1. Introduction

In this chapter, I will attempt to make a critical analysis of certain generalized human convictions which act as implicit theories describing and interpreting the use of forbidden substances and doping in sport. This attempt concentrates on arguments commonly used in competitive and recreational sport in order to justify, from a psychosocial, anthropological, historical and philosophical perspective, the use of illegal substances and doping methods. We shall complete this section by emphasizing the importance of an inter-disciplinary approach and the role of education in researching and managing the phenomenon, which manifests itself in a variety of age group and fields, and is not confined to competitive sport.

2. Short introduction to the theories of advantages and equalities

Very often, sport is presented in scientific literature as a facet of people’s social life and, as in any other form of social life, in sport there are various aspects with different levels of intensity and interaction that characterize each sport or event. In competitive sport, in particular, these interactions are determined by a system of externally defined customary rules that allow the performance of individual as well as social functions. These regulatory systems set the frame for the individual’s interaction with himself, his objective and his social environment. The observance of these rules was glorified in Classical Greece, since there was faith that this observance was leading to idealized forms of emulation, which in turn was leading to the exaltation not only of individuals, but of their societies as entities of peaceful coexistence.

3. Historical facts

Despite the fact that the historical progress of the different forms of emulation were often linked to extrinsic objectives (national-liberation, recreation, etc.), its core values (friendship, equality, accepting defeat, recognizing the most capable, equal opportunities, fair play, respecting the rules, etc.) were always strong and continued to be definitive, both at the individual level with a series of psychological factors such as motivation, attitudes and intentions, as well as at the social and intercultural level, where powerful social trends and social institutions were created (Olympic Movement, volunteer movement, etc.).

Following the Byzantine and Renaissance cessation, the universal nature of the Games was revived again, linking individuals and whole societies (recent Olympic Games, sports meetings of Eastern and Western countries, intercontinental games, etc.). Through sport and the modern Games, the principles of equality, justice and altruism were institutionalized once again, at a different level from that of the Classical period.

During the last century, great progress was made in anthropocentric and humanitarian sciences, and the centre of attention moved from the study of factors of external and mechanistic origin (see behaviourism) to man’s internal, cognitive and emotional potential. This change led to the creation of new frameworks and theories for studying and understanding the behaviour that is expressed in the social context of sport.

More recently, important principles that governed the framework and operation of sport were connected to the higher levels of cognitive development and ethical reflection put forward by structural and developmental theories (cf. Piaget, Kohlberg). These theories claim that reaching higher levels of reflection is not an autonomous and automatic process resulting from conditions of the environment and that there are degrees of consolidation in this hierarchy, which start from cognitive development and finally reach the human values of freedom, equality and justice.

4. The pros and cons of the use of forbidden substances

People and organizations representing different social contexts, many researchers from a series of branches of science (medicine, biochemistry, genetics, sociology, law, philosophy, pedagogy, etc.) have accepted and rejected the use of forbidden substances and methods. We find similarities in the answers that were given to this dilemma. In the arguments against the use of forbidden substances, Parry (2006) includes, inter alia: a) the higher risk of injury and its effects on health; b) the violation of the rules of fair play (although he stresses that the different categories of rules require legislation); c) obtaining advantages that are achieved by illegal means and d) the social effects and consequences of the use of substances and methods (i.e. introducing use in school or recreational sport).

More recent studies aim at higher levels of precision, attempting to show the facilitating or deterring role of a series of psychological predispositions and variables which determine peoples’ rational intentions and the expression of such behaviours (Lazuras, Barkoukis, Rodafinos, & Tsorbatzoudis, 2010; Barkoukis, Lazuras, Tsorbatzoudis, & Rodafinos, 2011; Barkoukis, Lazuras, Rodafinos, & Tsorbatzoudis, 2013). These studies show the indicators and variables on the basis of which more effective interventions can be designed, both with the athletes and people involved in this process of educational or coaching interaction (parents, coaches, officials, etc.).

There are also those who accept the use of forbidden substances and methods, invoking different arguments, for example, that a) anti-doping controls violate the fundamental freedom of privacy, b) full coverage of all sports, in all countries, cannot be achieved, c) tests are not fully reliable, d) athletes have found ways to circumvent tests, and e) that there are many cases of wrongful diagnosis (Parry, 2006).

