Reading for pleasure in Secondary Schools: a systematic review of literature
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
A systematic literature review was conducted to analyse trends, approaches, and findings on reading for pleasure in secondary education between 2020 and 2025. Specialised databases (Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, Dialnet, SciELO, and EBSCO) were consulted, applying previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selection process followed the PRISMA guidelines, resulting in a final corpus of 22 studies. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the QuADS and ROBIS tools. The findings indicate that research is mainly organized into five dimensions: cognitive and academic, motivational, personal and social, emotional, and cultural. In addition, factors such as school libraries, teacher mediation, institutional policies, and digital culture were found to significantly influence the development of reading for pleasure. It is concluded that, although the field shows significant progress, gaps remain in understanding the subjective experience of readers and in addressing socio-emotional benefits. The need to strengthen comprehensive approaches that recognize reading for pleasure as a key cultural practice in adolescent development is highlighted.
Article Details
INTRODUCTION
In recent decades, numerous international organisations, such as and the , have emphasised the need to promote reading within school systems, not only as a skill linked to academic achievement, but also as a cultural and social practice that contributes to human development. However, reading in secondary education has largely been instrumentalised, reduced to standardised assessments and a means of measuring educational quality (). International assessments such as PISA (), PIRLS () and LLECE () have reinforced this view of reading comprehension as a measurable skill, sidelining aspects related to enjoyment, intrinsic motivation and the construction of personal meaning.
In Latin America, 51% of young people do not include reading among their leisure activities (), a figure that highlights the disconnect between school reading programmes and students’ actual interests. In Asia and Africa, education systems have emphasised the use of reading as a teaching tool to meet international standards (), whilst in Oceania and North America there is a tension between the promotion of reading policies aimed at equity and the persistence of assessment-focused practices (). These global trends indicate that reading for pleasure remains a low priority in education (). However, although international reports cover a wide range of regions, this systematic review is limited to academic literature published in English or Spanish; consequently, the findings presented here predominantly reflect the realities of English-speaking and Spanish-speaking countries. This limitation allows for a more contextualised analysis, although we recognise the need for future reviews to include research in other languages and regions.
The risks associated with this instrumental view have been documented in several studies. demonstrate how making reading compulsory in school settings can lead to resistance among students and reduce intrinsic motivation. point out that school practices focused on reading proficiency limit the opportunity to explore the aesthetic dimension of texts; and criticises the performance-oriented mindset that pervades educational institutions, where reading ceases to be an end in itself and becomes a means of control and assessment.
The phenomenon is further complicated by digital culture and the new ways in which teenagers read. Although digital reading opens up new possibilities for access and participation, it is often approached from a utilitarian perspective: platforms tend to prioritise tracking and assessment over enjoyment (). Similarly, new forms of digital literacy require the curriculum to be expanded to include information retrieval, critical evaluation and the collaborative construction of meaning ().
It is worth noting that the term ‘reading for pleasure’ is not unambiguous in academic literature. Some studies link it to the independent choice of texts; others, to subjective enjoyment or intrinsic motivation (); whilst certain studies use related terms such as ‘recreational reading’ or ‘voluntary reading’ (). This diversity reveals a concept fraught with tensions between freedom and prescription, subjective experience and institutional mediation. This review adopts a broad definition that incorporates both the affective and contextual components, whilst acknowledging that its definition remains a matter of debate.
In light of the above, it is worth reviewing recent academic research on reading for pleasure in secondary education in order to characterise a field that is growing but remains fragmented in conceptual, methodological and geographical terms. This review aims at identifying the key issues, prevailing methodologies, associated benefits and trends. Its main contribution is to provide a comprehensive framework for teachers, researchers and education policy-makers.
METHOD
This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA Statement in order to ensure transparency, rigour and traceability in the process of searching for, selecting and analysing the included studies.
