Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Learning and Individual Differences

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate / l ind i f

The influence of personality characteristics on children's intrinsic reading motivation

Emma Medford, Sarah P. McGeown ⁎Psychology Department, University of Hull, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK

⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1482 465157.E-mail address: S.P.McGeown@hull.ac.uk (S.P. McGe

1041-6080/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Alldoi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.06.002

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 22 November 2011Received in revised form 20 April 2012Accepted 2 June 2012

Keywords:ReadingMotivationPersonalitySelf-conceptAbility

Research suggests that children's motivation to read is influenced by their level of reading skill and readingself-concept. However, it is possible that characteristics unrelated to reading, such as underlying personalitycharacteristics, may also influence children's motivation to read. The current study examined the extent towhich children's intrinsic reading motivation was predicted by their reading skill, reading self-concept, andpersonality characteristics. Two hundred and ninety five children (aged 10–11) completed questionnairesmeasuring reading motivation, reading self-concept, personality characteristics, and also completed a readingassessment. It was found that personality explained significant variance in intrinsic reading motivation afteraccounting for reading skill and reading self-concept. Furthermore, personality factors accounted for similaramounts of variance in intrinsic reading motivation as reading self-concept and skill. The implications for im-proving children's motivation to read are discussed, in addition to the importance of tailoring educational andmotivational strategies to individuals.

© 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Given the importance of reading skill for educational success, re-searchers have focused on identifying ways to improve children's read-ing by examining the abilities that support this learnt skill. A number ofstudies have illustrated that children's reading skill is associated withtheir motivation to read (Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Morgan & Fuchs,2007; Wang & Guthrie, 2004). Furthermore, studies have found thatchildren's motivation to read can explain variance in their reading at-tainment after accounting for cognitive abilities (Anmarkrud & Braten,2009; Taboada, Tonks, Wigfield, & Guthrie, 2009) and previous readingskill (Logan, Medford, & Hughes, 2011), suggesting that both cognitiveand motivational factors are important. As a result, there is a significantemphasis in creating and implementing reading programmes and inter-ventions that are engaging and enjoyable to boost children's enjoymentof reading andmotivation to read, in addition to developing their read-ing skills. Indeed, research suggests that interventions focusing on im-proving both reading skill and reading motivation produce greaterimprovements in children's reading attainment (Guthrie, Mckae, &Klauda, 2007). However, in order to foster the greatest gains in readingmotivation, it is important to understand the factors that may influenceit. Whilst the relationship between children's reading motivation andreading skill/self-concept has been established (e.g., Baker & Wigfield,1999; Wang & Guthrie, 2004), it is possible that other factors, such aspersonality characteristics, also influence children's motivation to read.

own).

rights reserved.

1.1. Intrinsic reading motivation

There aremany different conceptualisations of motivation, howeverthe theorywhich ismost commonly used in reading research andwhichwill be focused on in the current study, is that of intrinsic and extrinsicmotivation (e.g. Ryan & Deci, 2000; Wang & Guthrie, 2004; Wigfield &Guthrie, 1997). According to this theory, a child is intrinsically motivat-ed to read because they find reading inherently interesting or enjoyableand extrinsically motivated to read when they engage in a reading ac-tivity because of separable outcomes, such as gaining a reward oravoiding a punishment. Research suggests that being intrinsically moti-vated to read is advantageous, as intrinsic reading motivation is associ-ated with higher levels of reading attainment (e.g., Wang & Guthrie,2004), whereas extrinsic motivation is generally negatively associatedwith reading skill (Becker, McElvany, & Kortenbruck, 2010; Mucherah& Yoder, 2008; Wang & Guthrie, 2004) or unrelated to reading skill(Logan & Medford, 2011). Nevertheless, the relationship between in-trinsic and extrinsic is arguably complex; whilst these dimensionshave been considered by some to relate to opposite ends of a single con-tinuum, more recently it is acknowledged that children can bemotivat-ed to read for numerous reasons, both intrinsic and extrinsic. Indeed itmay be the case that extrinsic readingmotivation is not necessarily det-rimental if coupledwith high levels of intrinsicmotivation (Park, 2011).However, as research suggests that intrinsic motivation is, in general,more beneficial to children's reading skill than extrinsic motivation(e.g. Becker et al., 2010; Wang & Guthrie, 2004), the current study fo-cuses on the factors that may influence children's intrinsic reading mo-tivation. Taboada et al. (2009) suggest that intrinsic reading motivationdoes not act separately from cognitive skills, but rather acts as anenergiser that enables students to engage their cognitive resources

787E. Medford, S.P. McGeown / Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

and strategies, leading to improved reading performance. As a result,children's intrinsic reading motivation may influence the extent towhich they reach their full reading skill potential. Therefore, identifyingthe factors that underpin children's intrinsic readingmotivation is argu-ably important.

