Pečjak, PhD, Pirc, PhD, Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD Reading Motivation Profiles in Children and Adolescents DOI: https://doi.org/10.55707/ds-po.v39i2.133 Prejeto 12. 1. 2024 / Sprejeto 28. 6. 2024 Received 12. 1. 2024 / Accepted 28. 6. 2024 Znanstveni članek Scientific paper UDK 159.947.5:028.5/.6 UDC 159.947.5:028.5/.6 KLJUČNE BESEDE: bralna motivacija, motivacij- KEYWORDS: reading motivation, motivational di- ske dimenzije, motivacijski profili, otroci, mladostniki mension, motivational profiles, children, adolescents POVZETEK – V preglednem članku prikazujemo vlo- ABSTRACT – In the comprehensive article, we eluci- go bralne motivacije za bralne dosežke učencev. Ker date the role of reading motivation in students’ read- je bralna motivacija konstrukt s številnimi dimenzija- ing achievements. As reading motivation is a construct mi, ki so pri posamezniku organizirane na specifičen with numerous dimensions organized in a specific način, je pri raziskovanju smiselno uporabiti na po- manner within an individual, it is sensible to employ a sameznika usmerjen pristop (person-centred appro- person-centred approach in research, yielding various ach), katerega rezultat so različni motivacijski profili motivational profiles of readers. These profiles repre- bralcev. To so opisi skupin bralcev glede na podobno sent group descriptions based on similar expressions izraženost posameznih motivacijskih dimenzij in po- of individual motivational dimensions and analogous dobne povezave med temi dimenzijami. Poznavanje connections among these dimensions. Familiarity with teh bralnih profilov oz. védenje, kaj otroke in mla- these reading profiles, or understanding what mo- dostnike motivira za branje, omogoča pedagoškim tivates children and adolescents to read, empowers delavcem, da lahko prilagodijo pristope in aktivnosti educational professionals to adapt approaches and tako, da zadovoljijo potrebe posameznih skupin bral- activities to satisfy the needs of specific reader groups, cev in jih tako spodbudijo k branju. To je še posebej thereby encouraging them to engage in reading. This is pomembno v obdobju poznega otroštva oz. zgodnje- particularly crucial during the late childhood or early ga mladostništva, v katerem pride do pomembnega adolescence period when there is a significant decline upada v motivaciji za branje. V članku smo sistema- in motivation for reading. In the article, we systemati- tično prikazali šest novejših raziskav o motivacijskih cally present six recent studies on motivational profiles profilih pri otrocih in mladostnikih, jih analizirali po in children and adolescents, analyse them according to različnih kriterijih in ugotovili med njimi tako dolo- various criteria, and identify certain similarities (all čene podobnosti (vse imajo dobro teoretično podla- have a strong theoretical foundation, most delineate go, večina navaja štiri motivacijske profile bralcev, ki four motivational reader profiles logically linked to so smiselno povezani z bralnimi dosežki, priložnostni reading achievements, and utilize convenience sam- vzorec) kot tudi razlike (splošna nasproti specifični ples) as well as differences (general vs. specific moti- motivaciji, velikost vzorca in kulturni kontekst). vational dimensions, size of sample, cultural context). 1 The Significance of Reading Motivation for Reading Literacy Reading is a complex activity influenced by various cognitive, motivational, and behavioural factors, all of which interact with each other. International research on lit- eracy consistently indicates that reading motivation is a significant determinant of in- dividual reading achievements across all age groups –children, adolescents, and adults. For instance, PIRLS studies among 10-year-old students demonstrate that reading mo- tivation is a key predictor of their reading achievements (Mullis et al., 2023). Simi- Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 85 larly, positive associations between reading motivation and literacy achievements are reported in PISA studies for 15-year-olds in general (OECD, 2019, 2023), including Slovenian students (Pečjak, 2020; Štigl, 2020). The proven positive correlation between reading motivation and literacy proficiency extends to adults as well, as evidenced by the PIAAC study (2016). Therefore, the question of how to motivate individuals for reading or, more broadly, how to cultivate their reading culture, remains a perennial concern. The concept of reading culture encompasses beliefs and values associated with reading, forming the foundation for reading motivation and the development of reading habits manifested in reading frequency and duration, reading for pleasure, the quantity of books read, library visits, and so on. A study on reading culture among adult readers in Slovenia reveals an increase in the proportion of non-readers or a decline in the number of readers and those who visit the library at least once a month from 2014 to 2019 (Rupar et al., 2019). Given that, alongside the family, school is a crucial socialization system in the development of reading culture, this issue is particularly important in the context of the education sys- tem. This is especially relevant during early adolescence (between 10–12 years of age), a period when students experience a decline in motivation for reading both in academic and leisure contexts (Wigfield et al., 2016). Consequently, the focus in the rest of the article is placed on presenting reading dimensions or reading profiles during this critical period, where retaining students as readers becomes particularly important. 2 Dimensions of Reading Motivation Reading motivation is a multidimensional concept that encompasses various in- terrelated constructs, such as beliefs, values, and goals. From an educational-psycho- logical perspective, it most commonly involves the following latent variables: read- ing self-efficacy, reading interest, reading attitudes, the value of reading; some authors combine these concepts into two broader constructs: intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation (e.g., Guthrie et al., 2009; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000). At the behavioural level, reading motivation manifests as the frequency of reading, reading amount, diversity of reading materials, and the frequency of library visits. Therefore, in the following, we briefly introduce these variables. Reading self-efficacy pertains to students’ perceptions of their own reading compe- tence, which are associated with their beliefs regarding ability and skill in reading tasks (Chapman & Tunmer, 1995). Perceived reading self-efficacy is positively correlated with: □ task choice – individuals who perceive greater competence tend to select more challenging reading tasks, engaging in deeper learning strategies (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Guthrie et al., 2009); □ effort and persistence – heightened confidence correlates with increased ef- fort invested in reading comprehension, fostering greater persistence in the task; 86 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) □ achievement – higher competency is directly and reciprocally linked to enhanced reading achievement (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Guthrie & Wig- field, 2000; Pečjak et al., 2006). Reading interest stands out as one of the most frequently referenced motivational factors. Researchers make a distinction between personal or intrinsic interest and situ- ational interest (Schiefele, 2001). Personal interest is characterized as a content-specific motivational variable influenced by emotional and value beliefs related to the content of