Search strategy
The search was designed using the terms ‘reading for pleasure’, ‘school’ and ‘adolescents’, employing Boolean operators (AND, OR). The following databases were consulted: Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, Dialnet, SciELO and EBSCO. In Scopus, the following advanced search query was used: (TITLE-ABS-KEY(‘reading for pleasure’) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(school) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY(adolescents)) AND PUBYEAR > 2019 AND PUBYEAR < 2026, including filters by subject area (Social Sciences), document type (article) and language (English or Spanish). In Web of Science, the same search terms were refined, restricted to the period 2020–2025, using filters for document type, language and subject area. In ERIC, Dialnet, SciELO and EBSCO, the general equation ‘Reading for pleasure AND school’ was applied, adapted to the specific features of each platform. All searches were carried out on 4th April 2025, yielding 237 articles.
Study selection process
The identification of studies involved inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as a methodological assessment. First, relevant studies were identified using defined criteria; subsequently, their methodological quality was assessed to ensure the robustness of the final body of evidence.
Eligibility criteria
After running the search queries and filters, the following inclusion criteria were applied to the set of articles returned by each database: a) research relating to reading for pleasure in schools; b) studies published between 2020 and 2025, a period selected to capture the most recent output following the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic - an event which, according to various reports (), altered adolescents’ reading habits - and in the absence of previous systematic reviews that updated the state of the field during this period; c) studies published in academic journals; d) studies published in English or Spanish; e) studies involving or focusing on adolescent students.
Similarly, the following exclusion criteria were considered: a) studies that were literature reviews; b) studies involving a population other than adolescents; c) studies on reading in a foreign language; d) studies that did not address reading for pleasure in secondary school; e) studies published in a language other than Spanish or English; f) publications not available via open access; g) publications prior to 2020; and h) studies lacking a methodology. Once the eligibility criteria had been applied to the 237 articles identified, 200 were excluded for failing to meet the established criteria. Of the remaining 37 studies, 14 were excluded as duplicates, leaving a final set of 23 articles selected for the methodological quality assessment.
Assessing the quality of the studies
Quality was assessed using QuADS (), a 13-item scale ranging from 0 to 3, which is suitable for qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods studies. Table 1 shows the scores for each item.
Study 17 () was of low quality due to limitations in its design, data identification and reflexivity, which compromised its validity; it was therefore excluded, the final corpus amounted to 22 articles.
In addition, the ROBIS tool (), phases II and III, was applied to identify risks of bias. Four domains were analysed and an overall assessment was conducted.
Implementation of the ROBIS tool revealed that 20 of the 22 studies analysed were classified as low risk, indicating adequate methodological rigour and internal consistency between the study design, data selection and analysis. The remaining two studies (; ) were classified as having moderate risk, due to limitations mainly in domain 4. However, these shortcomings do not significantly affect the validity or relevance of the overall analysis; consequently, it was decided to include them in the final synthesis. Consequently, the total number of articles included in the analysis, following the application of the ROBIS tool, remained at 22.
Diagram of the selection process
The process of identifying, screening and selecting studies followed the guidelines set out in the PRISMA 2020 flowchart. Figure 1 shows the process from the identification of records in the databases, through the assessment of inclusion and exclusion criteria, the removal of duplicates, to the final sample. This diagram summarises the main stages of the procedure and the number of records excluded at each stage.
Data extraction and coding
The 22 studies were recorded in an Excel spreadsheet organised alphabetically by author. The following details were recorded: APA citation, database, year, journal, quartile, country, language and the presence of teaching strategies to encourage reading for pleasure. Key variables were also systematised: the research question, objectives, definitions of reading for pleasure, methodological approach, data collection and analysis techniques, sample characteristics, benefits and contextual factors. This analysis made it possible to identify patterns, contrasts and contributions across the studies and served as a basis for answering the research questions.
The initial data extraction was conducted by one researcher and reviewed by another, who checked the data for accuracy and applied standardisation procedures to ensure consistency. The issues and benefits were identified in the introductions; the methodologies and techniques, in the methodology sections; and the findings, in the discussions and conclusions. This strategy consolidated the systematisation of the corpus and ensured the consistency of the analysis.
