AbstractWe are grateful to have received so many insightful commentaries from interested colleagues regarding our proposed behavioural constellation of deprivation (BCD) and our thoughts on its causes and consequences. In this response article, we offer some clarifications regarding our perspective and tackle some common misperceptions, including, for example, assumptions that the BCD is adaptive and that it should include all behaviours that vary with socioeconomic status. We then welcome some excellent proposals for extensions and modifications of our ideas, such as the conceptualisation of the BCD as a risk-management strategy and the calls for a greater focus on strengths and differential investment rather than deficits and disinvestment. Finally, we highlight some insightful explorations of the implications of our ideas for ethics, policy, and practice.
Sport Integrity: Ethics, Policy and Practice: An Introduction