1.2. Reading self-concept

Reading self-concept, an individual's self-estimates or beliefsabout how competent they are at reading, is considered by some re-searchers to be one of the main indicators or components ofchildren's motivation to read (Gambrell, Palmer, Codling, &Mazzoni, 1996; Morgan & Fuchs, 2007). Children's self-perceptionsof their reading abilities have been found to be positively related totheir intrinsic reading motivation (Baker & Wigfield, 1999; Bouffard,Marcoux, Vezeau, & Bordeleau, 2003) as children with higher readingself-concept are likely to be more motivated to engage in readingtasks compared to children with low reading self-concept. This is con-sistent with the self-efficacy theory of motivation (Seifert, 2004),which suggests that children who have high perceptions of their abil-ities will persevere more with challenging tasks than children whohave low perceptions of their abilities. If this is the case, it would sug-gest that the most effective way to increase levels of reading motiva-tion would be to focus primarily on remediating children's readingskill deficits and self-concept of themselves as readers. It is likelythat reading competency beliefs mainly develop as a consequence ofchildren's reading abilities and experiences with reading (Aunola,Leskinen, Onatsu-Anilommi, & Nurmi, 2002; Chapman & Tunmer,1997; Chapman, Tunmer, & Prochnow, 2000). Good readers, who ex-perience a high success rate with reading tasks, are likely to develophigh self-estimates of their reading abilities, whereas poor readers,who struggle with reading tasks and experience higher rates of fail-ure, are likely to develop negative reading competency beliefs.Indeed, reading self-concept has been found to be associated withreading enjoyment and interest (Retelsdorf, Köller, & Möller, 2011),attitudes towards reading (Logan & Johnston, 2009), and readingskill (Aunola et al., 2002; Chapman & Tunmer, 1995; 1997;Chapman et al., 2000; Logan & Medford, 2011). Research suggeststhat children's reading skill and reading competency beliefs are recip-rocally related (Morgan & Fuchs, 2007). Therefore if a child experi-ences repeated episodes of difficulty or failure during reading tasks,they are likely to become discouraged with reading and consequentlytheir reading motivation and self-concept will decline. Alternatively,if a child experiences a high success rate with reading tasks, theywill begin to associate positive feelings of success with reading activ-ities, they will enjoy reading more, and their reading motivation andself-concept will increase. In the current study, competency beliefsare examined separately from intrinsic reading motivation, in orderto investigate the extent to which beliefs in reading ability and read-ing skill predict intrinsic reading motivation.

1.3. Personality

In addition to children's experiences with reading (i.e., theirreading skill and self-concept), it is possible that reading motivationis also influenced by other underlying factors, such as personalitycharacteristics. Currently, there is a lack of research examiningthe relationship between children's personality traits and motiva-tion. However, a number of studies have shown that personalitytraits are related to children's general academic performance(Barbaranelli, Caprara, Rabasca, & Pastorelli, 2001; Bratko,Chamorro-Premuzic, & Saks, 2006; Hair & Graziano, 2003; Heaven,Ciarrochi, & Vialle, 2007; Laidra, Pullmann, & Allik, 2007; Poropat,2009). Personality refers to the set of underlying traits that deter-mine how an individual typically behaves, thinks, and feels. Thereare several different conceptualisations of personality; however

one of the most widely accepted frameworks is the five-dimensional‘Big 5’ framework (Goldberg, 1990). The Big 5 framework identifiesfive main personality factors to explain variation in personalityamong individuals. These are agreeableness, extraversion, neuroti-cism, openness to experiences, and conscientiousness.

