Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of the Validity of Korean version of Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale

한국형 Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale의 타당도 평가

  • Choi, Hokyung (Department of Community Sport, Korea National Sport University) ;
  • Park, Jaemyoung (National Team, Korea Association of Athletics Federation) ;
  • Kim, Taegyu (Department of Marine Sports, Pukyong National University)
  • 최호경 (한국체육대학교 사회체육학과) ;
  • 박재명 (대한육상연맹 국가대표팀) ;
  • 김태규 (부경대학교 해양스포츠학과)
  • Received : 2019.02.22
  • Accepted : 2019.05.20
  • Published : 2019.05.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the model fit of various versions of Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale (PEAS) developed for measuring quantitatively the attitude toward doping and to provide the information on Korean version of PEAS. One hundred and eighty elite athletic players participated in this study and they filled out 17 items PEAS under the supervision. And 17 items, 11 items, 9 items, 8 items and 6 items PEAS were analyzed by using confirmatory factor analysis. The result of this study showed that an 8 items PEAS was fit for Korean elite athletic players, and a 6 items PEAS was for adolescents, but insignificant. Therefore, further studies of the relationship between psychosocial factors and attitudes toward doping by using 8-items PEAS would provide precise and useful information for developing anti-doping strategy.

본 연구는 도핑 (doping)에 대한 태도를 정량적으로 평가하기 위해 개발된 Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale (PEAS)의 다양한 버전에 대해 모형적합도 (model fit)를 확인함으로써 대한민국 엘리트선수에게 적합한 한국형 PEAS에 대한 정보를 제공하고자 하였다. 180명의 엘리트 육상선수를 대상으로 잘 훈련된 2명의 조사자 감독하에 17문항 PEAS를 자가기입식으로 응답하는 방법으로 자료를 수집하였고, 이를 활용하여 11문항과 9문항, 8문항 및 6문항으로 구분하여 모형적합도를 확인하였다. 그 결과, 8문항 PEAS가 대한민국 엘리트 육상선수에게 좋은 적합도를 보였고, 6문항 PEAS는 청소년선수에게 좋은 적합도를 보였으나 통계적으로 유의하게 나타나지는 않았다. 이러한 결과는 8문항 PEAS를 사용하는 것이 성인 및 청소년 육상선수의 도핑에 대한 태도를 측정하는 데에 더 타당하다는 것을 의미하고, 추후 이를 활용하여 도핑 행위에 영향을 미치는 심리사회학적 요인을 확인한다면 반도핑 전략 개발에 있어서 정확한 정보를 제공할 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

Table 1. Participants' demographic information

DJTJBT_2019_v17n5_385_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. 17-items PEAS[9]

DJTJBT_2019_v17n5_385_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis of PEAS

DJTJBT_2019_v17n5_385_t0003.png 이미지

References

  1. N. Ntoumanis, J. Y. Ng, V. Barkoukis & S. Backhouse. (2014). Personal and psychosocial predictors of doping use in physical activity settings: a meta-analysis. Sports Medicine. 44(11), 1603-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0240-4
  2. D. Hauw & S. Mohamed. (2015). Patterns in the situated activity of substance use in the careers of elite doping athletes. Psychol Sport Exerc. 16, 156-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.09.005
  3. A. Petroczi. (2007). Attitudes and doping: a structural equation analysis of the relationship between athletes' attitudes, sport orientation and doping behaviour. Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy. 2(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-2-34
  4. C. Wiefferink, S. Detmar, B. Coumans, T. Vogels & T. Paulussen. (2007). Social psychological determinants of the use of performance- enhancing drugs by gym users. Health Educ Res. 23(1), 70-80. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cym004
  5. V. Barkoukis, K. Kartali, L. Lazuras & H. Tsorbatzoudis. (2016). Evaluation of an anti- doping intervention for adolescents: Findings from a school-based study. Sport Management Review. 19(1), 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2015.12.003
  6. A. Bloodworth & M. McNamee. (2010). Clean Olympians? Doping and anti-doping: The views of talented young British athletes. International journal of drug policy, 21(4), 276-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.11.009
  7. D. F. Gucciardi, G. Jalleh & R. J. Donovan. (2010). Does social desirability influence the relationship between doping attitudes and doping susceptibility in athletes? Psychol Sport Exerc. 11(6), 479-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.06.002
  8. A. Petroczi. (2002) Exploring the doping dilemma in elite sport: Can athletes' attitudes be responsible for doping? Published Doctor of Philosophy dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, USA.
  9. A. Petroczi & E. Aidman. (2009). Measuring explicit attitude toward doping: Review of the psychometric properties of the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale. Psychol Sport Exerc, 10(3), 390-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.11.001
  10. A. Elbe & R. Brand. (2016). The effect of an ethical decision-making training on young athletes' attitudes toward doping. Ethics Behav, 26(1), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.976864
  11. E. J. Vargo et al. (2014). Perceptions of assisted cognitive and sport performance enhancement among university students in England. Performance Enhancement & Health, 3(2), 66-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peh.2015.02.001
  12. T. G. Kim & Y. H. Kim. (2017). Korean national athletes' knowledge, practices, and attitudes of doping: a cross-sectional study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy, 12(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-017-0092-7
  13. M. J. Bae, J. J. Yoon, H. Y. Kang & T. G. Kim. (2017). Influences of perfectionism and motivational climate on attitudes towards doping among Korean national athletes: a cross sectional study. Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy, 12(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-017-0138-x
  14. G. Zucchetti, F. Candela & C. Villosio. (2015). Psychological and social correlates of doping attitudes among Italian athletes. International Journal of Drug Policy, 26(2), 162-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.07.021
  15. A. R. Nicholls et al. (2014). Coach perceptions of performance enhancement in adolescence: the sport drug control model for adolescent athletes. Performance Enhancement & Health, 3(2), 93-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peh.2015.07.001
  16. A. R. Nicholls, D. J. Madigan & A. R. Levy. (2017). A confirmatory factor analysis of the performance enhancement attitude scale for adult and adolescent athletes. Psychol Sport Exerc, 28, 100-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.10.010
  17. J. M. Park & T. G. Kim. (2018). A confirmatory factor analysis on the performance enhancement attitude scale-Korean version for elite athletes. Journal of Digital Convergence, 16(11), 599-604. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2018.16.11.599
  18. E. K. Kim & T. G. Kim. (2014). Attitudes and Dispositions toward Doping in Korean National Players. Korean Journal of Sports Science, 23(1), 215-224.
  19. T. G. Kim & S. H. Kim. (2014). Study on the validity of PEAS for analyzing doping attitude and disposition of Korean elite player through Rasch model. Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society, 25(3), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2014.25.3.567
  20. P. M. Bentler. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull, 107(2), 238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
  21. M. W. Browne & R. Cudeck. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
  22. L. R. Tucker & C. Lewis. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
  23. H. J. Lee. (2013). Doping Prohibition, Why It Reasonable Is? Critique of Doping Prohibition and Reflection of Doping Permission. Journal of Korean Society for Sport Anthropology. 8(1), 57-81.
  24. M. Anshel. (2005). Substance use: Chemical roulette in sport. The sport psych handbook. 255-76.
  25. A. Alaranta, H. Alaranta, J. Holmila, P. Palmu, K. Pietila & I. Helenius. (2006). Self-reported attitudes of elite athletes towards doping: differences between type of sport. Int J Sports Med, 27(10), 842-846. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-872969