The above arguments have been the subject of systematic interest in recent research literature and informational approach. The outcome is that officially institutionalized rules take away part of the athlete’s personal space. For example, it is commonly accepted that the famous “whereabouts” statements penetrate deeply into the athlete’s private and social life, based on the argument of equal treatment at interstate level or that of equal handling of all sports, leaving important unanswered questions both at the psychosocial and practical level.

Regarding the issue of the tests’ diagnostic precision, we need to identify an immediate and a diachronic aspect. This distinction is useful because there are examples of athletes and substances where the protocols and methods did not allow their immediate detection, but which were identified after a “short” period of time. In general terms, the emphasis on continuity is an argument that is closely linked to the development of the same science and cannot be answered in teleological terms and facts. In other words, as science progresses, there will be greater precision in the tests for detecting forbidden substances and methods. In order to overcome the disadvantages of diagnostic immediacy, a rule was introduced for keeping the samples that were obtained from male and female athletes for long periods of time. However, this decision, too, raises many questions, such as where, how and for how long these samples can be kept. The above reveal only a few of the issues that need to be resolved and that continue to preoccupy the interested parties as well as those who, by studying the phenomenon, provide information on the search for the limits of these interventions.

Should the use of illegal substances and methods be accepted, however, new questions will arise, some of which refer to how we can establish different values such as equality, justice or the athletes’ health. In addition, on a more general level, it will not be easy to answer questions concerning the individual’s equal opportunity and the research facilities of the countries from which athletes are coming. As a result, the centre of interest moves from the individual to the substances and from training to the drugs and to factors outside the individual sphere, something which does not comply with the spirit of fair play and participation in the contest. Mouratidis (2007) describes the process, noting succinctly that emulation among men, sooner or later, will become acompetition among drugs. This would give its place to a fatalistic attachment to substances, thus raising the question: to whom and for what should victory be given? Mouratidis (2007, 278) calls this victory and supremacy a “guilty illusion” and in order to make his vocabulary more vivid, he contrasts contemporary athletes who use illegal substances to those of the Classical period, who “needed to find their own true splendour for which they should live and, if necessary, die” (Mouratidis, 2007, 279).

5. Written and customary law

The above arguments obviously support the principle that no deviation from the written or unwritten rules that apply to sport and the games is allowed. However, although the importance of written rules was always apparent, the role of unwritten rules remained marginalized. According to Mouratidis (2007), this parameter is important since the rules decree that an athlete cannot do two opposite things, from an ethical point of view, i.e. take forbidden substances or use illegal methods in order to be proclaimed a victor. It is obvious that this view lays emphasis on the regulatory framework that applies to sport. Questions were raised, however, on the time span of this regulatory framework, whether it concerns only the games or extends to other facets of the athlete’s social life.

In recent decades, we have witnessed interest growing away from institutions (Olympic Committee, World Anti-doping Agency, etc.) and turning to the athletes’ behaviour outside the framework of the Games. The debate has shifted from the pursuit of victory in the game or the acceptance of defeat to the methods of deceit and imaginative ways for obtaining advantages, or the systematic creation of inequalities that characterise athletes, especially before the Games. This is an important reason for the efforts that have been made in recent years to create written rules and not rely on the customary and “unclear” ethical rules. The power was therefore conferred upon institutions and organizations like WADA and National Anti-doping Agencies to introduce a system of written rules before the Games, in order to allow control, at any time, with the result that the athletes and the champions in particular were deprived of the customary trust which has always surrounded their status.

The other parameters of this phenomenon bring out the arguments of the historical and philosophical view. Mouratidis (2007), a genuine representative of this perspective, notes that the athletes who use anabolics do not rely only on their own powers, thus making competition between athletes more intense, and imitation more necessary. According to him, this way the athlete changes the conditions of participation and distinction, thus hiding alternative choices since the view that “everybody takes them” prevails and that “without them” there is no top performance. This constitutes mental coercion. The expert focuses on the importance of imitation for young people who have reduced resistance and, wanting to show off, they do not hesitate to use forbidden substances, methods and drugs. This particular age group has no clear awareness of the cognitive or organic effects of use, since it has not reached the higher levels of “ethical” reflection. The young athlete no longer aims at the regular, normal and symmetrical development of his body and his health, but at the quick, technical and abnormal increase of his abilities (Mouratidis, 2007).