reading. Emotional beliefs are linked to the enjoyment derived from specific content, differing purposes (academic vs. recreational), and types of materials (digital vs. print). Value beliefs, on the other hand, are associated with one’s assessment of the importance of reading. Reading interest significantly impacts reading comprehension by influencing the cognitive organization of reading material, stimulating the use of deeper comprehen- sion strategies, and is also crucial for memorization and recall (Hidi, 2001; Schiefele, 2001). Guthrie et al. (1998) observed that the quantity of reading predicted reading comprehension in groups of 3rd-, 5th-, and 10th-grade students, even when controlling for various variables correlated with reading comprehension, such as prior knowledge and reading efficacy. Attitudes toward reading are characterized as an individual’s affective stance – wheth- er positive or negative – toward reading (Alexander & Filler, 1976) and are considered a relatively stable disposition that develops gradually over time (Jang & Henretty, 2019). In addition to the emotional dimension, attitudes encompass a value-based aspect (the perceived importance of reading) and a behavioural dimension. Student’s attitudes toward reading influence their reading intentions (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). It is crucial to distin- guish between perceptions of reading as a value and positive attitudes toward reading. For instance, in the United States, 86 % of students aged 6 to 17 acknowledge the importance of reading for their future, yet only 58 % express enjoyment in reading books for pleasure (Scholastic, 2017). Attitudes toward reading are also contingent on the purpose of reading. Students exhibit different attitudes toward reading for leisure or academic purposes and toward reading in print or digital settings (McKenna et al., 2012). These attitudes play a pivotal role in reading achievement (McKenna et al., 2012). Nonetheless, the impact of emo- tions and moods on text comprehension is likely indirect, exerting influence through various cognitive and metacognitive factors. Emotions affect reading comprehension through working memory (Ellis & Moore, 2000). Negative emotions direct working memory toward personal concerns rather than cognitive demands, while happy-induced individuals demonstrate better causal inference abilities from texts than the sad-induced ones (Seibert & Ellis, 1991; Bohn-Gettler & Rapp, 2011). Despite the decline being more pronounced in boys than girls, positive attitudes toward reading diminish significantly over the school years, affecting both recreational and academic reading (Kush & Watkins, 1996; McKenna et al., 2012). In the PIRLS 2021 study, 10-year-old students reported that 42 % liked reading very much, 40 % liked it somewhat, and 18 % did not like reading at all (Mullis et al., 2023). Positive attitudes not only influence the decision to read but also predict students’ reading achievement; Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 87 in PIRLS 2021, students who liked reading very much scored significantly higher than those who liked it somewhat and those who did not like reading. Intrinsic reading motivation is defined as a sustained inclination to read character- ized by profound engagement, curiosity, and a quest for understanding (Wang et al., 2020). It serves as the prototype of fully autonomous or self-determined behaviour, thus representing the most optimal form of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2010). Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, entails the influence of the social environ- ment (such as teachers, parents, or significant others) encouraging students to read for external reasons, such as meeting demands, obtaining rewards, or avoiding punishment. Students may feel pressured by their teachers, parents, or significant others to engage in reading. However, this pressure is not exclusively external and can also arise from internal demands driven by emotions like guilt, shame, or pride. For example, a boy may read a book not only due to external pressures but also because doing so aligns with internal expectations, such as feeling like a “good boy” (De Naeghel et al., 2012). Intrinsic motivation exerts a notably positive influence on both reading compre- hension and word recognition (Schiefele et al., 2012). Nevertheless, numerous studies indicate a general decline in this motivation across the school years (Kirby et al., 2011; McKenna et al., 1995; Wigfield et al., 2015). This decline commences in the first grade and persists throughout secondary school. Additionally, research suggests that not only intrinsic but also extrinsic motivation diminishes over time. This holds true for both general extrinsic motivation for learning (Wigfield et al., 2015) and extrinsic motivation for reading for pleasure (Schiefele et al., 2012). Given that individual readers manifest distinct levels of various latent motivational dimensions, and these dimensions are differentially interconnected, it is meaningful to explore readers’ motivational profiles. The creation of profiles stems from a person- centred perspective, an aspect that has been largely overlooked in the field of reading motivation. The majority of research on reading motivation adopts a variables-centred approach, examining individual motivational dimensions in relation to various reading outcomes. However, these approaches are limited in their capacity to explore intricate interactions among variables within individuals. In contrast, person-centred methods in- volve constructing profiles that delineate configurations of different motivational char- acteristics by grouping individuals with similar levels on several motivational variables into distinct profiles, which in turn enables differentiated work with students (Čagran et al., 2009). 3 Motivational Profiles of Readers: What Are They and Why Study Them? Motivational profiles are descriptions of different groups of readers based on simi- lar expressions of individual motivational dimensions and similar connections among these dimensions. Motivational profiles elucidate which motivational factors prompt readers to initiate reading, persevere in it, and repeatedly return to reading, as well as the interactions between these factors. 88 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) Researching motivational profiles of readers is meaningful for several reasons. Firstly, understanding motivational profiles of readers at a theoretical level enhances comprehension of readers, their needs, desires, and interests. This is crucial in devising effective national (and other) strategies to promote reading and enhance reading culture. Knowledge of what motivates readers allows us to tailor approaches and activities to satisfy their needs and encourage their engagement in reading. Secondly, investigating motivational profiles of readers can assist in identifying distinct reader groups, which is particularly important in education. This allows for targeted action by teachers and/or librarians based on the specific needs and preferences of individual student groups, known as a personalized approach to reading. This is es- pecially crucial for students who are unmotivated or have low motivation for reading, as the approach involves providing focused support to students in areas where they are weaker or have deficits. By understanding their motivational profiles, teachers and/or li- brarians can offer them tailored materials in a way that resonates with them, potentially increasing their interest and enjoyment in reading. For instance, if a group of students is most motivated by a specific genre, educators can incorporate a higher number of books from that genre in learning activities to engage that specific group of readers. 