It is currently unclear why the relationship between personalitytraits and academic attainment exists. It may be that personality is di-rectly related to children's academic attainment because of positivetraits that naturally promote academic learning. For example, positivetraits related to conscientiousness, such as organisational skills andself-discipline, by their very nature, are likely to foster better schoolperformance. Alternatively, it may be that personality characteristicsinfluence children's academic achievement via other, mediating fac-tors, such as children's motivation, or willingness to perform(Poropat, 2009). However, research investigating the relationship be-tween personality factors and motivation is limited, and studies thathave examined these associations have generally focused on universi-ty undergraduate students. These studies have found evidence of astrong relationship between student's personality characteristicsand their academic motivation. For example, Komarraju and Karau(2005) found that higher levels of openness to experiences wasstrongly related to higher levels of academic motivation and engage-ment, suggesting that differences in student motivation may be relat-ed to basic differences in personality characteristics. In addition,Richardson and Abraham (2009) found that achievement motivationfully mediated the impact of conscientiousness on student's academicperformance. Similarly, Komarraju, Karau, and Schmeck (2009),found that 17% of the variance in student's intrinsic academic motiva-tion could be explained by their conscientiousness and openness toexperiences, whilst 13% of the variance in extrinsic academic motiva-tion could be explained by levels of neuroticism, conscientiousness,and extraversion. Other research has found that student's personalitycharacteristics may be differentially related to different sub-facets ofmotivation. For example, Clark and Schroth (2010) found that stu-dents who were intrinsically motivated to gain knowledge and ac-complish things were more agreeable and conscientious, whereasstudents who were intrinsically motivated to experience stimulationhad higher levels of openness to experiences. Therefore it appearsthat personality characteristics may relate differently to differentsub-facets of motivation (Clark & Schroth, 2010). In the currentstudy, agreeableness, openness to experiences and conscientiousnesswere examined to investigate whether these underlying personalitycharacteristics would predict children's intrinsic reading motivationafter accounting for reading skill and self-concept. In the context ofreading, conscientiousness was examined as conscientious childrenare typically more achievement-oriented and self-disciplined, andare therefore more likely to be self-motivated to engage in readingtasks. Children who have higher levels of openness to experiencesare more intellectually curious, and therefore may be more likely tohave a desire to learn through reading. Finally, agreeable childrenare typically more compliant, and as a result may also demonstratehigher levels of reading motivation in school.

1.4. Aims and hypotheses

The aim of the present study was to examine the factors underpin-ning children's intrinsic reading motivation, but more specificallywhether personality characteristics would predict additional variancein children's intrinsic reading motivation (curiosity, challenge andinvolvement) after accounting for reading skill and reading self-concept. A second aim was to examine whether personality charac-teristics are differentially related to the sub-components of intrinsicreading motivation. It was predicted that personality characteristicswould predict additional variance in children's intrinsic readingmotivation after accounting for their reading skill and readingself-concept. Furthermore, it was predicted that all personality

788 E. Medford, S.P. McGeown / Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

characteristics would correlate with intrinsic reading motivation, butthat these characteristics would differ in the ability to predict differ-ent aspects of intrinsic reading motivation.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

In total, 295 children took part in this study. One hundred andthirty five children were in Year Five (63 boys, 72 girls) with an aver-age age of 10 years and one month (.30 SD) and 160 children were inYear Six (80 boys, 80 girls) with an average age of 11 years and onemonth (.28 SD). The children were attending four different primaryschools in the U.K.

2.2. Materials

2.2.1. Reading skillReading skill was assessed using a group administered, 45-item,

sentence completion task (Group Reading Test II (GRT II),Macmillan Test Unit, 2000a). This assessment requires children to se-lect appropriate words to complete sentences with missing words(e.g., “The _____ was filled with hay”, options: play, idea, barn,horse, and table). Based on manual guidelines, Forms C and D of thetest were given to children alternately based on where they were sea-ted to prevent copying. The examiner read through the practice itemswith the children beforehand to ensure they understood the test. Theassessment was completed in approximately 25 min, although notime restriction was imposed for completion. Reliability and validityfor this assessment is high. With regard to reliability, K-R 21 forForm C is .88 and for Form D is .84. With regard to validity, the GRTII correlates with National Curriculum Test Scores, Teacher Assess-ments Levels for Reading and a correlation of .73 has been found be-tween the GRT II and the NFER Reading Test (see Macmillan Test Unit,2000b for further information). Children's standardised scores wereused for the purposes of analysis.

2.2.2. PersonalityChildren completed a group administered, standardised question-

naire measuring the Big 5 personality dispositions (Five‐Factor Per-sonality Inventory — Children (FFPI-C), McGhee, Ehrler, & Buckhalt,2007). The FFPI-C consists of five sub‐scales that correspond to theBig 5 personality factors: agreeableness, extraversion, openness to ex-periences, conscientiousness, and neuroticism/emotional regulation.In the present study only three of the sub-scales were used; agree-ableness, openness to experiences and conscientiousness, as thesefactors have been found to be most closely associated with children'sacademic performance (e.g. Laidra et al., 2007). Agreeableness in-cludes traits such as trustworthiness, straightforwardness, altruism,compliance, modesty and tendermindedness. Openness to experi-ences includes imagination, interest in aesthetics, intellectual curios-ity, and openness to feelings, actions, and other values. Finally,conscientiousness includes sensibleness, organisation, moral obliga-tion, achievement striving, self-discipline and carefulness. The ques-tionnaire consisted of 45 items; 15 items for each sub‐scale. Eachitem consisted of two opposing anchor statements (e.g. ‘I like toread poetry’, ‘I don't like to read poetry’), which were read aloud bythe experimenter. The children were required to choose the anchorstatement that mostly closely represented their opinion, and then tomake a qualitative decision about the degree of support for theirchoice by filling in one of five circles between the two anchor state-ments. The questionnaire took approximately 25 min to administerand scores were summed and converted to standardised scores forthe purposes of analysis. Using the current data set, Cronbach'salpha was used to evaluate internal consistency for the three person-ality dimensions. Internal consistency values for conscientiousness

(α=.79), openness to experiences (α=.70), and agreeableness(α=.78) were regarded as suitable for analysis. The FFPI-C is consid-ered a reliable and valid measure of personality; further informationregarding the reliability and validity can be found in the examiner'smanual (McGhee et al., 2007).