All the above clearly indicate that athletes must think and act in a responsible way towards themselves (self-responsibility) and towards society (socialresponsibility). In order to understand the framework in which different forms of responsibility are developed, we shall refer to some of the advantages and inequalities which are pursued in sport competitions, or linked to them. More specifically, we shall examine widespread views beyond the sphere of sport, in order to understand and manage doping as a simple advantage similar to psychological predispositions and scientific and technological developments.

6. Doping as an advantage

Some of the questions that are raised when dealing with doping refer to whether or not it should be considered as a simple advantage, as something unique in itself, or whether there are other elements in the sport system that create conditions for being ahead “at the starting line”. The list of questions begins to encompass new ones, such as: Do all athletes have equal access to training systems and methods? Is training at high altitude and competing at sea level ethical when one of the two athletes has this advantage and the other not? Do all athletes who still compete, even on a micro-scale, have the same access to complex nutritional protocols, substances and energy foods? Do all athletes have the same access to medical services and systematic follow-up in order to restore their health? We must acknowledge, however, that questions of this kind are compatible with the view that doping is nothing more that one of the advantages which the athlete wants to have and which constitute the basis for the development of individual interpretive theorems. But is this equation allowed? Can the inability to provide medical services to the athletes be equated with the use of forbidden substances? And, more generally, can the construction of such theories (implicit ones) exonerate the use of such substances? It soon becomes clear that these incomplete theories cannot respond to logical counter-arguments regarding the high priority that is given to health (biological, psychological and social) and the essence of an individual’s existence.

7. Types of psychological predisposition and competitive inequality

In recent years, the issue of the contribution of the cognitive and, more precisely, of the psychological predisposition for achieving top athletic performances, is raised more and more often. Can different psychological predispositions, such as, for example, sets of motives or attitudes, and different cognitive, emotional and behavioural variables, be responsible for the high performances of athletes, and if yes, to what extent? It is certain that similar questions enrich the discussion on equality and inequality in sport and widen our horizon in order to understand the phenomenon of using illegal methods (which are linked to training, an example of which is blood doping) and substances. In other words, the debate attempts to equate the natural management of mental potential, based on education, with the method of bleeding, which is technologically controlled. The use of energy consuming “vegetal” products is based on a similar theorem.

In my opinion, the search for the reasons that lead athletes to pursue victory contributes significantly to understanding their motives, since we can better describe and explain how they are connected to the use of forbidden substances. At a more primary level, descriptive studies emphatically reveal some of the reasons which athletes invoke for taking forbidden substances and using illegal training methods. This long list includes: a) improving their performance (directly or indirectly), b) reducing the period of use after, c) covering the presence of other substances, d) gaining or losing weight, e) improving their self-confidence and f) continuing to be competitive (Parry, 2006).

Other studies have also identified different cognitive and emotional factors. For example, important studies agree that mental training has beneficial effects on the reaction time and sport performance of athletes from different sports (Grouios, 1992; Grouios, Tsorbatzoudis, Barkoukis, Kaissidis, & Alexiou, 1999). Moreover, some sets of motives (for example, categories of internal motives) produce favourable conditions for cognitive, emotional and behavioural results (Lazuras, Barkoukis, Rodafinos, & Tsorbatzoudis, 2010; Barkoukis, Lazuras, Rodafinos, & Tsorbatzoudis, 2013). Can the handling of these variables and their redirecting be interpreted as doping? In my opinion, this view on the functioning of predispositions and their effect on behavior and, more particularly, on sport performance is too mechanistic. What is certain, however, is that countries which are scientifically advanced, are well ahead in this sector, i.e. the handling of the athlete’s cognitive and emotional potential. So, in recent years, athletes, coaches and other people who are involved in the sport system, acknowledge the importance and the benefits not only of training, but also of psychosocial interventions. Maybe this explains the broader acceptance of the “psychological advantage” in relation to other exogenous factors, such as the use of forbidden substances, and places a positive evaluation on the closeness of mechanisms and the self-management of internal potential.