Once the horizontal analysis was completed, a vertical analysis was conducted using the recorded variables. A separate sheet was created for each category to examine the link between objectives, methodology, problems, findings and teaching strategies. This approach encouraged a critical reading, highlighted key contributions, identified gaps, and facilitated cross-referencing, thematic categorisation and critical synthesis.
The study is based on the following research questions:
-
1. What are the issues identified in relation to reading for pleasure in secondary education?
-
2. What methodologies are used to study this in secondary education?
-
3. What are the benefits linked to its development?
-
4. What role does the wider context (libraries, social media, policies, teachers, family environment) play in promoting it?
RESULTS
An analysis of the 22 articles shows that, between 2020 and 2025, academic output on reading for pleasure has been on the rise, peaking in 2023. Australia is the country with the highest number of publications, with six studies (; ; ; ; ; ), followed by the US with three (; ; ) and countries such as Sweden (; ), Chile (; ), Singapore (; ), with two studies each. The geographical distribution of the studies is shown in Figure 2.
As regards language, English dominates with 18 articles, whilst Spanish features to a more limited extent in four studies (; ; ; ). Only one article described a specific intervention to encourage reading for pleasure (); the others are descriptive or theoretical studies, which highlights a lack of applied research into teaching strategies for reading for pleasure.
The main group of participants in the research is secondary school pupils (14 studies), with a diverse range of samples including large-scale studies such as PISA 2018, which involved 5,713 pupils (), and small-scale qualitative studies involving six teachers (). Five studies involve teachers/school leaders (; ; ; ; ), whilst others analyse digital environments (; ) or policy documents (; ).
The responses to the four questions that guided the analysis are presented below in an integrated manner, organised according to the trends and patterns identified in the body of evidence gathered.
What issues have been identified in relation to reading for pleasure in secondary education?
Studies on reading for pleasure in secondary education identify seven key issues that form the basis of research in this field. Figure 3 shows these issues and the distribution of studies across each one.
According to the analysis of issues in this field, 8 of the 22 studies cite the decline in reading habits among secondary school students as the rationale for their research. A further five studies base their work on the lack of recognition of the role of the school library in fostering a love of reading among secondary school students (; ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ).
Taken together, these two issues account for 59% of the research, whilst the remaining 41% (10 studies) addresses five different issues (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ). In short, more than half of the studies on reading for pleasure in secondary schools focus on two main areas: the decline in reading habits and the devaluation of the role of the school library.
What methodologies have been used to study reading for pleasure in secondary education?
The corpus of 22 studies analysed shows a predominance of qualitative designs, with 11 of the studies accounting for 50% of the corpus (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ); followed by 8 quantitative studies accounting for 36% (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ) & a small number of mixed-methods studies comprising three studies, accounting for 14% of the corpus (; ; ).
As for data collection techniques, five main methods were identified: surveys, interviews, textual analysis, observation and mobile ethnography. The most commonly used method was the questionnaire, which was employed to measure reading frequency, attitudes, motivation and sociodemographic variables (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ). Of the studies that used surveys, six employed previously validated questionnaires (for example, scales derived from PISA or the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire), whilst the remaining studies designed ad hoc instruments without reporting their psychometric properties. In the quantitative studies, the analyses included correlations, t-tests or ANOVAs to establish a link between reading for pleasure and variables such as academic performance or reading frequency. Secondly, semi-structured, narrative or focus group interviews were used to provide interpretative depth to the findings (; ; ; ; ; ).
Textual or content analysis came third, applied to institutional documents, student narratives and digital material such as videos and BookTok/TikTok comments (; ; ; ; ). Observation and focus groups aimed at recording classroom interactions and reading mediation processes were used less frequently (; ; ). Finally, techniques such as mobile ethnography, reading diaries and photo-elicitation - which aim at capturing practices in natural settings - were applied in a single study (). The percentage distribution of these techniques is shown in Figure 4, which provides a visual summary of the relative frequency of each technique in the corpus under review. Some studies appear in more than one category due to the overlap in the data collection methods used.