2.2.3. Reading self-conceptChildren completed a group administered 10 item questionnaire

measuring reading self-concept (Motivation to Read Profile Self-concept sub‐scale, Gambrell et al., 1996). This scale measureschildren's self-perceived competence in reading. Questions wereread aloud to the children, who responded using a 4‐point Likert‐type Scale. One practice item was administered beforehand (‘Mathis… very easy for me, kind of easy for me, kind of hard for me, veryhard for me’) to ensure that the children knew the nature of the as-sessment. The most positive responses were assigned 4 points andthe least positive responses were assigned 1 point. Scores for all re-sponses were summed to give an indication of the child's overallreading self-concept. The questionnaire took approximately 5–10 min for children to complete. Cronbach's alpha was used to evalu-ate internal consistency and was found to be high (α=.77).

2.2.4. Reading motivationChildren completed a group administered questionnaire measur-

ing reading motivation (Motivation for Reading Questionnaire(MRQ) — Revised Version, Wang & Guthrie, 2004). The MRQ —

Revised measures reading motivation using a multi-dimensional ap-proach and includes three dimensions of intrinsic readingmotivation;challenge (desire to work with/master complex materials; 5 items),curiosity (desire to learn more/new things; 7 items) and involvement(child's level of engagement/involvement; 7 items) which were usedin the current study. The MRQ has a strong theoretical framework andhas been used extensively in reading research studies where motiva-tion is an area of interest (e.g., Wang & Guthrie, 2004; Wigfield &Guthrie, 1997). Questions were read aloud to the children, who an-swered each statement using a 4 point Likert scale (very differentfrom me, a little different from me, a little like me, a lot like me).The most positive responses were assigned 4 points and the least pos-itive responses were assigned 1 point. In addition, two practice ques-tions (‘I like to read about animals’; ‘I read a lot of books at home’)were given beforehand to ensure children understood the nature ofthe assessment. Scores for each sub-scale were summed to give an in-dication of the child's reading curiosity, reading involvement andpreference for challenge. Scores from these three dimensions wereadded together to provide a composite intrinsic reading motivationscore. The questionnaire took approximately 15 min for children tocomplete. Cronbach's alpha values were calculated based on the cur-rent data set and these were: curiosity (α=.74); involvement(α=.68); preference for challenge (α=.66) and total intrinsic moti-vation (α=.85). Two of these values are slightly lower than is typi-cally acceptable (.70). This will be discussed later.

2.3. Procedure

Assessments were carried out in the fourth or fifth month of thechildren's fifth or sixth school year. All children completed the ques-tionnaires and reading assessment in their classrooms. These werecompleted in the following order: Reading motivation questionnaire,reading self-concept questionnaire, reading assessment and personal-ity questionnaire. Ethical approval was sought and granted from theDepartment of Psychology Ethics Committee at the University of Hull.

3. Results

Mean, standard deviation, skew and kurtosis values can be foundin Table 1. The range of possible scores for each assessment was as

Table 1Mean, standard deviation, skew and kurtosis values for all assessments.

Assessment Mean S.D. Skewness Kurtosis

Reading skill (SS) 94.36 12.55 1.68 −1.34Competency beliefs (raw) 28.44 4.74 0.42 −1.12Total intrinsic motivation (raw) 54.92 10.50 −2.90 −.078Involvement (raw) 20.28 4.42 −2.31 −1.45Challenge (raw) 14.57 3.49 −3.96 −0.42Curiosity (raw) 19.95 4.47 −2.56 −1.52Conscientiousness (SS) 100.79 13.12 1.03 1.06Openness to experiences (SS) 98.76 16.62 −1.26 1.60Agreeableness (SS) 99.83 14.31 1.33 0.26

Table 3Regression analysis predicting intrinsic reading motivation using reading skill, readingself-concept, and personality as predictors.

