1

Research Summary #1

Lacey S. Suey

University of Nevada Las Vegas

CIL 699: Literacy Research Seminar

Dr. April Douglass

October 12, 2021

 2

Citation

Marinak, B. A., & Gambrell, L. B. (2008). Intrinsic motivation and rewards: What sustains

young children's engagement with text? Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(1), 9–26.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070701749546

Purpose, Research Question(s), and Rationale

This study’s purpose was to examine the influence of being able to choose a reward that

fostered reading for third graders. The researchers posed two research questions for this study,

which were, “How does the proximity of the reward affect the intrinsic motivation to read?” and

“How does choice of reward affect the intrinsic motivation to read?” (Marinak & Gambrell, p.

10, 2008). The researchers decided to conduct this study because there were not many studies

done that “have examined the effects of two important variables identified in reward contingency

studies on intrinsic motivation – type of reward and choice of reward” (Marinak & Gambrell, p.

10, 2008). The researchers wanted to investigate the effects of a reward that is proximal to the

learning behavior that is wanted. There had been many studies done that have explored the

effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, but not many studies have been conducted to

examine the effects of giving rewards to students that are in line with what they are learning.

This study revealed that students were motivated to read more when given a reward proximal to

reading, such as a book.

Methodology – Participants & Context

The participants in this study were seventy-five third-grade students, who were selected

from a total of 288 students from three different elementary schools in a mid-Atlantic suburban

school district. The students in the schools were very diverse and included 40% Caucasian, 30%

African American, 20% Asian, and 10% Eastern European.

 3

Data Sources and Data Collection

Before starting this experiment, a survey was taken to assess the students’ existing

motivation. According to Marinak and Gambrell (2008), “Six weeks before the experiment, a

reading specialist administered the Motivation to Read Profile” (p. 15). During the study,

students were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups equalized for gender. “The five

treatments were: book/choice (student selected book), book/no choice (randomly selected book),

token/choice (student selected token), and token/no choice (randomly selected token), and the

control group (no reward/no choice)” (Marinak & Gambrell, 2008, p. 12). The study involved

two phases. The first being the library book selection activity and the second being the

observation of the free-choice activity. The researcher met with each individual student during

both parts, which permitted them to record data for the measures of intrinsic motivation, which

included the first activity chosen, the number of words read, and the number of seconds that were

spent reading. The researcher was interviewing each individual student and asking them

questions during the library selection activity. During the free-choice activity, students were able

to either read, complete a jigsaw puzzle, or play a math game for ten minutes. If the student

chose to return to reading, the researcher made a note of that and asked the student to mark the

last page that he or she read.

Data Analysis

The Motivation to Read Profile data was analyzed using Analysis of Variance to identify

if important differences in reading motivation existed in the treatment groups. I would say that

the analysis of this study used a mixed methods approach because the researcher interviewed and

observed participants, which is qualitative data. The quantitative data is shown is this study

through statistics and numbers organized into tables.

 4

Trustworthiness/Evaluating Study Quality

The Methods section of this study is presented in a way that would be easily replicated.

The researchers provided detail about how participants were assigned to a group, as well as being

particular with the materials used and the procedures for this study. The participants chosen were

from many different backgrounds in a large suburban school district. The results show that data

were collected for four different aspects of task persistence. Each section of data goes into detail

of observations, as well as tables with collected information.

Author(s)’ Results/Discussion/Recommendations

“The major finding of this study is that the students who were given a book (proximal

reward) and students who received no reward were more motivated to engage in subsequent

reading than the students who received a token (less proximal reward)” (Marinak & Gambrell,

2008, p. 22). Basically, students were motivated to read more when they were given a proximal

reward, such as a book, compared to students who received a materialistic reward. One

conclusion involved the idea that rewards proximal to the behavior do not weaken intrinsic

motivation. Also, less proximal rewards do weaken intrinsic motivation. Lastly, the choice of

reward was not found to be a prominent factor in the study. This article does not provide

recommendations for future research; however, this study did answer the question of reward

proximity affecting intrinsic motivation.

Limitations of the Study

This article does not provide a section of limitations of the study; however, according to

Marinak & Gambrell (2008), “…the results of the study can be generalized only to children of

approximately the same age and levels of reading achievement” (p. 22). The reading motivation
 5

of students is affected by many factors that are not included in this study. I would say another

limitation would be that this article does not state how long the research study was.

Implications for Classroom/Educational Practice, Policy, and Research

“The major implication is that carefully chosen rewards can foster a culture of reading

motivation” (Marinak & Gambrell, 2008, p. 9). Since most educators use reward systems in their

classrooms to develop students’ intrinsic motivation to read, it is important for them to know that

they need to choose a reward proximal to the desired learning behavior to foster their love for

reading.

My Evaluation/Rating of the Study

The strengths of this study, in my opinion, are that it involved a diverse group of students

and that students were assigned to five treatments groups to balance out gender. The weaknesses

of this study are that it is missing some components, like how long the study was and limitations.

This study was personally relevant to me because being a first-grade teacher and teaching the

foundations of reading, it is difficult sometimes to motivate students to read, especially if they

are low in reading. This study has made me realize the importance of rewarding students with

something proximal to reading in order to boost their intrinsic motivation.