A detailed examination of reporting procedural fidelity in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Abstract

AbstractFew reviews on procedural fidelity—the degree to which procedures are implemented as designed—provide details to gauge the quality of fidelity reporting in behavior‐analytic research. This review focused on experiments in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (2006–2021) with “integrity” or “fidelity” in the abstract or body. When fidelity data were collected, the coders characterized measurement details (e.g., description of calculation, report of single or multiple values, frequency of fidelity checks, checklist use). The researchers found increasing trends in describing the calculation(s), reporting multiple values, and stating the frequency of measurement. Few studies described using a checklist. Most studies reported fidelity as a percentage, with high obtained values (M = 97%). When not collecting fidelity data was stated as a limitation, authors were unlikely to provide a rationale for the omission. We discuss recommendations for reporting procedural fidelity to increase the quality of and transparency in behavior‐analytic research.