Enter R² F Final β

Total intrinsic reading motivation1. Reading skill .05 12.51** .21**2. Reading self-concept .22 37.03** .45**3. Personality .44 42.06**

Agreeableness .13*Openness to experiences .44**Conscientiousness −.01

Curiosity1. Reading skill .00 .94 .062. Reading self-concept .14 21.14** .39**3. Personality .37 30.94**

Agreeableness .19**Openness to experiences .40**

789E. Medford, S.P. McGeown / Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

follows: Reading skill (70–130), competency beliefs (10–40), total in-trinsic motivation (19–76), involvement (7–28), challenge (5–15),curiosity (7–28), conscientiousness (55–145), openness to experi-ences (55–145) and agreeableness (55–145). Skew values for all di-mensions of motivation differed significantly from the normaldistribution (pb .05), with more scores high in the distribution. How-ever kurtosis values were not significant for these variables. All otherskew and kurtosis values indicated a normal distribution. Thereforethe score distributions for all variables were regarded as suitable forfurther analysis.

3.1. Correlations

Initially correlations were carried out to examine the strength ofassociation between the measured variables. Each dimension of moti-vation was entered individually and a summed measure was alsoincluded.

Children's reading involvement, preference for challenge, andcomposite intrinsic motivation were significantly correlated withtheir reading skill (see Table 2), whereas their reading curiosity wasnot. When examining personality, none of the personality factors cor-related significantly with reading skill. However, all personality fac-tors correlated significantly and positively with total intrinsicmotivation and with each sub-component of motivation; opennessto experiences was most closely related to each sub-component ofmotivation. Conscientiousness and openness to experiences correlat-ed with children's reading self-concept, whilst agreeableness did not.Finally, children's reading self-concept was significantly and closelyrelated to their reading skill and to each sub-component of intrinsicmotivation.

3.2. Regression analysis

Regression analysis was carried out to test both research ques-tions: 1) Do personality characteristics predict additional variance inreading motivation after accounting for reading skill and reading

Table 2Associations between reading skill, reading self-concept, reading motivation, andpersonality.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Reading skill –

2. Self-concept .37** –

3. Total intrinsic .21** .46** –

4. Curiosity .06 .34** .87** –

5. Involvement .23** .36** .85** .57** –

6. Challenge .30** .48** .84** .62** .59** –

7. Agreeableness −.06 .02 .28** .34** .21** .16** –

8. Openness .10 .28** .57** .53** .52** .42** .34** –

9. Conscientiousness .10 .40** .41** .39** .31** .35** .44** .53**

Note: * pb .05, ** pb .01.

self-concept? 2) Do the different personality characteristics predictvariance in different aspects of intrinsic reading motivation?

The regression models were tested by running collinearity statis-tics. For the four regression models, the variance inflation factor(VIF) varied between 1.437 and 1.491 and the tolerance statistics var-ied between 0.67 and 0.69. Therefore collinearity was not an issue forany of the regression models. After controlling for children's readingskill and reading self-concept, personality factors explained signifi-cant additional variance in total intrinsic motivation and each sub-component of motivation. Furthermore, a regression model usingreading skill, self-concept, and personality factors as predictorsexplained 23% more variance in total intrinsic motivation than a re-gression model including only reading skill and reading self-concept(see Table 3). Indeed, openness to experiences and agreeablenessboth made significant contributions to total intrinsic motivationafter accounting for reading ability and self-concept, with opennessto experiences explaining more variance. When examining the sub-components of motivation, personality factors accounted for most ad-ditional variance in children's reading curiosity and reading involve-ment. Openness to experiences and agreeableness both madesignificant contributions to children's reading curiosity, with open-ness to experiences explaining the most variance, whereas only open-ness to experiences made a significant additional contribution toreading involvement and preference for challenge.

With regards to self-concept and skill, children's self-estimates oftheir reading ability explained significant variance in total intrinsic mo-tivation and in each sub-component after accounting for reading skill.However, of all the sub-components, reading self-concept explainedthe most variance in children's preference for challenge. Finally, whilstreading skill explained significant variance in total intrinsic motivation,reading involvement and preference for challenge, it did not explainsignificant variance in children's reading curiosity.

Conscientiousness −.00

Involvement1. Reading skill .05 13.36** .22**2. Reading self-concept .14 21.57** .32**3. Personality .32 25.58**

Agreeableness .08Openness to experiences .44**Conscientiousness −.06

Preference for challenge1. Reading skill .09 26.07** .30**2. Reading self-concept .25 44.01** .43**3. Personality .34 27.30**

Agreeableness .04Openness to experiences .28**Conscientiousness .04

Note: * pb .05, ** pb .01.

