Effects on affirming motivations and reading comprehension are trivial at delayed post-tests and do not significantly differ from immediate-posttest effects¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r? · q4 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i0 For affirming motivations, the delayed-posttest effect was trivial (d = 0.19) and did not significantly differ from the immediate effect. → van der Sande 2023 q4 i0 For reading comprehension, the delayed-posttest effect was trivial (d = 0.16) and did not significantly differ from the immediate effect. → van der Sande 2023 (2)

Evidence¶

van der Sande 2023¶

van der Sande, L., van Steensel, R., Fikrat-Wevers, S., & Arends, L. (2023). Effectiveness of Interventions that Foster Reading Motivation: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09719-3

q4 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r?

Delayed-posttest synthesis (k = 5 for affirming motivations, delay 2 to 28 weeks). The immediate effect was small (d = 0.40) and the delayed effect trivial (d = 0.19); the difference was not significant (Q(1) = 2.00, p = .16).

"For affirming motivations, a small effect was found on immediate post-tests (Cohen's d = 0.40; SE = 0.07) and a trivial effect on delayed post-tests (Cohen's d = 0.19; SE = 0.13)."

van der Sande 2023 (2)¶

van der Sande, L., van Steensel, R., Fikrat-Wevers, S., & Arends, L. (2023). Effectiveness of Interventions that Foster Reading Motivation: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09719-3

q4 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r?

Delayed-posttest synthesis (k = 7 for reading comprehension). The immediate effect was small (d = 0.29) and the delayed effect trivial (d = 0.16); the difference was not significant (Q(1) = 1.99, p = 0.16).

"For reading comprehension, a small effect was found on immediate post-tests (Cohen's d = 0.29; SE = 0.06) and a trivial effect on delayed post-tests (Cohen's d = 0.16; SE = 0.07)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interventions that trigger interest have larger effects on affirming motivations and reading comprehension than interventions that do not — related
• Programs focusing solely on motivation are equally effective in stimulating affirming motivations and reading comprehension as programs combining motivational support with skills instruction — related
• Effects on affirming motivations are larger when total intervention duration is longer and when the share of boys in the sample is higher — related
• Interventions delivered by researchers have larger effects on reading comprehension than interventions delivered by others, mostly teachers — related
• Study design and post-test timing show only borderline moderating effects in between-subject analyses, not significant in within-subject analyses — related
• Problem-driven learning shows significantly smaller effects on students' reasons for studying than on other motivation constructs — related