Can Reading Self-Efficacy Be Modified? A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Interventions on Reading Self-Efficacy

Abstract

Studies of interventions’ impact on reading self-efficacy have been conducted since the 1980s. The purpose of this project was to conduct a systematic review of these studies because the primary studies often yielded divergent results. Included studies entailed an intervention, addressed reading specifically, and reported explicit pre- and postintervention measures of reading self-efficacy. Subjects were students in elementary grades through college. The results of a systematic search and screening procedure found 30 studies in which 2,300 subjects received treatments of various kinds while 1,957 were in control or comparison groups. A meta-analysis of three subsets of study designs revealed that each subset generated a significant effect size: treatment–control (g = 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.10, 0.39]); treatment–comparison (g = 0.44, 95% CI [0.04, 0.84]); pretest–posttest (g = 0.36, 95% CI [0.16, 0.57]). Significant heterogeneity was found and modeled using moderator analyses conducted on several variables. The results indicated that significant moderators of effect sizes included grade level, number of sources shaping reading self-efficacy, a reading self-efficacy measurement index, and journal publication. In studies that measured the impact of the intervention on reading comprehension, its relationship with reading self-efficacy was analyzed revealing a strong correlation between the two constructs. Discussion includes an exploration of the importance of these findings to future policy, practice, and research on the design of reading self-efficacy measurement instruments and on interventions that utilize major sources of experiences shaping reading self-efficacy.