In short, a third of the studies used surveys, making this the most commonly used method, even in qualitative studies. For their part, observations and ethnographies were rarely used, which highlights the scarcity of approaches focusing on the meanings, emotions and social contexts of reading for pleasure. Qualitative studies account for around half of the body of research; quantitative methods continue to dominate the field, with only limited use of mixed-methods designs.
According to research, what are the benefits of encouraging reading for pleasure in secondary education?
It should be noted that most of these findings are based on self-report measures (attitude questionnaires, interviews and motivation scales), and therefore reflect the participants’ subjective perceptions.
The analysis of the corpus identifies benefits attributed to reading for pleasure in school settings, grouped into five dimensions: cognitive and academic; motivational; personal and social; emotional; and cultural. Ten studies show that students report improvements in academic performance, vocabulary, reading comprehension and independent access to information (; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ). Furthermore, reading for pleasure and academic performance are positively correlated, particularly among secondary education students. show that those who read for pleasure tend to perform better in standardised reading comprehension and writing tests, whilst demonstrate that this type of reading promotes the development of cognitive strategies that can be transferred to other areas of the curriculum.
With regard to the motivational dimension, seven studies agree that reading for pleasure strengthens intrinsic motivation, reading autonomy and students’ ability to choose and sustain their reading practices independently (; ; ; ; ; ; ).
In the personal and social sphere, two studies highlight the role of reading for pleasure in identity formation, the development of empathy, the broadening of perspectives and the enhancement of well-being among students (; ). On an emotional level, two further studies highlight how reading for pleasure connects directly with students’ emotions and fosters empathetic reading practices (; ). Finally, a study suggests that reading for pleasure also promotes cultural interaction by fostering connections through digital platforms for literary socialising - such as BookTok - (). Figure 5 shows the percentage distribution of these benefits, providing a clear picture of which aspects have received the most attention in the studies analysed.
These findings show that reading for pleasure has an impact across a range of areas, but research tends to focus on its effects in the academic sphere and on reading motivation. However, there is a gap in the exploration of its contribution to holistic development, particularly in the development of soft skills such as citizenship education, social-emotional learning, empathy and cultural intelligence. This gap limits our understanding of its potential, reducing it to a tool for academic improvement rather than a resource for human flourishing. Linking reading for pleasure with this perspective will enable us to broaden our scope to explore its contributions to the development of well-rounded and socially engaged individuals.
What role does context play in encouraging reading for pleasure in secondary school?
This systematic review identified five findings that demonstrate how various environmental factors - institutional, digital, educational and family-related - contribute to either promoting or undermining this practice. The percentage distribution of these findings is shown in Figure 6.
The first finding highlights the school library as a space for reading for pleasure, as identified by seven studies (; ; ; ; ; ). This research shows that it serves not only as a repository of texts, but also as a hub where students have free access to a wide range of reading material, take part in reading clubs and develop independent study habits. and point out that it can become a democratic space that levels out inequalities in access, whilst highlights its role as a space for building reading communities that sustain motivation. In contrast, point out that the undervaluing of school libraries is a factor that limits their potential to encourage reading for pleasure.
Secondly, five studies all conclude that the reading culture prevalent on social media influences the promotion of reading for pleasure among students (; ; ; ; ). In other words, the content circulating on platforms such as BookTok often encourages students to discover the original work and join online communities where they can share reviews, recommendations and reading experiences. emphasises that these digital spaces encourage identification with peers and give rise to fandom phenomena that cement reading as a social practice.
Thirdly, four studies have shown that institutional policies and programmes can have both a positive and a negative influence on the development of reading for pleasure (; ; ; ). show that policies focused on standardised outcomes tend to reduce the time spent on independent reading, whilst show how flexible reading promotion programmes succeed in integrating voluntary reading into school culture. In this regard, point out that the lack of clear institutional guidelines leaves the promotion of reading to the discretion of individual teachers, based on their own knowledge and interests.
The fourth finding relates to teacher mediation, which is identified in three studies as a factor that can either encourage or hinder reading (; ; ). argues that assessment practices centred on compulsory reading generate resistance among students, whilst emphasise that when teachers act as cultural mediators, offering recommendations and support, a love of reading is fostered. confirm that teachers’ motivation and their own reading habits serve as a key example in the classroom.