4 Classification of Motivational Profiles Over the past 30–40 years, various classifications of students’ motivational reading profiles have been developed, with a primary focus on understanding how motivational factors relate to reading comprehension and student learning performance. Simultane- ously, some authors note that students at different educational stages exhibit distinct motivational reading profiles (Lin et al., 2021). Studies indicate a positive developmen- tal trend toward intrinsic motivation over time for primary students, while a negative trend is observed for students at the secondary level (Schiefele & Loeweke, 2017). Therefore, in reviewing readers’ profiles, our primary focus is on those identified during early adolescence (from 10/11 to 14 years of age), where a decline in reading motivation commonly occurs. A rational analysis of research on various motivational profiles, as presented in the following (Table 1), included eight classification criteria: □ general vs. specific reading motivation (motivation for reading in general vs. reading motivation based on the purpose and type of reading material); □ grade/years and number of students; □ theoretical foundations and motivational dimensions; □ additional motivational variables; □ cognitive variables/performance; □ number and characteristics of profiles; □ profiles vs. performance; □ study limitations. Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 89 Table 1 Research on Motivational Reading Profiles in Children and Adolescents 1. Guthrie et al. (2009) Type of RM General RM Grade/student age, No. of 5th grade/10–11 years, 245 students students, Country (76 % Caucasian, 24 % African American), USA Theoretical background and main motivational variable: The research focused on multiple goals in motivation, as outlined by Pintrich (2000). The study investigated motivational factors contribu- ting to positive (affirmative) Reading Motivation (RM) and those that diminish motivation in rea- ding (negative or undermining motivation). Affirmative motivation comprised intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy, while negative motivation encompassed avoidance and perceived difficulty. The researchers posited that intrinsic RM and reading avoidance are relatively independent, and created composites of high and low intrinsic RM, as well as high and low reading avoidance. This resulted in four distinct student reading profiles: avid readers – characterized by high intrinsic RM and low avoidance; ambivalent readers – characterized by high intrinsic RM and high avoidance; apathetic readers – characterized by low intrinsic RM and low avoidance; and averse readers – characterized by low intrinsic RM and high avoidance. Additional motivational variables: Reading interest, self-efficacy Cognitive variables, performance: Word recognition, reading fluency, reading comprehension Number and characteristics of profiles: Four profiles: □ 1. Avid readers – comprising 33.5 % of students, this group exhibits a high interest in reading both within and outside the school context. They actively engage in school reading without avoidance and possess intrinsic motivation. Avid readers demonstrate commitment and self- discipline, ensuring they fulfil their school reading responsibilities. □ 2. Ambivalent readers – 8.5 % of students; they have intrinsic RM only for some texts – e.g., some read frequently and intensively in out-of-school contexts (e.g., computer games, instant messages, electronic mail, and certain magazines) while avoiding school reading (textbooks, novels, or informational books). □ 3. Apathetic readers – 23 % of students have low intrinsic RM and low reading avoidance. These students do not have a sustained interest in reading, but also do not claim to avoid school reading. They experience boredom, disinterest and indifference to textbooks and other texts. However, they may be persuaded to engage in reading activity by a strong external stimulus (e.g., if they are threatened with failing a class or being suspended from school, they will avoid this punishment by performing only a minimal amount of the required reading activities and tasks), but this external incentive does not increase their intrinsic RM. □ 4. Averse readers – 35 % of students; they have little intrinsic RM and high motivation to avoid reading. Students resist reading and have little interest in reading. Some of them are functionally literate and read documents such as bus schedules, occasional magazines, and job applications. However, this limited reading does not provide substantial knowledge for good reading comprehension and academic achievement. □ Reading comprehension: avid* > ambivalent, apathetic, averse; Caucasian* > African American Performance of profiles □ Reading fluency: avid* > ambivalent, apathetic, averse; Caucasian* > African American □ Word recognition: avid* > ambivalent, averse; Caucasian* > African American □ Cross-sectional approach; Study limitations □ Small number of students. 90 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) 2. Rosenzweig and Wigfield (2017) Type of RM RM for school informational texts Grade/student age, No. of 7th grade/12–13 years, 1134 students students, Country (78.3 % Caucasian, 19.3 % African American), USA Theoretical background and main motivational variables: The study draws on the Social Co- gnitive Theory by Bandura (1997) and the Expectancy-Value Theory proposed by Eccles and Wigfield (2002). According to these theoretical frameworks, students‘ beliefs regarding their competence to successfully complete academic tasks, known as self-efficacy, play a crucial role in influencing their motivation to engage in the tasks and subsequently impact various achieve- ment outcomes. Additionally, Eccles and Wigfield (2002) assert that students‘ subjective value assigned to different achievement tasks serves as a predictor for their academic outcomes. In this context, “value” is defined by how beneficial a task is perceived by students, by the importance of succeeding in the task to their self-concept and goals, and by their level of interest in the task. Additional motivational variables: Dedication, persistence Cognitive variables, performance: Reading comprehension, language art‘s grades Number and characteristics of profiles: Four profiles: □ 1. High affirming and low undermining motivations (30.8 % of students). This group exhibits elevated self-efficacy and values related to reading informational text, coupled with low scores on perceived difficulty and devaluation of reading informational text. □ 2. Low affirming and high undermining motivations (19.2 % of students). Students in this category demonstrate low self-efficacy and low value for reading, alongside high levels of perceived difficulty and devaluation of reading. □ 3. High self-efficacy, low difficulty and low value, high devaluation of reading (20.5 % of the total sample). This group is characterized by high self-efficacy and low perceived difficulty and value related to reading. However, there is a simultaneous high devaluation of reading. □ 4. Moderate profile (29.5 % of students). This cluster features medium scores across all four motivational constructs. While not displaying extremely high or low levels of motivation, students in this group experience slightly higher perceived difficulty, slightly higher value, and slightly lower self-efficacy compared to students in the other clusters. □ 1st profile: the highest of all outcomes – reading comprehension, reading persistence, and grades. □ 2nd profile: the lowest reading comprehension scores. □ 3rd profile: good reading comprehension and high grades, but low reading Performance engagement. of profiles □ 4th profile: high reading comprehension, good grades, and moderate engagement. □ There were no gender differences between the profiles; □ Differences were found in the ethnicity of the students (Caucasian* > African American). □ A need for expansion beyond focusing solely on informational text within Study limitations the context of science, indicating a requirement to include narrative texts and explore other academic domains as well. Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 91 3. Schiefele and Löweke (2017) Type of RM General RM Grade/student age, No. of 3rd grade/9.2 years, 405 students, Germany (10-month-longitudinal study) students, Country Theoretical background and main motivational variables: According to the theoretical frame- work of reading engagement proposed by Wigfield and Guthrie (1997), intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are regarded as two distinct dimensions of RM. Intrinsic RM refers to involvement (enjoyment of getting lost in a story or experiencing imaginative actions), and curiosity (pleasure derived from learning more about topics of personal interest). Extrinsic RM consists of recogni- tion (read to receive praise from others), and competition (desire to attain higher levels of reading achievement). Additional motivational variables: Reading amount Cognitive variables, performance: Reading comprehension Number and characteristics of profiles: Four profiles: □ 1. High intrinsic: high involvement and curiosity, moderate/low recognition and competition (47.2 % of students in 3rd and 61.7 % in 4th grade). □ 2. High involvement: high involvement, low on the other dimensions (13.1 % of students in 3rd and 14.8 % in 4th grade). □ 3. High quantity: high on all intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions (30.4 % of students in 3rd and 13.6 % in 4th grade). □ 4. Moderate quantity: low to moderate on all dimensions (9.4 % of students in 3rd and 9.9 % in 4th grade). A total of 65 % of the students remained in the same profile from 3rd to 4th grade. □ Reading motivation: high intrinsic and high involvement profile* > High Performance and moderate quantity of profiles □ Reading amount: high intrinsic, high involvement and high quantity profile* > moderate quantity profile Study limitations □ Specific context: participants answered the questionnaire for reading in their free time outside of school. 92 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) 4. Linnenbrink-Garcia et al. (2018) Type of RM RM for schoolwork Grade/student age, No. of 5th grade/10–11 years, 160 students, USA students, Country Theoretical background and main motivational variables: Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT; Ec- cles & Wigfield, 2002) and Achievement Goal Theory (AGT; Ames, 1992) are two prominent theoretical frameworks in motivation research. EVT focuses on two crucial aspects of moti- vation: expectancies for success (i.e., perceived competence), and task value (i.e., perceived worth associated with a particular domain or task). Task value encompasses interest, utility, and cost (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). AGT revolves around two goal orientations: mastery goals (de- veloping competence), and performance goals (demonstrating competence). Both mastery and performance goal orientations can be further categorized into approach and avoidance forms (Elliot, 1999; Pintrich, 2000b). Linnenbrink-Garcia et al. (2018) utilized a trichotomous mo- del of achievement goal orientations, including mastery-approach, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance orientations. Additional motivational variables: – Cognitive variables, performance: Engagement in schoolwork, achievement (in reading and math) Number and characteristics of profiles: Four profiles: □ 1. Moderate-high all: mean ratings for all motivational variables were above the sample average, with scores above 4 on the 5-point Likert scale for all constructs except performance- approach goals, which were just below 4. This profile was the most frequently identified profile (39.9 % of students). □ 2. Intrinsic and confident: characterized by equally high scores on goal orientations for task mastery, task value, and perceived competence. However, in contrast to the moderate-high all profile, performance-approach and performance-avoidance goal orientations were lower for this profile than for all other profiles, i.e., ratings of less than 2.7 on a 5-point scale (18.6 % of the students in the sample). □ 3. Average all: contains ratings around the midpoint (3.0) on a 5-point Likert scale for all motivational variables. Students reported the lowest scores for the mastery goals, perceived competence, and task value, and the second lowest scores for the performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals (34.2 % of the students in the sample). □ 4. Very high all: represents a motivational pattern characterized by exceptionally high levels of motivation across all dimensions, surpassing even the moderate-high all profile. This profile exhibited robust endorsement of all motivation variables, with average ratings approaching the maximum on the 5-point Likert scale. With the exception of mastery-approach goals, the scores on all motivation variables were significantly higher compared to scores reported in all other profiles (only 7.6 % of the students). □ Engagement: moderate-high all, intrinsic and confident, very high all* > average all profile Performance of profiles □ Math achievement: moderate-high all, intrinsic and confident, very high all* > average all profile □ Reading achievement: no significant differences between the profiles Study limitations □ Cross-sectional approach Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 93 5. Lin et al. (2021) Type of RM Reading engagement Grade/student age, No. of 8th grade/13–14 years, 18.338 students, China students, country Theoretical background and main motivational variables: Based on Guthrie and Wigfield’s (1997) theory of reading engagement (as a combination of motivational and cognitive variables), Lin et al. (2021) included behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement in the study (rea- ding amount, reading variety, interest, and reading strategies: self-regulation and comprehension strategies) and examined the relationship between reading engagement profiles and reading com- prehension. They obtained six reading engagement profiles, two of which had consistent patterns and four of which had mixed patterns. Additional motivational variables: – Cognitive variables, performance: Reading comprehension Number and characteristics of profiles: Six profiles: □ 1. Large amount/strong engagement (LA/SE): the best performance in all aspects of reading engagement (in terms of reading amount, variety, interest, reading and comprehension strategies); their scores were significantly higher than the scores for the other profiles (0.5–1.25 SD; 22.8 % of students). □ 2. Small amount/weak engagement (SA/WE): significantly lower scores than other profiles in all aspects (0.75–1.75 SD; 8.5 % of students). The mixed patterns were divided into two categories – two profiles with large reading amount but with significant differences in other four aspects: □ 3. Large amount/moderate engagement (LA/ME): 31.3 % of students in this sample had high scores for amount (0.50 SD above the mean) and moderate scores on other variables (0.00–0.25 SD near the mean). □ 4. Large amount/weak engagement (LA/WE): 8.0 % of