Replicating motivational and cognitive-motivational typologies of doping attitudes among recreational fitness athletes: implications for harm reduction and risk communication

Background The non-medical use of image- and performance-enhancing drugs (IPEDs) in recreational fitness represents an important public health and harm-reduction challenge. While prevalence estimates provide useful benchmarks, they often obscure the motivational and cognitive-motivational heterogeneity underlying substance-use decisions and prevention needs in gym populations. Objective This study re-examined a previously published typology and evaluated its reproducibility of doping attitudes and prevention needs among German recreational fitness athletes using selected constructs from the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Health Belief Model (HBM), complemented by qualitative illustration. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 624 recreational athletes (64.1% male, 34.5% female, 1.4% diverse; Mage = 37.1, SD = 10.0). After data cleaning, the analytical sample comprised 550 participants. Four TPB/HBM-related scales with acceptable internal consistency (α = .78–.86) served as clustering variables. Ward’s method followed by k-means clustering (k = 7, seed = 42) informed the retention of a seven-cluster solution (overall silhouette = .22; bootstrap-based reproducibility with B = 200 indicated moderate stability). Associations with lifetime use of anabolic–androgenic steroids (AAS), testosterone replacement therapy (TRT), and growth hormone (GH) were examined descriptively. Fifty-two open-ended responses to illustrate cluster-specific motivational and cognitive-motivational patterns. Results Seven distinct motivational and cognitive-motivational profiles were identified, with descriptively distinct profile patterns across TPB/HBM-related dimensions. Small but statistically significant associations were observed for AAS and TRT, whereas GH use did not differ significantly across profiles. Qualitative accounts illustrated contrasts between value-based abstainers, ambivalent risk-takers, performance-oriented rationalisers, and low-engagement groups. Conclusions The replication provides preliminary support for a seven-profile typology of IPED-related orientations in recreational fitness, indicating heterogeneous motivational patterns and prevention needs rather than a single risk continuum. Given the moderate stability observed in the bootstrap analyses, the typology should be interpreted cautiously at the individual level but may provide an exploratory framework for harm-reduction-oriented communication and prevention approaches in gym populations.