The given article review will primarily focus on the doping control in sports, where the selected research investigates the elite athletes’ perception and trust in regards to the doping system within their corresponding areas. In short, the article reveals that two-thirds of all athletes in the sample found the current national system to be satisfactory, whereas the remaining one-third had some concerns. However, a majority of the participants did not fully trust the doping system of certain countries because they thought that these nations were not strict enough in order to win medals. In addition, an athlete’s negative experience with the doping system made him or her highly distrustful, and the ones who rely on its effectiveness experience more frustration.
The individuals were elite athletes from various sports, and they were surveyed through a web-based questionnaire. The total number of units in the sample was equal to 645, but the response rate was 43% (Overbye 10). The first key point of the article is the fact that the majority of the elite athlete had no problems with their corresponding nation anti-doping systems. Therefore, they were mostly satisfied with how these systems operated and worked. However, they still had certain concerns about the doping system of other nations since they mainly compete internationally. The main reason is manifested in the fact that some nations do not preserve the overall strictness of the anti-doping testing measures in order to increase the chances of winning medals for the specified country.
The second key point is that the elite athletes, who had a negative experience with the doping system or witnessed its flaws, were highly distrustful of it. It is also accompanied by the notion that the athletes, who rely more on the perfect functioning of the doping system, were more frustrated with imperfections and inaccuracies (Overbye 10). In other words, the athletes coming from nations where the anti-doping system is strict and accurate do not trust the systems of other countries, and thus, feel a sense of frustration in this regard.
The article illuminates both evident and non-obvious considerations of the athletes for the doping systems across the world. The main disadvantage of the article is the fact that it primarily focuses on Danish athletes, who mostly come from a single organization. Therefore, one might argue that the sample is not fully representative of both Danish and worldwide athletes. The methodology of a web-based questionnaire allows to conduct surveys internationally, or at least within the regions of the European Union. One can also argue that athletes from nations with a higher probability of corruption in the doping systems might be less satisfied with it.
The article provides valuable insight into the key driving forces behind athletes’ trust or distrust in the doping system. It provides a relevant information about the fact that the ones coming from strict and less corrupt systems might be more worried about their international rivals, who undergo less strict controls. Therefore, the study was able to generalize the results in a succinct and clear manner with proper precision within the context of the data acquired. However, it lacks a certain form of credibility due to the sampling method, which focused on athletes from a single organization (Overbye 10). Such an adherence might skew the general results towards a positive two-thirds value, whereas the real estimate would be lower. Thus, the article could be useful in the profession of sports management in regards to the doping system, but one needs to question these results and rely on experience as an additional factor.
Work Cited
Overbye, Marie. “Doping Control in Sport: An Investigation of How Elite Athletes Perceive and Trust the Functioning of the Doping Testing System in Their Sport.” Sport Management Review, vol. 19, no. 1, 2016, pp. 6-22.