students had similar amount scores as LA/ME, but low scores on other aspects (about 0.25 SD below the mean for diversity, 0.50– 1.25 below the mean for interest, self-regulation and comprehension strategies). The next two profiles were: □ 5. Small amount/moderate engagement (SA/ME): low scores on reading amount (about 1 SD below the mean) and moderate scores on other aspects (about 0.25–0.50 SD below the mean; 21.4 % of students). □ 6. Small amount/strong engagement (SA/SE): 8.0 % of students had low scores on reading amount (1.00 SD below the mean), but high scores on interest, regulation, and comprehension strategies (approximately 0.25–1.00 SD above the mean). □ Reading comprehension: the best are students with LA/SE profile and Performance the worst are those with SA/WE profile. For the other profiles, it seems of profiles that high reading amount does not automatically lead to better reading comprehension, as students with the LA/ME and SA/ME profiles had similar reading comprehension. Study limitations □ Specific cultural context (Chinese) 94 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) 6. Jang & Henretty (2019) Type of RM Attitudes in RM Grade/student age, No. of 6th–8th grade students/11–14 years, 5,000 students, USA students, country Theoretical background and main motivational variables: Authors emphasize that the catego- rization of students into dichotomous variables (readers/non-readers, engaged/unengaged, en- thusiastic/reluctant readers) must be understood if their reading attitudes are to be understood. Therefore, a typology of readers was created according to adolescents‘ attitudes based on two criteria: □ purpose/context of reading: academic and leisure or pleasure, and □ reading material: digital or print. Additional motivational variables: – Cognitive variables, performance: – Number and characteristics of profiles: Four attitudinal profiles: □ 1. Recreational digital-only readers: 4 % of students; they scored high in digital reading pleasure (video games, digital activities); in-print and academic reading scores were low. They were often described as non-readers, had very little interest in print. □ 2. Engaged digital readers: 24 % of students. They had a preference for reading texts in digital form. Their attitudes toward reading in general were high, but higher for digital material in both contexts. □ 3. Engaged print readers: 31.9 % of students. They scored high on reading print material; they read digital material only when necessary for school/academic purposes. □ 4. Digital-preferred readers: 39.4 %. Their attitude towards digital reading was slightly higher than towards reading printed material. They were not inclined to read independently. A suggestion for this student profile is to read an article, book, biography, etc. about a particular interest or person to encourage independent reading. Performance of profiles – Study limitations – 5 Similarities and Differences among Motivational Profiles Among the presented studies, numerous parallels or similarities can be identified. Firstly, all studies exhibit a solid theoretical foundation, relying on fundamental models and theories that underpin the understanding and explanation of the concept of read- ing motivation. These include the Theoretical Framework of Multiple Goals (Pintrich, 2000), Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1997), Theory of Reading Engagement (Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997), Expectancy-Value Theory (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002), and Achievement Goal Theory (Ames, 1992). Secondly, the selected studies are homogeneous in terms of the age range of the in- cluded students, covering the developmental period from late childhood to early adoles- Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 95 cence. This period is characterized by a decline in reading motivation, making the un- derstanding of factors that help sustain it particularly important. Three studies include students in the late childhood period, aged 9 (study 3) and between 10–11 years (studies 1 and 4), while the other three focus on the early adolescence period, spanning from 11 to 14 years of age (studies 2, 5, and 6). Consequently, this implies that the obtained profiles are likely to be ecologically valid indicators of the expression of individual dimensions of reading motivation in this developmental period. Thirdly, all studies (except for study 5) report four motivational profiles of readers, indicating that this number of profiles adequately and validly distinguishes students from a motivational perspective. In study 5, where the authors described six motiva- tional profiles of students, the most likely reason for that is that they examined profiles of reading engagement as a combination of motivational and cognitive variables (self- regulation and comprehension strategies). Fourthly, the authors assessed the criterion validity of individual motivational pro- files by linking them to reading comprehension/achievement (studies 1–4), thereby demonstrating and proving that reading motivation has a strong impact on students’ academic achievements. This finding holds significant practical implications, as the ma- jority of written assessments in school is linked to the comprehension of instructional materials. At the same time, important differences can be observed among individual stud- ies. The first notable difference lies in the aspect of reading motivation that the authors attempted to explore. A more detailed analysis of the presented motivational profiles reveals that in three studies, the authors investigated motivation for reading in general, encompassing both reading motivation for the academic context and reading for pleas- ure (studies 1, 3, and 5). In three cases, the focus was contextually specific – related to schoolwork (study 4), even more specifically to reading school informational texts (study 2), and to reading digital or print texts (study 6). The studies also differed in the size of the samples of students used by the authors to form motivational profiles of readers. The samples ranged from very small, with 160 to 405 students (studies 1, 3, and 4), to a slightly larger sample (1134 students in study 2), and two large samples (5000 – 18,338 students in studies 5 and 6). All samples were convenience samples and were not representative of individual countries, thus not allowing for generalized conclusions regarding reading profiles either on a country- specific level or concerning the racial representation of students. There were also differ- ences in the cultural environments from which the students were drawn – four studies were conducted in the USA, one in Germany, and one in China. Furthermore, differences in reading profiles are evident in various motivational variables at different levels of specificity, for example, a broad concept like affirmative/ undermining motivation in studies 1 and 2 compared to a narrower concept of reading attitudes in study 6. Some studies include only motivational concepts, while others in- vestigate reading engagement, which connects motivational aspects with the cognitive aspects of reading (studies 2 and 5). 