CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 270Reading and Literacy DevelopmentEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessLiteracy and Educational Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relations Between Motivation and Reading Achievement for K–12 Students

Open access
Toste, Jessica R., Didion, Lisa, Peng, Peng, Filderman, Marissa J., McClelland, Amanda M.·2020·Review of Educational Research
DOI 10.3102/0034654320919352
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analytic review was to investigate the relation between motivation and reading achievement among students in kindergarten through 12th grade. A comprehensive search of peer-reviewed published research resulted in 132 articles with 185 independent samples and 1,154 reported effect sizes (Pearson’s r). Results of our random-effects metaregression model indicate a significant, moderate relation between motivation and reading, r = .22, p < .001. Moderation analyses revealed that the motivation construct being measured influenced the relation between motivation and reading. There were no other significant moderating or interaction effects related to reading domain, sample type, or grade level. Evidence to support the bidirectional nature of the relation between motivation and reading was provided through longitudinal analyses, with findings suggesting that earlier reading is a stronger predictor of later motivation than motivation is of reading. Taken together, the findings from this meta-analysis provide a better understanding of how motivational processes relate to reading performance, which has important implications for developing effective instructional practices and fostering students’ active engagement in reading. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for reading development are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/0034654320919352

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 88 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Kaniuka T. S., 2010, Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37, 184
  2. Lipsey M. W., 2001, Applied social research methods series: Vol. 49. Practical meta-analysis
  3. Matthew K. I., 1996, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5, 379
  4. Nicholls J. G., 1984, Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 3. The development of achievement motivation, 185
  5. 10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Weiner B., 2012, Human motivation
  7. What Works Clearinghouse, 2014, WWC procedures and standards handbook

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–270 of 270

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Toste, J. R., Didion, L., Peng, P., Filderman, M. J., & McClelland, A. M.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
ORCID
Venue
Review of Educational Research
Publisher
American Educational Research Association (AERA)
Published
2020-05-13
Volume
90
Issue
3
Pages
420-456
ISSN
  • 0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1046
DOI
10.3102/0034654320919352
OpenAlex
W3024412491
Cited by
269
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 7
FWCI
49.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Review of Educational Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › Literacy and Educational Practices
Keywords
reading motivation, reading achievement, K-12 students, bidirectional relationship, reading development, motivational processes, reading engagement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review