The good, the bad, and the ugly: A qualitative secondary analysis into the impact of doping and anti-doping on clean elite athletes in five European countries

ABSTRACT Protecting clean sport, and the rights of athletes to a clean sport environment, is at the centre of anti-doping policies. To better support and enable clean athletes and sport, an understanding of the clean athlete lifeworld is required. The current study explored the ways that clean athletes are personally affected by others’ actual or suspected instances of doping and anti-doping rule violations, and by aspects of the anti-doping system. Qualitative Secondary Analysis (QSA) was used to re-analyse and interpret 13 focus group transcripts generated from the ‘Research-Embedded Strategic Plan for Anti-Doping Education Clean Sport Alliance Initiative for Tackling Doping’ (RESPECT) project (see Petróczi et al., 2021b). The sample in the parent study included 82 self-declared clean elite athletes, from Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Slovenia, and the UK. Reflexive thematic analysis generated three overarching themes: The harm done by clean athletes having to coexist with dopers, how clean athletes are undermined by a disingenuous interest in clean sport, and the anxiety experienced by clean athletes over mistakes that could lead to anti-doping rule violations. The impacts of doping on clean athletes – direct or indirect – are experienced by all clean athletes in some way. The results indicate that current approaches to anti-doping rule compliance frequently undermine clean athletes and the perceived legitimacy of the anti-doping system.

[1]  A. Petróczi,et al.  The role of personal commitment to integrity in clean sport and anti-doping , 2022, Performance Enhancement & Health.

[2]  A. Petróczi,et al.  The Meaning of “Clean” in Anti-doping Education and Decision Making: Moving Toward Integrity and Conceptual Clarity , 2022, Frontiers in Sports and Active Living.

[3]  B. Strauss,et al.  The role of comprehensive education in anti-doping policy legitimacy and support among clean athletes , 2022, Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

[4]  W. Schobersberger,et al.  The status quo before the International Standard for Education: Elite adolescent athletes’ perceptions of anti-doping education , 2021, Performance Enhancement & Health.

[5]  Francesca Cavallerio Creative Nonfiction in Sport and Exercise Research , 2021 .

[6]  A. Petróczi,et al.  Racing Clean in a Tainted World: A Qualitative Exploration of the Experiences and Views of Clean British Elite Distance Runners on Doping and Anti-Doping , 2021, Frontiers in Psychology.

[7]  Y. Pitsiladis,et al.  Analysis of Anti-Doping Rule Violations That Have Impacted Medal Results at the Summer Olympic Games 1968–2012 , 2021, Sports Medicine.

[8]  A. Petróczi,et al.  Co-creating a social science research agenda for clean sport: An international Delphi study. , 2021, The International journal on drug policy.

[9]  Gleaves A Moral Examination of the Therapeutic Use Exemption in Anti-Doping , 2021 .

[10]  A. Petróczi,et al.  'Clean athlete status' cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in 'alternative' anti-doping systems. , 2020, The International journal on drug policy.

[11]  B. Houlihan,et al.  Balancing mission creep, means, effectiveness and legitimacy at the World Anti-Doping Agency , 2020 .

[12]  A. Petróczi,et al.  Understanding and building clean(er) sport together: Community-based participatory research with elite athletes and anti-doping organisations from five European countries , 2020, Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

[13]  B. Steijn,et al.  Red Tape, Organizational Performance, and Employee Outcomes: Meta‐analysis, Meta‐regression, and Research Agenda , 2020 .

[14]  Virginia Braun,et al.  One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? , 2020, Qualitative Research in Psychology.

[15]  J. R. Woolf,et al.  An examination of anti-doping education initiatives from an educational perspective: Insights and recommendations for improved educational design , 2020 .

[16]  A. Petróczi,et al.  "Doing What Is Right and Doing It Right": A Mapping Review of Athletes' Perception of Anti-Doping Legitimacy. , 2020, The International journal on drug policy.

[17]  C. Ring,et al.  An evaluation of UK athletics’ clean sport programme in preventing doping in junior elite athletes , 2020 .

[18]  W. Schobersberger,et al.  An evaluation of prevention initiatives by 53 national anti-doping organizations: Achievements and limitations , 2019, Journal of sport and health science.

[19]  SAGE Research Methods Foundations , 2020 .

[20]  R. Leenes,et al.  Looking at the Anti-Doping Regime Through a Human Rights Lens , 2020 .

[21]  S. Backhouse,et al.  “The process isn’t a case of report it and stop”: Athletes’ lived experience of whistleblowing on doping in sport , 2019 .

[22]  Nader Ahmadi,et al.  Limitations and duties: elite athletes’ perceptions of compliance with anti-doping rules , 2019, Sport in Society.

[23]  Nader Ahmadi,et al.  From fighting the bad to protecting the good: Legitimation strategies in WADA’s athlete guides , 2019, Performance Enhancement & Health.

[24]  Jeffrey G. Caron,et al.  Thinking through and designing qualitative research studies: a focused mapping review of 30 years of qualitative research in sport psychology , 2019, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology.

[25]  Fabian Hattke,et al.  Emotional Responses to Bureaucratic Red Tape , 2019, Public Administration Review.

[26]  L. Duncan,et al.  A Qualitative Exploration of Athletes' Past Experiences With Doping Prevention Education , 2019 .

[27]  S. Backhouse,et al.  Anti-doping Policy, Therapeutic Use Exemption and Medication Use in Athletes with Asthma: A Narrative Review and Critical Appraisal of Current Regulations , 2019, Sports Medicine.

[28]  Sigmund Loland,et al.  The ‘spirit of sport’, WADAs code review, and the search for an overlapping consensus , 2019, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics.

[29]  John Gleaves,et al.  Athletes’ perspectives on WADA and the code: a review and analysis , 2019, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics.

[30]  M. Englar-Carlson,et al.  Moral Communities in Anti-Doping Policy: A Response to Bowers and Paternoster , 2019 .

[31]  Nicole Ruggiano,et al.  Conducting secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we, and how? , 2019, Qualitative social work : QSW : research and practice.

[32]  Stacie Gray,et al.  Achieving compliance with the World Anti-Doping Code: learning from the implementation of another international agreement , 2018, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics.

[33]  B. Houlihan,et al.  Legitimacy driven change at the World Anti-Doping Agency , 2019, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics.

[34]  B. Houlihan,et al.  The effectiveness of the World Anti-Doping Agency: developing a framework for analysis , 2018, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics.

[35]  B. Strauss,et al.  Perception of the Current Anti-doping Regime – A Quantitative Study Among German Top-Level Cyclists and Track and Field Athletes , 2018, Front. Psychol..

[36]  P. Dimeo,et al.  Perceptions of legitimacy, attitudes and buy-in among athlete groups: a cross-national qualitative investigation providing practical solutions , 2018 .

[37]  X. Estivill,et al.  Geolocalisation of athletes for out-of-competition drug testing: ethical considerations. Position statement by the WADA Ethics Panel , 2018, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[38]  Brett Smith Generalizability in qualitative research: misunderstandings, opportunities and recommendations for the sport and exercise sciences , 2018 .

[39]  C. Griffiths,et al.  Tackling doping in sport: a call to take action on the dopogenic environment , 2017, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[40]  K. McGannon,et al.  Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology , 2017 .

[41]  Marie Overbye Deterrence by risk of detection? An inquiry into how elite athletes perceive the deterrent effect of the doping testing regime in their sport , 2017 .

[42]  Simon Robinson,et al.  Integrity and the corruption debate in sport: where is the integrity? , 2017 .

[43]  A. Petróczi,et al.  Can We Better Integrate the Role of Anti-Doping in Sports and Society? A Psychological Approach to Contemporary Value-Based Prevention. , 2017, Medicine and sport science.

[44]  Nader Ahmadi,et al.  Contexts and conditions for a level playing field: Elite athletes’ perspectives on anti-doping in practice , 2016 .

[45]  M. Englar-Carlson,et al.  What about the clean athletes? The need for positive psychology in anti-doping research , 2016 .

[46]  Nader Ahmadi,et al.  Anti-doping and legitimacy: an international survey of elite athletes’ perceptions , 2016 .

[47]  D. Carless,et al.  “The ripples are big”: Storying the impact of doping in sport beyond the sanctioned athlete , 2016 .

[48]  Marie Overbye Doping control in sport: An investigation of how elite athletes perceive and trust the functioning of the doping testing system in their sport , 2016 .

[49]  T. Tyler Popular Legitimacy and the Exercise of Legal Authority : Motivating Compliance , Cooperation and Engagement , 2016 .

[50]  A. Elbe,et al.  Athletes' perceptions of anti-doping sanctions: the ban from sport versus social, financial and self-imposed sanctions , 2015 .

[51]  Ulrik Wagner,et al.  Experiences, attitudes and trust: an inquiry into elite athletes’ perception of the whereabouts reporting system , 2014 .

[52]  D. Collins,et al.  Why athletes say no to doping: A qualitative exploration of the reasons underpinning athletes’ decision not to dope , 2014 .

[53]  I. van Hilvoorde,et al.  Doping control, providing whereabouts and the importance of privacy for elite athletes. , 2014, The International journal on drug policy.

[54]  T. Tyler,et al.  Popular Legitimacy and the Exercise of Legal Authority: Motivating Compliance, Cooperation and Engagement , 2014 .

[55]  A. Petróczi The doping mindset—Part I: Implications of the Functional Use Theory on mental representations of doping , 2013 .

[56]  M. McNamee,et al.  Anti-doping, purported rights to privacy and WADA's whereabouts requirements: A legal analysis , 2013 .

[57]  T. Tyler,et al.  Why Do People Comply with the Law? Legitimacy and the Influence of Legal Institutions , 2012 .

[58]  Brett Smith,et al.  Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology and relativism in action , 2009 .

[59]  J. Heaton Secondary analysis of qualitative data: an overview , 2008 .

[60]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[61]  J. Heaton Reworking Qualitative Data , 2004 .

[62]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Bureaucracy and Red Tape , 1999 .

[63]  V Szabo,et al.  Secondary analysis of qualitative data. , 1997, ANS. Advances in nursing science.

[64]  M. Crozier The Bureaucratic Phenomenon , 1964 .

[65]  Robert K. Merton,et al.  Bureaucratic Structure and Personality , 1940 .