Using the prototype willingness model to predict doping in sport L. Whitaker 1 , J. Long 1 , A. Petróczi 2 , S. H. Backhouse 1 1 Carnegie Research Institute, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK, 2 School of Life Sciences, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK Corresponding author: Lisa Whitaker, Carnegie Research Institute, Leeds Metropolitan University, Headingley Campus, Leeds LS6 3QS, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 113 812 4684. E-mail: l.a.whitaker@leedsmet.ac.uk Accepted for publication 30 September 2013 To enable preventive measures to be designed, it is important to identify modifiable distal and proximal factors underlying doping behavior. This study investi- gated aspects of the prototype willingness model in rela- tion to doping. A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 729 competitive athletes. Following ethical approval, athletes (mean age = 28.8 ± 10.1 years; 63% male) completed an online questionnaire, which assessed doping-related attitudes, norms, prototype perceptions, outcome expectancies, and behavioral willingness. Using hierarchical multiple regression analysis, 54.4% of the total variance in willingness to dope was explained. Spe- cifically, past doping, attitudes, and favorability of performance enhancing substance user prototypes were the strongest unique predictors of willingness to dope. Athletes appeared most willing to dope if they were to suffer an injury, a dip in performance, or think others are doping and getting away with it. National-level ath- letes displayed significantly greater willingness to dope (Kruskal-Wallis γ 2 = 35.9, P < 0.001) and perceived themselves as significantly more similar to a doper (Kruskal-Wallis γ 2 = 13.4, P = 0.004) than athletes com- peting at any other level. The findings highlight the importance of extending anti-doping provision beyond elite-level sport and the need to target athletes’ doping- related perceptions. Recurring doping headlines illustrate that an appetite for using performance-enhancing substances (PES) remains despite a greater emphasis on preventative education and increased efforts to detect such use through drug testing. However, testing programs typically target those com- peting at the elite/professional level and this is problem- atic because research has shown that PES use is ubiquitous across the sporting landscape (Pitsch & Emrich, 2011). Equally, the costs and logistics associ- ated with carrying out drug testing are also inherent limitations of detection-based deterrence. In light of these limitations, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) emphasizes the importance of preventative education (Fahey, 2009), which aims to inhibit the ini- tiation of doping behaviors. To prevent doping in sport, an understanding of the psychosocial mechanisms involved in the decision- making processes that shape athletes’ chosen perfor- mance enhancement methods is necessary (Petróczi & Aidman, 2008). Thus far, Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 1985) has been the dominant framework applied to examine doping behavior in sport (e.g., Lucidi et al., 2008; Goulet et al., 2010). Research utilizing the TPB or elements of the TPB within inte- grated social cognition models have found attitudes and social norms to emerge as predictors of doping behavior through the mediator intentions (e.g., Lucidi et al., 2008; Wiefferink et al., 2008). However, intentions do not account for behaviors that may occur in response to a risk-conducive circumstance (Gibbons et al., 2006). Therefore, it is important to acknowledge the possibility that an athlete may use PES if a certain situation arises, even though they may have no prior intention to dope. The prototype willingness model (PWM; Gibbons et al., 2003) is a dual-processing model that considers personal, social and environmental factors. Previous research utilizing the PWM has focused on risky behav- iors such as alcohol consumption and smoking (e.g., Zimmermann & Sieverding, 2010), but more recently, it has been applied to health-promoting behaviors (e.g., condom use, exercise, healthy eating; Blanton et al., 2001; Rivis & Sheeran, 2003). The PWM comprises two pathways – the reasoned and the reactive. The reasoned pathway consists of intentions and the antecedent’s atti- tudes and perceived norms as previously explored through the TPB. In contrast to the TPB, the PWM incorporates descriptive norms (i.e., what significant others actually do) rather than injunctive norms (i.e., what significant others think the person ought to do). This is pertinent because the predictive validity of the TPB following the inclusion of descriptive norms has been enhanced (Rivis & Sheeran, 2003). As such, descriptive norms have been examined within doping- related studies utilizing the TPB (Wiefferink et al., 2008; Scand J Med Sci Sports 2013: ••: ••–•• doi: 10.1111/sms.12148 © 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1