Ensuring Rich Rigor of Qualitative Methodologies in Behavior Analytic Research

Lorio-Barsten et al. (2026) wrote a how-to paper. They show behavior analysts how to judge or plan qualitative studies.

The authors use Tracy’s eight “big-tent” rules. These rules cover worthy topics, rich rigor, sincerity, credibility, and four more.

Two example studies walk readers through each rule. No new data are given; the paper is a roadmap.

The field rarely applies qualitative standards. Tracy’s eight criteria fill that gap.

When you check off each rule, your study story becomes clearer and easier to trust.

Bottema-Beutel et al. (2024) and Bottema-Beutel et al. (2025) found most papers use fuzzy behavior labels. The new criteria answer their call by giving a checklist for clear descriptions.

King et al. (2020) showed that many ABA reviews hide how they found articles. Tracy’s “rich rigor” rule asks authors to show every search step, so the two papers line up.

Martinez et al. (2022) taught how to adapt materials for different cultures. Tracy’s “sincerity” and “credibility” rules push researchers to report community input, extending that cultural lens into qualitative work.

You can use the eight criteria right now. When you read a parent-interview study, ask: Is the topic worth it? Did the authors explain how they collected notes? Did they check findings with families? If a paper fails these tests, treat conclusions as weak. When you write your own social-validity report, follow the same checklist to earn trust from caregivers and funders.