against pro-doping behavior in athletes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zazueta-Beltrán et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: