@misc{LazurasBarkoukisLoukovitisetal.2018, author = {Lazuras, Lambros and Barkoukis, Vassilis and Loukovitis, Andreas and Brand, Ralf and Hudson, Andy and Mallia, Luca and Michaelides, Michalis and Muzi, Milena and Petroczi, Andrea and Zelli, Arnaldo}, title = {Corrigendum: "I Want It All, and I Want It Now": Lifetime Prevalence and Reasons for Using and Abstaining from Controlled Performance and Appearance Enhancing Substances (PAES) among Young Exercisers and Amateur Athletes in Five European Countries (Frontiers in psychology. - 8 (2017), 717.)}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {9}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01162}, pages = {4}, year = {2018}, language = {en} } @unpublished{PetrocziBackhouseBarkoukisetal.2015, author = {Petroczi, Andrea and Backhouse, Susan H. and Barkoukis, Vassilis and Brand, Ralf and Elbe, Anne-Marie and Lazuras, Larnbros and Lucidi, Fabio}, title = {A call for policy guidance on psychometric testing in doping control in sport}, series = {International journal of drug policy}, volume = {26}, journal = {International journal of drug policy}, number = {11}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0955-3959}, doi = {10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.04.022}, pages = {1130 -- 1139}, year = {2015}, abstract = {One of the fundamental challenges in anti-doping is identifying athletes who use, or are at risk of using, prohibited performance enhancing substances. The growing trend to employ a forensic approach to doping control aims to integrate information from social sciences (e.g., psychology of doping) into organised intelligence to protect clean sport. Beyond the foreseeable consequences of a positive identification as a doping user, this task is further complicated by the discrepancy between what constitutes a doping offence in the World Anti-Doping Code and operationalized in doping research. Whilst psychology plays an important role in developing our understanding of doping behaviour in order to inform intervention and prevention, its contribution to the array of doping diagnostic tools is still in its infancy. In both research and forensic settings, we must acknowledge that (1) socially desirable responding confounds self-reported psychometric test results and (2) that the cognitive complexity surrounding test performance means that the response-time based measures and the lie detector tests for revealing concealed life-events (e.g., doping use) are prone to produce false or non-interpretable outcomes in field settings. Differences in social-cognitive characteristics of doping behaviour that are tested at group level (doping users vs. non-users) cannot be extrapolated to individuals; nor these psychometric measures used for individual diagnostics. In this paper, we present a position statement calling for policy guidance on appropriate use of psychometric assessments in the pursuit of clean sport. We argue that, to date, both self-reported and response-time based psychometric tests for doping have been designed, tested and validated to explore how athletes feel and think about doping in order to develop a better understanding of doping behaviour, not to establish evidence for doping. A false 'positive' psychological profile for doping affects not only the individual 'clean' athlete but also their entourage, their organisation and sport itself. The proposed policy guidance aims to protect the global athletic community against social, ethical and legal consequences from potential misuse of psychological tests, including erroneous or incompetent applications as forensic diagnostic tools in both practice and research. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.}, language = {en} } @unpublished{PetrocziBackhouseBarkoukisetal.2015, author = {Petroczi, Andrea and Backhouse, Susan H. and Barkoukis, Vassilis and Brand, Ralf and Elbe, Anne-Marie and Lazuras, Lambros and Lucidi, Fabio}, title = {A matter of mind-set in the interpretation of forensic application}, series = {International journal of drug policy}, volume = {26}, journal = {International journal of drug policy}, number = {11}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0955-3959}, doi = {10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.06.007}, pages = {1142 -- 1143}, year = {2015}, language = {en} } @article{LazurasBarkoukisLoukovitisetal.2017, author = {Lazuras, Lambros and Barkoukis, Vassilis and Loukovitis, Andreas and Brand, Ralf and Hudson, Andy and Mallia, Luca and Michaelides, Michalis and Muzi, Milena and Petroczi, Andrea and Zelli, Arnaldo}, title = {"I Want It All, and I Want It Now": Lifetime Prevalence and Reasons for Using and Abstaining from Controlled Performance and Appearance Enhancing Substances (PAES) among Young Exercisers and Amateur Athletes in Five European Countries}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {8}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00717}, pages = {9}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Doping use in recreational sports is an emerging issue that has received limited attention so far in the psychological literature. The present study assessed the lifetime prevalence of controlled performance and appearance enhancing substances ( PAES), and used behavioral reasoning theory to identify the reasons for using and for avoiding using controlled PAES in young exercisers across five European countries, in the context of the "SAFE YOU" Project. Participants were 915 young amateur athletes and exercisers (M = 21.62; SD = 2.62) from Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Italy, and UK who completed an anonymous questionnaire that included measures of self-reported use of controlled PAES, as well as reasons for using and not using controlled PAES. The results of the descriptive analyses demonstrated that almost one out five exercisers in the sample had a previous experience with controlled PAES. Higher prevalence rates were found in Greece and Cyprus and lower in Italy. The most frequently reported reasons for using controlled PAES included achieving the desired results faster; pushing the self to the (physical) limits; and recovering faster after exercise/training. Furthermore, the most frequently reported reasons for not using controlled PAES involved worry about any possible adverse health effects; not feeling the need for using them; and wanting to see what can be achieved naturally without using any controlled PAES. The findings of the present study indicate that the use of controlled PAES is fast becoming a crisis in amateur sports and exercise settings and highlight the need for preventive action and concerted anti-doping education efforts.}, language = {en} }