The moderating effect of sex in the relationship between competitive collegiate sport participants' harmonious passion and attitudes towards performance enhancing substances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: For health and ethical reasons, collegiate sport administrators are interested in managing athletes' attitudes towards performance enhancing drugs (PEDs). Research has called for a better understanding of the psychosocial processes through which permissive attitudes towards PEDs are formed. This study explored the potential influence of male and female competitive collegiate athletes' harmonious passion on their attitudes towards PEDs. Method: A survey was administered to varsity and competitive recreation athletes (n = 587) participating in one of seven team sports at four Canadian universities. Participants completed the performance enhancement attitudes scale (Petróczi, 2006: PEAS), the harmonious passion subscale from the passion scale (Vallerand et al., 2003) and a brief demographic questionnaire. Data were analyzed using Hayes' (2013) PROCESS macro in SPSS to examine the potential moderating role of sex in the association between harmonious passion and attitudes towards PEDs. Results: Males reported more lenient attitudes towards PEDs. No sex difference for harmonious passion was reported. The influence of passion on attitudes towards PEDs is moderated by sex, such that harmonious passion is negatively associated with males' attitudes toward PEDs, but unrelated for females. Discussion: This study demonstrates that for male competitive athletes, harmonious passion plays a significant role in decreasing the development of attitudes towards PEDs. These results may help administrators to target efforts for decreasing permissive attitudes towards PEDs through the construct of passion, specifically harmonious passion. Promoting the harmonious aspects of competitive sport and physical activity may be effective at challenging males' liberal attitudes towards PEDs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".