With regard to students’ prior habits and the influence of their environment, three studies identify these as key factors (; ; ). found that the presence of books in the home and shared reading within the family significantly increase the likelihood of developing independent reading habits in secondary education. For their part, point out that cultural capital and family expectations have a direct impact on motivation, creating a situation in which reading is perceived either as a valuable activity or, conversely, as a marginal one. In the same vein, identify the decline in reading habits as a structural challenge within the current context that has a negative impact on the promotion of reading for pleasure.
Among these findings, the role of the school library and the influence of digital culture and social media stand out as the most significant factors in promoting reading for pleasure, cited in 55% of the studies. These findings suggest that the field of study has focused more on external factors (libraries, social media, policies, teacher support, and the family environment) than on the reader’s subjective experience. There is a gap in the research regarding how students experience, interpret and reshape their relationship with themselves and the world through reading for pleasure.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this systematic review is to outline the field of research into reading for pleasure in secondary education, identifying key issues, methodologies, benefits and contextual factors. An analysis of 22 articles published between 2020 and 2025 revealed an increase in output, with a concentration in Australia, the United States and certain European and Latin American countries. Most studies were published in English and adopted descriptive approaches, reflecting a growing - albeit fragmented - field.
With regard to the issues at hand, studies point to a consensus on two key concerns: the decline in reading habits and the low regard in which the role of the school library is held. There is a tension between the findings of this review—which highlight a decline in reading habits—and some recent reports (; ) which identify teenagers as one of the population groups with the highest rates of ‘reading’. This discrepancy can be explained by differences in the type of reading considered (digital vs. print, leisure vs. academic) and by the measurement tools used (self-report vs. library lending records). Whilst reports generally measure reading frequency across all media, the academic studies reviewed focus on reading in school settings, where a decline in reading motivation has been observed.
These issues account for more than half of the research, which highlights a field that is dominated by shortcomings. This trend can be understood in the light of Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital (), according to which structural inequalities determine access to cultural resources and practices. Thus, both the loss of established practices and the institutional weakness of the library reflect how schools tend to perpetuate—rather than bridge—social and cultural divides. The challenge, therefore, is to promote research that, rather than focusing on shortcomings, explores the conditions that enable meaningful reading experiences, recognising students as active participants capable of shaping their own educational journeys.
In terms of methodologies, qualitative and quantitative studies predominated, with a heavy reliance on surveys - even within qualitative designs - which gives rise to a certain epistemological inconsistency. The scarcity of mixed-methods, longitudinal, ethnographic or critical research limits our understanding of the experiential and social dimensions of reading for pleasure. and emphasise that reading should be studied as a social and cultural practice, which requires methodologies that take into account context, relationships and experience, rather than merely measuring skills.
As for the benefits associated with reading for pleasure, studies highlight five areas: cognitive and academic; motivational; personal and social; emotional; and cultural. These benefits are linked to the theory of social and emotional learning (), as reading fosters self-awareness, self-regulation and empathy. They are also linked to self-determination theory (), which emphasises the importance of intrinsic motivation in sustaining engagement and autonomous learning. However, the findings place the emphasis on academic and motivational effects, whilst downplaying socio-emotional and identity-related effects. This gap calls for the research agenda to be broadened to include a view of reading as a tool for holistic human development.
Three key findings stand out: the role of the school library, the influence of digital culture and social media, and the impact of policies and programmes. Taken together, these findings show that reading for pleasure at school does not depend on a single factor, but rather on the interplay between spaces, practices and institutional decisions.
