On a persisting curious double standard in behavior analysis: Behavioral scholars' perspectives on procedural fidelity
Leading scholars confess they skip fidelity reporting—know their five excuses so you can avoid them.
01Research in Context
What this study did
St. Peter et al. (2023) ran focus groups with veteran behavior-analytic scholars. They asked why so many published studies skip procedural-fidelity data.
The team recorded the excuses and grouped them into five themes. They also asked what would make reporting easier.
What they found
Even top researchers admitted they often leave fidelity out. The five reasons were time, money, boring paperwork, fear of ugly numbers, and ‘everyone else skips it’.
Scholars said journals and reviewers rarely ask for the data. When no one checks, silence feels safe.
How this fits with other research
Sham et al. (2014) already showed that published PRT studies paint a rosier picture than hidden dissertations. St. Peter adds a second blind spot: we also hide how well we actually ran the sessions.
Rosenberg et al. (2019) urge us to move past box-ticking compliance. The new data agree—fidelity is an ethical duty, not a journal checkbox.
White-Cascarilla et al. (2025) found special educators grow shy about reporting when certainty drops. The same discomfort appears here: researchers skip fidelity when the numbers might look messy.
Why it matters
If the experts dodge fidelity, new BCBAs learn the habit. Start breaking the cycle in your next report. Add a simple fidelity checklist to your method section and graph the results. It takes one extra page and shows families, funders, and future reviewers that your intervention really happened as planned.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a two-column fidelity sheet to your next session note: list each planned step, tick if you did it, and attach the sheet to your data file.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Procedural fidelity is the extent to which independent variables are implemented as designed. Despite 40 years of discussion about the importance of procedural fidelity for behavioral research, reporting of fidelity data remains an uncommon practice in behavior-analytic journals. Researchers have speculated about reasons for underreporting, but the perspectives of scholars about when reporting is warranted or necessary have not yet been explored. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate possible reasons for infrequent reporting of fidelity data in behavior-analytic studies. To address this purpose, we conducted focus groups with scholars in applied behavior analysis. Five themes emerged regarding why procedural fidelity data are not typically reported. We provide a discussion about how these themes are interrelated and offer suggestions and recommendations to assist with the collection and reporting of fidelity data.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2023 · doi:10.1002/jaba.974