790 E. Medford, S.P. McGeown / Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

4. Discussion

The aim of this studywas to test whether children's intrinsic readingmotivation is predicted solely by their reading experiences (i.e., readingskill and reading self-concept), orwhether other, underlying personalitycharacteristics unrelated to reading, also explain variation inmotivation.It was found that children's personality traits did explain significant ad-ditional variance in their intrinsic reading motivation after accountingfor these factors. Indeed, the proportion of variance explained by per-sonality characteristics was comparable to that explained by readingskill and self-concept. This suggests that children's intrinsic readingmo-tivation does not result solely from their reading experiences (i.e.,reading skill and perceptions of reading skill), but that is alsounderpinned by more stable personality characteristics.

In accordancewith previous studies (Becker et al., 2010;Mucherah &Yoder, 2008; Wang & Guthrie, 2004), children's intrinsic reading moti-vation was positively associated with their reading skill. However,whilst children's preference for challenge and reading involvementwere associated with their reading skill, their reading curiosity wasnot. These resultswere reaffirmed in the regression analyses, suggestingthat children's level of reading skill may be differentially related to sub-components of motivation. Similar to Wang and Guthrie's (2004) re-search with U.S students, reading skill was most closely correlatedwith preference for challenge. Indeed, this close association is intuitive;those children who seek out challenging reading materials will be morelikely to develop their reading skills, similarly children with good read-ing skills will bemore likely to select challenging texts to read. However,no significant association was found between curiosity and reading skill(also similar toWang & Guthrie's research with U.S students). It may beargued that childrenwho read because they are curious to learn new in-formation are motivated to read regardless of their level of reading skill.Overall however, children's reading skill accounted for a very small pro-portion of the variance in all sub-components of motivation, suggestingthat other factors are important.

Consistent with previous research, children's reading self-conceptwas closely associated with their reading skill (Chapman & Tunmer,1995; 1997; Logan & Medford, 2011), and intrinsic motivation (bothcomposite score and each sub-component) (Baker & Wigfield, 1999;Retelsdorf et al., 2011). In addition, reading self-concept explainedsignificant additional variance in each sub-component of motivationand in total intrinsic motivation after reading skill. Similar to readingskill, self-concept explained most variance in preference for chal-lenge. Indeed, children with positive perceptions of their reading abil-ities will be more likely to believe that they will experience successwhen reading challenging materials whereas children with negativeperceptions will be more likely to believe that they will fail. This isconsistent with Boggiano, Main, and Katz (1988), who found thatchildren with higher perceptions of their academic competencereported a greater preference for challenging learning activities. Inthe present study, reading self-concept explained a much larger pro-portion of the variance in children's reading motivation than theirreading skill. Therefore children's perceptions of their reading abili-ties appear to be a stronger predictor of their reading motivationthan their actual reading ability.

With regard to personality characteristics, none of the personalityfactors assessed were significantly associated with children's readingskill. This contradicts previous findings showing a relationship betweenchildren's personality factors and their general academic performance(Barbaranelli et al., 2001; Bratko et al., 2006; Hair & Graziano, 2003;Heaven et al., 2007; Laidra et al., 2007; Poropat, 2009). However, itmay be that personality and ability are only related when consideringchildren's general academic ability rather than a single specific aspectof their performance (i.e., reading skill). Nevertheless, the resultsare consistent with the idea that personality characteristics exerttheir effects mainly through children's motivation, or willingness toperform (Poropat, 2009). Consistent with previous studies showing an

association between university student's personality characteristicsand academic motivation (Komarraju & Karau, 2005; Komarraju et al.,2009; Richardson & Abraham, 2009), children's personality characteris-tics were positively associated with their total intrinsic motivation andwith each sub-component of motivation. Furthermore, personality fac-tors explained additional unique variance in total intrinsic reading mo-tivation and in each sub-component of motivation after accounting forreading skill and self-concept. Personality explained more variance incuriosity and involvement than the combination of reading skill andself-concept as predictors; however skill and self-concept explainedmore variance in preference for challenge (although these differenceswere small). Indeed, personality characteristics explained a similarlevel of variance in total intrinsic reading motivation as reading skilland self-concept combined. This is interesting, as given that three mea-sures were domain specific (reading skill, reading self-concept andreading motivation), it is noteworthy that a non-domain specific traitunrelated to reading is such a strong predictor of children's readingmotivation.

Of the personality characteristics, openness to experienceswasmostclosely associated with and accounted for the most additional variancein total intrinsic motivation and in each sub-component. This factormay be particularly important because children with high levels ofopenness to experiences are more intellectually curious, and are thusmore likely to be self-motivated to engage in reading tasks in order tolearn through reading. However, agreeableness and conscientiousnesswere also correlated with intrinsic reading motivation, suggesting thatthese factors may also play a role, albeit a relatively smaller role, inexplaining variation in levels of intrinsic reading motivation.