8. Scientific and technological inequality

Does technology begin to touch the limits of morality (Miah, 2005)? Over recent decades, the views on the constructive role of technology for the development of sport performances were confirmed. Within this framework, the theory of the parallel course had been formulated, i.e. that as technology was developing, higher performances would be achieved, which meant more advanced drugs, more advanced instruments (i.e. poles, swim suits, etc.) and bigger interventions to genetic material and higher sports performances. It seems, however, that forecasting these developments does not follow a linear course, since other factors are involved. For example, the international federations have changed the technical specifications of the javelin, in order to prevent very long shots. The use of swim suits that gave special advantages in relation to floating and, therefore, to the athletes’ performance, were also forbidden. We also know, on the one hand, about the limited access of athletes to this type of equipment and, on the other, the higher cost that makes it impossible for athletes from underdeveloped countries to keep up. From the above, we also see that if we want to ensure long-term forecasting of performances, there are still many important questions that remain open.

The reports that were presented above on the various advantages were based, to a large extent, on how we approach the athlete as a man. This is an important question because it is a major criterion for evaluating performance and the athlete’s results. One can therefore adopt the view that the athlete is a creature that tries to go beyond the limits that are set by his biology or from the point of view of his genuine self (Miah, 2004).

An important aid for understanding these mechanisms is provided by the results of the cognitive and developmental theories of Piaget and Kohlberg, regarding the developmental stages of morality, their consequences for sport education and the use of forbidden substances and methods. These theories consequently provide a specific framework for the perception of man and the athlete.

Tested theoretical frameworks and attempts at intervention

The social and cognitive theories provide an excellent frameworks for promoting factors on the basis of which more effective interventions can be organized with the participation of athletes and coaches, as well as other institutions and officials, from near or afar. Examples that indicate moves in the right direction are the studies and programs that were developed in order to control the phenomenon (ATLAS, ATHENA, cf. Barkoukis, 2013), which is becoming a scourge not only in competitive sport, but also in recreational sport and other group categories, the issue being to go beyond the natural limits and top performance (military and police units, stock exchange, etc.)

9. Discussion on advantages and inequalities

Overall, the theories on equality and inequality offer a very broad framework for discussion and concern in different sciences. For example, the theory on the gene equality of the athletes (Gittins, 2005) raises the important issue of protecting personal data since important private information would have to become public. Moreover, the theory of training equality starts from the view that all athletes train in the same way. It is, however, unequivocal that each organism has its own reactions and its own mechanisms that protect itself from excesses. Many other questions will remain open regarding psychological and socioeconomic equality.

Regarding economic equality, its effects on athletes who have to deal with contracts and grants, special paragraphs and legal protection, are obvious. We can therefore conclude from the above that looking at the phenomenon from one angle reveals important gaps.

10. The role of education in doping

A series of interventions in different social areas have revealed important factors that can lead to behaviour changes. For example, the role of managing convictions and attitudes in order to protect and promote health has been enhanced. Ways and strategies have been developed through which the social environment shapes these as healthy and unhealthy behaviors. Moreover, research data have allowed the presentation of model proposals (for example, the Health Belief Model, the Trans-theoretical Model, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Self Determination Theory) in order to study more thoroughly the complex effect of these factors on the health of people and on the special population of athletes (cf. also the Integrative Model, Fishbein, 2009 and the Theory of Triadic Influence, Flay, Snyder and Petraitis, 2009).

Mouratidis (2007) recognizes the necessity of mental and ethical virtues and explains why athletes fully develop the virtue of self-confidence, a central feature related to being involved in sport. According to the researcher, this is due to the fact that they must always wait for outside help. Moreover, the athlete’s selfconfidence is shaken by the growing use of technological applications, such as special methods of excessive training, nutrition, special sport instruments and special medication (not forbidden) (Mouratidis, 2007). This situation is aggravated even more when forbidden substances are used, since many of them lead to dependence. Summarizing the results of a series of studies, Mouratidis (2007) takes the position that accepting the use of forbidden substances will mean that the Games will be held between “mechanical bodies”, thus losing the glory of sporting success, since the individual does not participate with all his personality.

