Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 28;48(1):23-39.
doi: 10.1007/s40614-025-00433-9. eCollection 2025 Mar.

From Percentages to Precision: Using Response Rates to Advance Analyses of Procedural Fidelity

Claire C St Peter  1 , Olivia B Harvey  1 , Marisela Aguilar  1
Affiliations

From Percentages to Precision: Using Response Rates to Advance Analyses of Procedural Fidelity

Claire C St Peter et al. Perspect Behav Sci. .

Abstract

In some domains of behavior analysis, summarizing data as a percentage is nearly ubiquitous. This is certainly the case when behavior analysts report data about procedural fidelity (the extent to which procedures are implemented as designed); fidelity data were reported solely as percentage in 423 of 425 recent studies published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. In this article, we critically examine the use of percentage, especially in the context of analyzing procedural-fidelity data. We demonstrate how exclusive reliance on percentage can obscure important nuances in fidelity data and how adding response rate as a metric offers a more precise understanding. To illustrate our points, we include reanalyzed data from a recent evaluation of procedural fidelity in public schools. We conclude with practical recommendations for adopting rate as a metric in the analysis of procedural-fidelity data, thereby building on contributions of notable behavior analysts like Henry Pennypacker, who prioritized continuous, dimensional approaches to measurement.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40614-025-00433-9.

Keywords: Fidelity; Measurement; Percentage; Response rate; Treatment integrity.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aguilar, M., Cooper, A. R., & St. Peter, C. C. (2023). Frequency of implementation errors negatively affects accuracy of fidelity data. Education & Treatment of Children,46, 233–241. 10.1007/s43494-023-00097-7
    1. Barrett, B. H. (2002). The technology of teaching revisited: A reader’s companion to B. F. Skinner’s book. Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.
    1. Barrett, B. H., Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1986). Behavior: Units, dimensions, measurement. In Conceptual foundations of behavior assessment (pp. ). Guilford Press.
    1. Bergmann, S., Long, B. P., & St. Peter, C. C., Brand, D., Strum, M. D., Han, J. B., & Wallace, M. D. (2023a). A detailed examination of reporting procedural fidelity in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,56(4), 708–719. 10.1002/jaba.1015 - PubMed
    1. Bergmann, S., Niland, H., Gavidia, V. L., Strum, M. D., & Harman, M. J. (2023b). Comparing multiple methods to measure procedural fidelity of discrete-trial instruction. Education & Treatment of Children,46, 201–220. 10.1007/s43494-023-00094-w - PMC - PubMed