3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Anabolic–androgenic steroid use is associated with psychopathy, risk-taking, anger, and physical problems

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Previous research has uncovered medical and psychological effects of anabolic–androgenic steroid (AAS) use, but the specific relationship between AAS use and risk-taking behaviors as well as between AAS use and psychopathic tendencies remains understudied. To explore these potential relationships, we anonymously recruited 492 biologically male, self-identified bodybuilders (median age 22; range 18–47 years) from online bodybuilding fora to complete an online survey on Appearance and Performance Enhancing Drug (APED) use, psychological traits, lifestyle choices, and health behaviors. We computed odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals using logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, education, exercise frequency, caloric intake, and lean BMI. Bodybuilders with a prior history of AAS use exhibited heightened odds of psychopathic traits, sexual and substance use risk-taking behaviors, anger problems, and physical problems compared to those with no prior history of AAS use. This study is among the first to directly assess psychopathy within AAS users. Our results on risk-taking, anger problems, and physical problems are consistent with prior AAS research as well as with existing frameworks of AAS use as a risk behavior. Future research should focus on ascertaining causality, specifically whether psychopathy is a risk associated with or a result of AAS use.

          Related collections

          Most cited references75

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population

            L Radloff (1977)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Factor structure of the barratt impulsiveness scale

              The purpose of the present study was to revise the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale Version 10 (BIS-10), identify the factor structure of the items among normals, and compare their scores on the revised form (BIS-11) with psychiatric inpatients and prison inmates. The scale was administered to 412 college undergraduates, 248 psychiatric inpatients, and 73 male prison inmates. Exploratory principal components analysis of the items identified six primary factors and three second-order factors. The three second-order factors were labeled Attentional Impulsiveness, Motor Impulsiveness, and Nonplanning Impulsiveness. Two of the three second-order factors identified in the BIS-11 were consistent with those proposed by Barratt (1985), but no cognitive impulsiveness component was identified per se. The results of the present study suggest that the total score of the BIS-11 is an internally consistent measure of impulsiveness and has potential clinical utility for measuring impulsiveness among selected patient and inmate populations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bryan.nelson@nyu.edu
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                1 June 2022
                1 June 2022
                2022
                : 12
                : 9133
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.137628.9, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8753, Department of Psychology, , New York University, ; New York, NY USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.59734.3c, ISNI 0000 0001 0670 2351, Department of Psychiatry, , Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, ; New York, NY USA
                Article
                13048
                10.1038/s41598-022-13048-w
                9160254
                35650220
                3bd155aa-d99e-48b2-861c-4b5871cea1a2
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 5 October 2021
                : 25 April 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: New York University Dean's Undergraduate Research Fund
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Uncategorized
                psychology,human behaviour
                Uncategorized
                psychology, human behaviour

                Comments

                Comment on this article