4.1. Implications for education

Consistent with previous research (Becker et al., 2010; Mucherah& Yoder, 2008; Wang & Guthrie, 2004), intrinsic reading motivationand reading skill were associated. Therefore, as argued earlier, it isimportant for reading programmes and interventions to be enjoyable,fun and engaging, to promote a desire and motivation to read. How-ever reading skill was not a consistent or strong predictor of intrinsicreading motivation compared to reading self-concept and more gen-eral personality characteristics. Indeed, the results highlight that un-derlying personality characteristics explain significant variation inchildren's reading motivation. This suggests that reading motivationmay be quite resistant to change as personality traits are regarded tobe relatively stable and consistent (Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000). Never-theless, itmaybe possible to encourage children to develop ormake bet-ter use of the personality characteristics that are most advantageous formotivation. For example, it may be possible to increase children's intrin-sic motivation by developing their intellectual curiosity, a personalitytrait associatedwith openness to experiences, by designing lesson activ-ities that encourage this trait. In addition, children could be rewarded fordemonstrating behaviours associated with positive personality traits,such as being more intellectually curious or conscientious.

It may also be beneficial to tailor teaching methods and interven-tions to children's personality characteristics. For example, Komarrajuand Karau (2005) suggested that matching educational environmentsto student's personality characteristics may cause levels of academicmotivation to improve. Similarly, a review by Eysenck (1996) pro-posed that children learn better with teaching methods that suittheir personality traits. Whilst this may not be feasible within the pri-mary school classroom, it is important that teachers have an under-standing of the factors that underpin children's motivation in orderto identify the most effective ways to boost motivation. Indeed,teachers may find it beneficial to assess the particular motivationaldeficits of their children before considering strategies to improvetheir reading motivation. Alternatively, teachers may provide learn-ing activities that match children's motivational preferences basedon their personality characteristics.

791E. Medford, S.P. McGeown / Learning and Individual Differences 22 (2012) 786–791

In addition, as the current results suggest that children's readingself-concept is a strong predictor of their motivation, it may be usefulto place more emphasis on raising children's perceptions of theirreading abilities. Interventions to improve self-concept may includeusing attribution re-training techniques (Chapman & Tunmer, 2003)or include giving children reading activities of appropriate difficultylevels so that they have the opportunity to experience success(Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003).

The current study examined intrinsic reading motivation, due to theextensive literature examining this particular aspect of motivation andevidence to suggest a consistent relationship between intrinsic readingmotivation and reading skill. However, there are many different con-ceptualisations of motivation and arguably no single concept of motiva-tion can fully account for the complex nature of this construct (Park,2011). Therefore this focus solely on intrinsic readingmotivation shouldbe borne in mind as a limitation. In addition, it is crucial that measuresused to assess specific constructs are reliable and valid. In this study,two intrinsic motivation dimensions failed to meet the threshold for ac-ceptability (although only just). Nevertheless, further research is neces-sary to determine the reliability and validity of questionnairescommonly used within this area of research. Finally, the use of correla-tional data provides no information about causality; future research isnecessary to reveal more about the precise nature of these relationships.

4.2. Conclusions

There is a significant emphasis within education to improvechildren's reading and motivation to read; however knowledge ofthe factors underpinning reading motivation is necessary in orderto do this. This study suggests that children's reading motivation isnot only predicted by their reading experiences, but also by morestable personality characteristics, suggesting that reading motiva-tion may be quite resistant to change. However, by having a betterknowledge of the factors that predict it, educators will be in a betterposition to identify ways to raise levels of motivation within theclassroom. In addition, individual differences in personality charac-teristics may mean that it is important to consider the individualwhen implementing educational and motivational strategies.

References

Anmarkrud, O., & Braten, I. (2009). Motivation for reading comprehension. Learning andIndividual Differences, 19, 252–256, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.09.002.

Aunola, K., Leskinen, E., Onatsu-Anilommi, T., & Nurmi, J. (2002). Three methods for study-ing developmental change: A case of reading skills and self-concept. British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 72, 343–364, http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709902320634447.

Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children's motivation for reading and theirrelations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34,452–477, http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.34.4.4.

Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., Rabasca, A., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). A questionnaire formeasuring the Big Five in late childhood. Personality and Individual Differences,34, 645–664, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00051-X.

Becker, M., McElvany, N., & Kortenbruck, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivationas predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psy-chology, 102, 773–785, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020084.

Boggiano, A. L., Main, D. S., & Katz, P. A. (1988). Children's preference for challenge: Therole of perceived competency and control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-ogy, 54, 134–141, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.134.

Bouffard, T., Marcoux, M., Vezeau, C., & Bordeleau, L. (2003). Changes in self-perceptions ofcompetence and intrinsic motivation among elementary school children. British Journalof Educational Psychology, 73, 171–186, http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/00070990360626921.