Regarding the extent of personality participation, there is the affirmation that the mental euphoria athletes experience after achieving a high performance has different quality features for those who use forbidden substances and methods. We still do not know whether these athletes reach the level which Csikszentmihalyi (2009) defined as a flow state and whether this state will have more coercive elements than the harmonious passion for sport (Vallerand & Miquelon, 2011). Although we have to recognize the difficulties of such a project, it would be very interesting to examine these two assumptions in experimental processes, in order to identify and possibly promote the different qualities of athletic experience in individuals who use or do not use forbidden substances.

11. Summary

The issue of the use of forbidden substances is complex, multi-dimensional, multi-factoral and inter-disciplinary. For this reason, the one-dimensional efforts for dealing with it did not have the expected success. This became obvious when the biomedical approach, which adopted mainly “scare” practices, did not have the expected results for explaining and controlling the phenomenon, when learning and socio-psychological elements began to appear. The issues of (sport) education were then raised. At the same time, however, and this is widely accepted, developments in biomedical sciences raised new questions on the meaning and essence of natural talent and its expression in an athletic environment.

Developments in science carry with them the training process and raise, for example, the imperative issue of intervention for the following generations.It is certain that biomedical interventions and handling may become one of the pillars of man’s short-lived limits, but they are probably neither unique nor exclusive, since their consequences for the generations that follow are neither foreseeable, nor even immediate.

It has been reported that genetic strengthening is not against the spirit of sports; on the contrary, it is the spirit of sports (Skipper, 2004). This conclusion, however, follows the wrong track. The way in which this strengthening process is achieved is very important. The spirit of sports is not defined by the abnormal counterfeiting of man’s interaction with the environment. In other words, we are changing man, we are changing the environment and we are calling the byproducts of this interaction top performance or record. In this sense, the argument of Skipper (2004) cannot be understood when it places genetic interventions within the spirit of sports. It is one thing to show virtues (courage, daring, mental resilience, etc.) and the athletes’ natural gifts thanks to which they can win (for example, strong will for victory or higher levels of maximum oxygen uptake), and another thing the artificial construction of these features. It is therefore imperative to find a new balance between the technological achievements that enhance existence and allow it to focus on the natural gifts of the man-athlete.

The use of new technologies has widened the distance and created an unclear picture of man’s individual responsibility. Personal responsibility acquires external features becoming the responsibility of others, i.e. it is socialized and extends to the narrow and broader environment.

The question of connecting these practices to the spirit of sport remains central. If we do not define it precisely, on the basis of which criteria can we decide to intervene? We also need to answer the question: to what extent is the spirit of sport related to the rules of sport? Are the rules and norms which are raised at biomedical level the ones that will define the spirit of sport? Is the regulatory value system more important? Depending on which factors will be high in ranking, the emphasis on the different aspects of morality will be determined. For example, if we give first place to the rules of sports, regulatory morality will be enhanced. If emphasis is given to biomedical facts, a biological morality will result or what Miah (2005) calls a biomedical model of morality. If we put the emphasis on values, the interventions must target the more human and educational aspects of morality.

From what has been said so far, it appears that a more holistic and human approach is needed in order to understand and deal with the phenomenon of doping. We also see that the need to discover one’s self should be something voluntary, not forced, and not through substances and methods.

The theory of equalities that is often introduced in the discussion does not have profound elements of reflection, since it goes against the pluralism of nature and the technological and scientific aspect. It is accepted now that natural selection is there, pitting itself against artificial choices. Which of the two will take precedence in this evolutionary process remains a lasting question.

We also see that doping is a broader social phenomenon that touches all levels of society, all ages and many professional areas. As such, it must be integrated in the issues of public and social health. Correspondingly, the approaches for dealing with it must also be multi-dimensional.

Education as an institution has many targets. It is one of the “tools” that is suitable for effective and humanitarian interventions. Within this framework the culture of virtues and values will have to be redesigned. The athlete must know and consolidate more anthropocentric values. This can be achieved through a series of internal motives, higher self-determination, as well as post-contractual reasoning.