96 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) 6 Conclusion One of the significant goals of reading instruction in school is to foster the growth of lifelong reading. As highlighted by Jang and Henretty (2019, p. 33), “literacy policies and standards that are predominantly cognitively based and achievement-driven may generate reluctant and resistant readers and writers". Through various empirical studies, we aimed to demonstrate that, in addition to cognitive factors, motivation for reading plays a crucial role in leisure reading (Smole et al., 2016) and learning achievements. This is particularly true during late childhood and early adolescence when there is a significant decline in motivation. However, as reading motivation is a complex pro- cess with numerous motivational elements, it is essential to understand what drives an individual reader to engage in reading, persist in it, and repeatedly return to it – the so- called person-centred approach, which has often been neglected in previous research. Therefore, we found it important to gather studies that, using the person-centred approach, have identified motivational profiles of readers. These profiles help us better understand the motivational characteristics of each reader, allowing education profes- sionals (teachers and librarians) to tailor the reading curriculum in various aspects (Re- pinc & Stričević, 2013). For instance, based on students’ levels of self-efficacy, they can offer suitable reading materials, considering the appropriate level of difficulty (neither too easy nor too challenging) (Žbogar, 2021). For recreational digital readers (as in study 6), educators can subscribe to print trade magazines aligned with their interests, repurpose recreational reading for academic purposes when class topics overlap with students’ interests, and permit students to read relevant digital texts during free reading. Furthermore, educators can create opportunities for individual students to connect with others who share similar reading interests. Lastly, it is crucial to recognize even the smallest progress in an individual’s achievement, offering acknowledgment (praise, rewards) to enhance their sense of pride and further motivation. Dr. Sonja Pečjak, dr. Tina Pirc, dr. Ana Vogrinčič Čepič Motivacijski profili bralcev pri otrocih in mladostnikih Branje je kompleksna aktivnost, ki jo določajo številni kognitivni, čustveno-mo- tivacijski, vedenjski in okoljski dejavniki, ki pri bralcu delujejo interaktivno. Pri tem mednarodne raziskave bralne pismenosti kažejo, da je motiviranost za branje eden od pomembnih dejavnikov bralnih dosežkov posameznika v vseh starostnih obdobjih ‒ pri otrocih (PIRLS, Mullis idr., 2023), mladostnikih (OECD, 2019, 2023) in odraslih (PI- AAC, 2016). Bralna motivacija je večdimenzionalen koncept, ki vključuje med seboj povezane konstrukte, kot so prepričanja, vrednote in cilji. S psihološkega vidika najpogosteje vključuje naslednje latentne spremenljivke: bralno samoučinkovitost, bralni interes, stališča do branja, vrednotenje branja; ali pa avtorji združujejo te koncepte v dva šir- ša konstrukta: notranja ‒ zunanja motivacija (Guthrie idr., 2009; Guthrie in Wigfield, Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 97 2000). Na vedenjski ravni se bralna motivacija pri posamezniku kaže skozi pogostost in obseg branja, raznovrstnost bralnega gradiva in pogostost obiskovanja knjižnic. Predhodne študije kažejo, da je višja bralna samoučinkovitost povezana z izbiro bolj zahtevnega bralnega gradiva, z več truda in vztrajnosti pri branju ter višjimi dosež- ki (Eccles in Wigfield, 2002; Guthrie in Wigfield, 2000; Pečjak idr., 2006). Večji bralni interes ima pomemben vpliv na bralno razumevanje, saj spodbuja uporabo strategij za globlje razumevanje prebranega in tudi za zapomnitev in ponoven priklic prebranega (Hidi, 2001; Shiefele, 2001). Stališče do branja ima dva vidika: čustven (branje mi je všeč) in vrednoten (branje je pomembno). Pri tem oba vidika, še zlasti pa čustveni, vplivata na motivacijo bralca in tudi na bralni dosežek. Emocije naj bi na bralno razu- mevanje vplivale posredno, preko različnih kognitivnih in metakognitivnih dejavnikov, npr. delovnega spomina (Ellis in Moore, 2000). Pri negativnih emocijah naj bi se bralec bolj kot s kognitivnimi zahtevami bralne naloge ukvarjal z lastnimi skrbmi v zvezi z na- logo. Notranja/intrinzična bralna motivacija je opredeljena kot trajen impulz za branje, za katerega so značilni intenzivna angažiranost, radovednost ter trud za razumevanje (Wang idr., 2020), in predstavlja optimalno obliko motivacije (Deci in Ryan, 2010). Pri zunanji/ekstrinzični motivaciji pa drugi posamezniki, npr. učitelji, starši, spodbujajo učence k branju in ti berejo, da bi zadovoljili zunanje zahteve, prejeli nagrado ali se izognili kazni. Pri tem je notranja motivacija pomembno povezana z boljšim bralnim razumevanjem in zapomnitvijo (Schiefele idr., 2012), študije pa kažejo, da pride pri starejših osnovnošolcih do pomembnega upada motivacije za šolsko delo nasploh, pa tudi za branje (Kirby idr., 2011; Wigfield idr., 2015). Ker imajo posamezni bralci različno izražene posamezne motivacijske dimenzije in ker so te med seboj različno povezane, je smiselno ugotavljati motivacijske profile bralcev. Izdelava profilov izhaja iz “na posameznika usmerjene perspektive”, ki je bila pogosto prezrta pri raziskovanju bralne motivacije. Motivacijski profili so opisi različ- nih skupin bralcev glede na podobno izraženost posameznih motivacijskih dimenzij in podobne povezave med temi dimenzijami. Motivacijski profili pojasnjujejo, kateri moti- vacijski dejavniki so tisti, zaradi katerih bralci pričnejo z branjem, pri njem vztrajajo in se k njemu vedno znova vračajo, in v kakšni interakciji so ti dejavniki med seboj. Raziskovanje motivacijskih profilov bralcev je smiselno iz več razlogov. Prvič, po- znavanje profilov omogoča boljše razumevanje bralcev, njihovih potreb, želja in in- teresov. To je ključno pri oblikovanju učinkovitih nacionalnih (in drugih) strategij za promocijo branja in izboljšanje bralne kulture. Če vemo, kaj bralce motivira, lahko prilagodimo pristope, aktivnosti in bralna gradiva tako, da zadovoljimo njihove potrebe in jih spodbudimo k branju. Drugič, raziskovanje motivacijskih profilov bralcev nam lahko pomaga identifici- rati različne skupine bralcev, kar je še posebej pomembno v izobraževanju. To namreč omogoča ciljno usmerjeno delovanje učiteljev in/ali knjižničarjev glede na specifične potrebe in preference posameznih skupin učencev, t. i. personaliziran pristop k branju. To je še posebej pomembno pri učencih, ki so nemotivirani oz. nizko motivirani za bra- nje, saj pristop predvideva usmerjeno pomoč učencem na področjih, kjer so šibkejši ali imajo primanjkljaje. S poznavanjem njihovih motivacijskih profilov jim lahko učitelji in/ ali knjižničarji ponudijo njim prilagojeno gradivo in to na način, ki je njim blizu, kar lahko poveča njihovo zanimanje za branje in užitek pri branju. 98 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) V zadnjih 40-ih letih so se pojavile različne klasifikacije motivacijskih bralnih pro- filov učencev. Večina se osredotoča predvsem na to, kako so ti profili povezani z bralnim razumevanjem in učno uspešnostjo učencev. Ob tem nekateri avtorji poudarjajo, da imajo učenci na različnih stopnjah izobraževanja različne motivacijske bralne profile (Lin idr., 2021). Ker avtorji raziskav poročajo o upadu motivacije za branje pri učencih v višjih razredih osnovne šole (npr. Schiefele in Loeweke, 2017), smo se pri pregledu motivacijskih profilov osredotočili predvsem na tiste raziskave, v okviru katerih so av- torji te profile identificirali v obdobju poznega otroštva in zgodnji adolescenci, ko se to upadanje prične. V racionalno analizo raziskav o različnih motivacijskih profilih smo vključili osem klasifikacijskih kriterijev: i) ali so raziskovalci preučevali splošno oz. specifično bralno motivacijo (tj. motivacijo za branje nasploh ali bralno motivacijo glede na namen bra- nja in vrsto bralnega gradiva); ii) razred/starost učencev in velikost vzorca; iii) iz kate- rih teoretičnih izhodišč so izhajali in katere