Bratko, D., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Saks, Z. (2006). Personality and school performance:Incremental validity of self- and peer-ratings over intelligence. Personality and Indi-vidual Differences, 41, 131–142, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.015.

Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1995). Development of young children's readingself-concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their relationship withreading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 154–167, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022 0663.87.1.154.

Chapman, J.W., & Tunmer,W. E. (1997). A longitudinal study of beginning readingachieve-ment and reading self-concept. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 279–291.

Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (2003). Reading difficulties, reading-related self-perceptions, and strategies for overcoming negative self-beliefs. Reading &Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19, 5–24, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10573560308205.

Chapman, J. W., Tunmer, W. E., & Prochnow, J. E. (2000). Early reading-related skillsand performance, reading self-concept, and the development of academicself-concept: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 703–708,http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.703.

Clark, M. H., & Schroth, C. A. (2010). Examining relationships between academic moti-vation and personality among college students. Learning and Individual Differences,20, 19–24, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.10.002.

Eysenck, H. J. (1996). Personality and the experimental study of education. European Jour-nal of Personality, 10, 427–439, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199612)10:5b427::AID-PER254>3.0.CO;2-H.

Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1996). Assessing motiva-tion to read. The Reading Teacher, 49, 518–533.

Goldberg, L. K. (1990). An alternative ‘description of personality’: The big-five factor struc-ture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216.

Guthrie, J. T., Mckae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented read-ing instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Edu-cational Psychologist, 42, 237–250.

Hair, E. C., & Graziano, W. G. (2003). Self-esteem, personality and achievement in highschool: A prospective longitudinal study in Texas. Journal of Personality, 71,971–994, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7106004.

Heaven, P. C. L., Ciarrochi, J., & Vialle, W. (2007). Conscientiousness and Eysenckian psy-choticism as predictors of school grades: A one-year longitudinal study. Personalityand Individual Differences, 42, 535–546, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid. 2006.07.028.

Komarraju, M., & Karau, S. J. (2005). The relationship between the big five personalitytraits and academic motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 557–567,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.013.

Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., & Schmeck, R. R. (2009). Role of the big five personalitytraits in predicting college students' academic motivation and achievement. Learn-ing and Individual Differences, 19, 47–52.

Laidra, K., Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2007). Personality and intelligence as predictors of aca-demic achievement: A cross-sectional study fromelementary to secondary school.Per-sonality and Individual Differences, 42, 441–451, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.08.001.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student en-gagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly: OvercomingLearning Difficulties, 19, 119–137, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10573560308223.

Logan, S., & Johnston, R. (2009). Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: ex-amining where these differences lie. Journal of Research in Reading, 32, 199–214,http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01389.x.

Logan, S., & Medford, E. (2011). Gender differences in the strength of association be-tween motivation, competency beliefs and reading skill. Educational Research, 53,85–94, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2011.552242.

Logan, S., Medford, E., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation forhigh and low ability readers' reading comprehension performance. Learning andIndividual Differences, 21, 124–128, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.09.011.

Macmillan Test Unit (2000). Group Reading Test II 6–14. : nferNelson.Macmillan Test Unit (2000b). Group Reading Test II Teacher's Guide. : nferNelson.McGhee, R. L., Ehrler, D. J., & Buckhalt, J. A. (2007). Five-Factor Personality Inventory —

Children (FFPI-C). Texas, U.S: PRO-ED, Inc..Morgan, P. L., & Fuchs, D. (2007). Is there a bidirectional relationship between

children's reading skills and reading motivation? Exceptional Children, 73, 165–183.Mucherah, W., & Yoder, A. (2008). Motivation for reading and middle school students'

performance on standardised testing in reading. Reading Psychology, 29, 214–235,http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702710801982159.

Park, Y. (2011). How motivational constructs interact to predict student's reading per-formance: Examples from attitudes and self-concept in reading. Learning and Indi-vidual Differences, 21, 347–358, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.02.009.

Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality andacademic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014996.

Retelsdorf, J., Köller, O., & Möller, J. (2011). On the effects of motivation on readingperformance growth in secondary school. Learning and Instruction, 21, 550–559,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.11.001.

Richardson, M., & Abraham, C. (2009). Conscientiousness and achievement motivationpredict performance. European Journal of Personality, 23, 589–605, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.732.

Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personalitytraits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psy-chological Bulletin, 126, 3–25, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.3.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitionsand new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67, http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps. 1999.1020.

Seifert, T. L. (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research, 46,137–149, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013188042000222421.

Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational andcognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22, 85–106,http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9133-y.

Wang, J. H., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modelling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrin-sic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text compre-hension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39,162–186, http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.2.2.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation for reading to theamount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89,420–432, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.420.