‍

Bibliography

Barkoukis, B. (2013). Psychological parameters of the use of doping in sport. Ch. Tsorbatzoudis, B. Barkoukis, & L. Lazuras (Ed.), Doping in Sport: Facts and Prevention Policies, (pp. 59–82) Thessaloniki: COPY CITY.

Barkoukis, V., Lazuras, L., Tsorbatzoudis, H. (2013). Beliefs about the causes of success in sports and susceptibility for doping use in adolescent athletes. Journal of Sport Sciences (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.819521).

Barkoukis, V., Lazuras, L., Tsorbatzoudis, H., & Rodafinos, A. (2014). Motivational and social cognitive predictors of doping intentions in elite sports: An integrated approach. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports (doi: 10.1111/ sms.12377).

Barkoukis, V., Lazuras, L., Tsorbatzoudis, H., & Rodafinos, A. (2011). Motivational and sportspersonship profiles of elite athletes in relation to doping behaviour. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 12, 205–212.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Progress: The Psychology of Happiness (in Greek). Athens: Kastaniotis.

Fishbein, M. (2009). An Integrative model of behavioral prediction and its application to health promotion. In R. Di Clemente, R. Crosby & M. Kleger (Eds.), Emergin heories in Health Promotion Practice and Research (pp. 215–234). San Francisco: John WIley.

Flay, B., Snyder, F., & Petraitis, J. (2009). The Theory of triadic influence. In R. Di Clemente, R. Crosby & M. Kleger (Eds.), Emerging Theories in Health Promotion Practice and Research (pp. 451–510). San Francisco: John Wiley.

Gittins, J. (2005). The ethics of gene doping. www.msu.edu/~folandwa/gittins_thesis. doc.

Grouios, G. (1992). Mental practice: A review. Journal of Sport Behavior, 15, 42–59.

Grouios, G., Tsorbatzoudis, H., Barkoukis, B., Kaissidis, A., & Alexiou, S. (1999). Reaction time as a function of stimulus information and mental practice. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 37, 1–18.

Kleiber, D. A., & Roberts, G. C. (1981). The effects of sport experience in the development of social character: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 3, 114–122.

Kohlberg, L. (1975). The cognitive-developmental approach to moral education. Phi Delta Kapa, 56 (10), 670–677.

Lazuras, L., Barkoukis, V., Rodafinos, A., & Tsorbatzoudis, H. (2010). Predictors of doping intentions in elite-level athletes: A social cognition approach. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32, 694–710.

Miah, A. (2004). Genetically Modified Athletes: Biomedical Ethics, Gene Doping, and Sport. Routledge: London.

Mouratidis, I. (2007). Themes of Physical Education Related to Philosophy. Introduction to Philosophy. The Problem of the Use of Forbidden Chemical Substances by the Athletes (in Greek), 156–168, Thessaloniki: Christodoulidis Publications.

Parry, J. (2006). Doping in the UK: Alain and Dwain, Rio and Greg – Not Guilty? Sport in Society, 9, 269–296.

Piaget, J. (1960). The general problem of psychological development. In J. M. Tanner (Ed.), Discussions on Child Development. New York: International University Press.

Piaget, J. (2000). On Pedagogy (in Greek, translation by M. Avaritsiotis). Athens: Ellinika Grammata.

Shields, D. L., & Bredemeier, B. L. (2001). Moral development and behavior in sport. In R. N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas, C. M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology (585–600). New York: John Wiley.

Shields, D. L., & Bredemeier, B. L. (2007). Advances in sport mortality research. In G. Tenenbaum & R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology (3rd ed., 662–684). New York: John Wiley.

Skipper, M. (2004). Gene doping: A new threat for the Olympics? Nature Reviews Genetics, 5 720 (doi: 10-1038/nrg 1135).

Vallerand, R., & Miquelon, P. (2011). The Athletes passion for sport (in Greek). In S. Jowett & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social Psychology of Sports, 317–335. Athens: Ion.

‍

‍

TSORMPATZOUDIS Charalampos,"Excellence and doping: Multi-disciplinary interpretations regarding self-interest in sport",in:K.Georgiadis (ed.), Olympic Movement: The process of renewal adaption, 55thInternational Session for Young Participants (Ancient Olympia,23/5-6/6/2015),InternationalOlympic Academy, Athens, 2016, pp.118-132.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