motivacijske dimenzije so preučevali; iv) ali so vključili še kakšne dodatne motivacijske spremenljivke; v) ali so vključili kognitivne spremenljivke/dosežke; vi) število in značilnosti motivacijskih profilov; vii) povezanost profilov z dosežki ter viii) omejitve raziskave. Med analiziranimi raziskavami obstajajo nekatere vzporednice oz. podobnosti. Pr- vič, pri vseh zasledimo, da imajo dobro utemeljeno teoretično izhodišče, saj izhajajo iz temeljnih in sodobnih modelov in teorij, s katerimi razlagajo koncept bralne motivaci- je: od teoretičnega okvirja multiplih ciljev (Pintrich, 2000), preko socialno-kognitivne teorije (Bandura, 1997), teorije bralne zavzetosti (Wigfield in Gutrie, 1997), teorije pričakovanje uspeha – vrednost cilja (Eccles in Wigfield, 2002) do teorije storilnostne motivacije (Ames, 1992). Drugič, učenci, vključeni v vzorce izbranih raziskav, so po starosti homogeni – uvr- ščamo jih v razvojno obdobje od poznega otroštva do srednjega mladostništva. To je tisto obdobje, v katerem prihaja do upada bralne motivacije na splošno in je zato razu- mevanje dejavnikov, ki jo pomagajo ohranjati, še posebej pomembno. Pri tem tri študije vključujejo učence v obdobju poznega otroštva, stare 9 let (raziskava 3) in med 10 ter 11 let (raziskavi 1 in 4); tri pa v obdobju zgodnjega mladostništva med 11. in 14. letom starosti (raziskave 2, 5 in 6). Posledično to pomeni, da so dobljeni profili zelo verjetno dokaj ekološko veljaven pokazatelj izraženosti posameznih dimenzij bralne motivacije v tem razvojnem obdobju. Tretjič, vse raziskave (razen raziskave 5) navajajo štiri motivacijske profile bral- cev, kar kaže na to, da je to število profilov tisto, ki verjetno dovolj ustrezno (veljavno) diferencira učence z motivacijskega vidika. Pri raziskavi 5, kjer so avtorji opisali 6 motivacijskih profilov učencev, je najverjetnejši razlog za večje število ta, da so preuče- vali profile bralne zavzetosti, ki kot konstrukt predstavlja kombinacijo motivacijskih in kognitivnih spremenljivk (npr. metakognitivnih in kognitivnih strategij). Četrtič, kriterijsko veljavnost posameznih motivacijskih profilov so avtorji prever- jali tako, da so jih povezali z bralnim razumevanjem/dosežkom (raziskave 1‒4), s čimer so pokazali in dokazali, da ima bralna motivacija močan vpliv na akademske dosežke učencev. Ta ugotovitev ima pomembne praktične implikacije, saj je večina pisnih pre- verjanj v šoli povezana z razumevanjem učnega gradiva. Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 99 Hkrati pa med posameznimi raziskavami lahko ugotovimo tudi nekatere pomembne razlike. Prva se nanaša na vidik bralne motivacije, ki so ga skušali avtorji raziskati. Pri tem podrobnejša analiza prikazanih motivacijskih profilov pokaže, da so avtorji v treh študijah preučevali motivacijo za branje na splošno, ki vključuje tako motivacijo za branje v šolskem kontekstu kot tudi branje za užitek v prostem času (raziskave 1, 3 in 5); v treh primerih pa kontekstualno specifično motivacijo, in sicer v povezavi z delom za šolo (raziskava 4), še bolj specifično motivacijo za branje šolskih razlagalnih oz. učbeniških besedil (raziskava 2) in za branje digitalnih nasproti tiskanim besedilom (raziskava 6). Raziskave so se razlikovale tudi v velikosti vzorcev učencev, na osnovi katerih so avtorji oblikovali motivacijske profile bralcev: od zelo majhnih vzorcev (med 160 in 405 učencev v raziskavah 1, 3 in 4); preko nekoliko večjega vzorca (1134 učencev v raziskavi 2) do dveh velikih vzorcev (5000–18.338 učencev v raziskavah 5 in 6). Pri tem pa je šlo pri vseh raziskavah za priložnostne vzorce, ki niso bili reprezentativni za posamezne države, zaradi česar je potrebna previdnost pri direktnem posploševanju oz. uporabi ugotovljenih bralnih profilov pri učencih nasploh, še posebej pri učencih iz drugih kulturnih okolij. Razlike v bralnih profilih se kažejo tudi v različnih motivacijskih spremenljivkah, ki so na različni stopnji specifičnosti, npr. od splošnega koncepta pozitivne in negativne motivacije v raziskavah 1 in 2 do ožjega koncepta stališč do branja v raziskavi 6. Ne- katere raziskave vključujejo samo motivacijske koncepte, medtem ko druge raziskujejo koncept bralne zavzetosti, ki povezuje motivacijske s kognitivnimi vidiki branja (razi- skavi 2 in 5). Zaključimo lahko, da motivacijski profili pomagajo bolje razumeti motivacijske značilnosti vsakega bralca, kar omogoča učiteljem in knjižničarjem, da jim lahko pri- lagajajo kurikul v različnih vidikih, upoštevajoč njihovo aktualno bralno samoučinko- vitost, interes in stališča do branja, ter hkrati pri njih razvijajo šibkejše vidike njihove bralne motivacije. REFERENCES 1. Alexander, J. E., & Filler, R. C. (1976). Attitudes and reading. International Reading Association. 2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Erlbaum. 3. Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327–348). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 4. Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Rapp, D. N. (2011). Depending on my mood: Mood-driven influen- ces on text comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 562–577. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0023458 5. Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1995). Development of young children’s reading self-concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their relationship with reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.1.154 6. Čagran, B., Ivanuš Grmek, M., & Štemberger, T. (2009). Zunanja učna diferenciacija in čustve- no-osebnostni vidiki učenja. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 24(2), 3–19. 7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan R. M. (2010). Self-Determination. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 100 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) 8. De Naeghel, J., Van Keer, H., Vansteenkiste, M., & Rosseel, Y. (2012). The relation between elementary students’ recreational and academic reading motivation, reading frequency, enga- gement, and comprehension: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1006–1021. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027800 9. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153 10. Ellis, H. C., & Moore, B. A. (2000). Mode and memory. In T. Daglesish, & M. Power (Eds.), The handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 34–46). John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. 11. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Reading engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Erlbaum. 12. Guthrie, J. T., Coddington, C. S., & Wigfiled, A. (2009). Profiles of reading motivation among African American and Caucasian students. Journal of Literacy research, 41, 317–353. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10862960903129196 13. Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical consideration. Educati- onal Psychology Review, 13(3), 191−209. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016667621114 14. Jang, B. G., & Henretty, D. (2019). Understanding multiple profiles of reading attitudes among adolescents. Middle School Journal, 50(3), 26–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2019.1603803 15. Kirby, J. R., Ball, A., Geier, B. K., Parrila, R., & Wade-Woolley, L. (2011). The development of reading interest and its relation to reading ability. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(3), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01439.x 16. Kush, J. C., & Watkins. M. W. (1996). Long-term stability of children’s attitudes toward rea- ding. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(5), 315–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671 .1996.9941333 17. Lin, D., Wong, K. K., & McBride-Chang, C. (2012). Reading motivation and reading compre- hension in Chinese and English among bilingual students. Reading and Writing, 25, 717–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9297-8 18. Lin, J., Li, Q., Sun, H., Huang, Z., & Zheng, G. (2021). Chinese secondary school students’ reading engagement profiles: associations with reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 34, 2257–2287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10139-4 19. Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Wormington, S. V., Snyder, K. E., Riggsbee, J., Perez, T., Ben-Eliyahu, A., & Hill, N. E. (2018). Multiple pathways to success: An examination of integrative motivati- onal profiles among upper elementary and college students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(7), 1026–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000245 20. McKenna, M. C., Conradi, K., Lawrence, C., Jang, B. G., & Meyer, J. P. (2012). Reading atti- tudes of middle school students: Results of a U. S. survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(3), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.021 21. McKenna, M. C., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children’s attitude toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 934−956. https://doi.org/10.2307/748205 22. Mullis, I. V. S., von Davier, M., Foy, P., Fishbein, B., Reynolds, K., & Wry, E. (2023). PIRLS 2021: International Results in Reading. Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. https://doi.org/10.6017/lse.tpisc.tr2103.kb5342 23. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en 24. OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What students know and can do, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en 25. Pečjak, S. (2020). Bralna pismenost v raziskavi PISA 2018 - psihološki vpogled in inter- pretacije dosežkov slovenskih učencev. Šolsko polje 31(1–2), 35–56. http://www.dlib. si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:DOC-QIIOG36C 26. Pečjak, S., Bucik, N., Gradišar, A., & Peklaj, C. (2006). Bralna motivacija: razvijanje in merje- nje. Zavod RS za šolstvo. 27. PIAAC (2016). Program za mednarodno ocenjevanje kompetenc odraslih. http://piaac.acs.si/ raziskava/slovenija/ Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Tina Pirc, PhD, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD: Reading Motivation... 101 28. Pintrich, P. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544–555. 29. Repinc, U., & Stričević, I. (2013). Branje je pomembno. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška ob- zorja, 28(1), 45–56. 30. Rosenzweig, E. Q., & Wigfield, A. (2017). What if reading is easy but unimportant? How stu- dents’ patterns of affirming and undermining motivation for reading information texts predict different reading outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 48, 133–148. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.09.002 31. Rupar, P., Blatnik, A., Kovač, M., & Rugelj, S. (2019). Knjiga in bralci VI: bralna kultura in nakupovanje knjig v Sloveniji v letu 2019. UMco. 32. Schiefele, U. (2001). The role of interest in motivation and learning. In J. M. Collis, & S. Messick (Eds.), Inteligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement (pp. 163–193). Erlbaum. 33. Schiefele, U., & Löweke, S. (2018). The nature, development, and effects of elementary stu- dents’ reading motivation profiles. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(4), 405–421. https://doi. org/10.1002/rrq.201 34. Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Möller, J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motiva- tion and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading research quarterly, 47(4), 427–463. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.030 35. Scholastic. (2017). Kids and family reading report: A biennial national survey of parents’ and children’s reading attitudes and behaviors. (6th ed.). https://www.scholastic.com/readingreport/ home.html 36. Seibert, P. S., & Ellis, H. C. (1991). Irrelevant thoughts, emotional mood states, and cognitive task performance. Memory & Cognition, 19, 507–513. 37. Smole, U., Čagran, B., & Hus, V. (2016). Preživljanje prostega časa četrtošolcev. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 31(2), 52–68. 38. Štigl, S. (Ed.). (2020). Izhodišča merjenja bralne pismenosti v raziskavi PISA 2018. Pedagoški insti- tut. https://www.pei.si/wp content/uploads/2020/06/PISA_2018_Izhodisca_bralne_pismenosti.pdf. 39. Wang, X., Jia, L., & Jin, Y. (2020). Reading amount and reading strategy as mediators of the ef- fects of intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation on reading achievement. Frontiers in psycho- logy, 11, 586346. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586346 40. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amo- unt and breadth or their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 420–432. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420 41. Wigfield, A., Gladstone, J. R., & Turci, L. (2016). Beyond cognition: Reading motivation and reading comprehension. Child Development Perspectives, 10(3), 190–195. https://doi. org/10.1111/cdep.12184 42. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Fredricks, J. A., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R. W., & Schiefele, U. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. In M. E. Lamb, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Socioemotional processes (pp. 657–700). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy316 43. Žbogar, A. (2021). (Meta)kognitivno-kritično šolsko branje književnosti. Didactica Sloveni- ca – Pedagoška obzorja, 36(3–4), 69–80. https://www.dspo.si/index.php/dspo/article/view/43 102 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (2, 2024) Članek je nastal v okviru projekta Erasmus + “Vzpostavitev motivacije za branje v digitalni dobi: uvajanje novih pristopov pedagogike branja za užitek v osnovnih šolah (MORE)” (2022-1-SI01- KA220-SCH – 000087839) v sodelovanju med Univerzo v Ljubljani, Filozofsko fakulteto (Slovenija), Mestno knjižnico Ljubljana (Slovenija), Univerzo v Turkuju (Finska), Mestno knjižnico Turku (Finska) in Društvom italijanskih pisateljev (Italija), ki ga finančno podpira Evropska unija. The article was created within the project Erasmus + “Setting up a Reading Motivator in the Digital Age: introducing New Approaches of Reading for Pleasure Pedagogy in Primary Schools (MORE)” (2022-1-SI01-KA220-SCH – 000087839) in collaboration between the University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts (Slovenia), the City Library of Ljubljana (Slovenia), the University of Turku (Finland), the City Library in Turku (Finland) and the Association of Italian Writers (Italy) and is financially supported by the European Union. Besedilo / Text © 2024 Avtor(ji) / The Author(s) To delo je objavljeno pod licenco CC BY Priznanje avtorstva 4.0 Mednarodna. This work is published under a licence CC BY Attribution 4.0 International. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Sonja Pečjak, PhD, Full professor of educational psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. E–mail: sonja.pecjak@ff.uni-lj.si Tina Pirc, PhD, Assistant professor of educational psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. E–mail: tina.pirc@ff.uni-lj.si Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, PhD, Department of sociology and department of library and information science and book studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. E–mail: ana.vogrinciccepic@ff.uni-lj.si