The school library is emerging as an ideal setting for fostering reading communities, in line with Barron’s ‘ecology of learning’ (), where physical and digital spaces enhance meaningful experiences. Digital and transmedia reading is another emerging trend. As argues in his theory of the culture of convergence, digital environments are reshaping the way in which teenagers engage with narratives, creating new opportunities for participation, but also risks of distraction and superficial reading. This finding highlights the need to develop hybrid teaching models that combine digital and print resources, striking a balance between compulsory and voluntary reading, without losing sight of the aesthetic and recreational aspects. The research examines the impact of policies and programmes designed to promote reading, demonstrating how institutional decisions can either expand or restrict opportunities for equitable access to meaningful experiences. emphasises that national reading schemes are essential for safeguarding the cultural right to read and reducing inequalities in access to cultural goods. highlights that reading cannot be reduced to the sole responsibility of schools, but requires the support of sustained policies that integrate cultural, educational and social dimensions. However, many programmes tend to focus on the instrumental promotion of reading (improving academic results) rather than on its educational and human value, which limits the development of practices associated with enjoyment, identity and civic engagement.
Finally, this review highlights the need to critically examine the concept of ‘reading for pleasure’. The polysemy identified - ranging from autonomous choice to subjective enjoyment - is not merely a terminological quibble, but reflects epistemological tensions. Is reading for pleasure an innate inclination, a context-dependent practice, or the result of educational policies? The studies reviewed tend to adopt an operational definition without exploring its implications. Future research should explicitly address this issue, through conceptual analyses or phenomenological studies that capture the experiences adolescents have been through.
In conclusion, the field of research into reading for pleasure in secondary education is expanding, but it faces four key challenges: (1) shift the focus from deficiencies to the exploration of practices and contexts that enable meaningful reading experiences; (2) diversify and deepen research methodologies; (3) broaden the perspective on benefits to encompass holistic human development, in dialogue with socio-emotional and motivational theories; and (4) balance the analysis of external conditions with an exploration of readers’ subjective experiences, integrating the possibilities and challenges of the digital realm. Addressing these challenges will enable us to move towards a more robust and equitable research agenda, one that recognises reading for pleasure as a fundamental cultural and educational practice for fostering critical, empathetic and socially engaged individuals.
LIMITATIONS
Given the selection process for the studies included in this literature review, the findings and conclusions drawn cannot be generalised to non-formal education settings or to educational levels other than secondary education. Nor are they conclusive with regard to other stages of life - such as childhood or adulthood - or in relation to people with disabilities or diverse abilities. Furthermore, most of the studies included in this review originate from Western contexts, which limits the extent to which the findings can be generalised to situations in the Global South. Similarly, these studies included recent research articles in English and Spanish, thereby excluding potentially relevant contributions in other languages.
AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS
Edna-Liliana Herrera-Lozano: Project management; Formal analysis; Conceptualisation; Data curation; Writing – first draft; Writing – revision and editing; Research; Methodology; Resources; Software; Visualisation.
Carola Gómez-Medina: Project management; Writing – proofreading and editing; Software; Supervision; Validation.
REFERENCES
1
Alvermann, D. E., & Kaminski-Sanders, R. (2019). Adolescents' literacies in a digital world. En R. Hobbs & P. Mihailidis (Eds.-in-Chief), The International Encyclopedia of Media Litercy. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118978238.ieml0005
2
3
Asplund, S., Egeland, B. L., & Olin-Scheller, C. (2024). Sharing is caring: Young people’s narratives about BookTok and volitional reading. Language and Education, 38(4), 635–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2024.2324947
4
Ayala-Campoverde, M., & Loyola-Illescas, E. (2025). Active methods to promote reading in high school. Innovaciones Educativas, 27(42), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.22458/ie.v27i42.5336
5
Bamise, O. F., & Akande, S. O. (2021). Gender differences in the reading habits of secondary school students of Osun State public schools. African Educational Research Journal, 9(3), 720–727. https://doi.org/10.30918/aerj.93.21.072
6
Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49(4), 193–224. https://doi.org/10.1159/000094368
7
8
Bezek, G., Şevgin, H., & Kayri, M. (2023). Reviewing the factors affecting PISA reading skills by using Random Forest and MARS Methods. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 10(1), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1192590
9
10
CASEL. (2020). What is SEL? Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. CASEL. https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/
11
Collins, V. J., Dargan, I. W., Walsh, R. L., & Merga, M. K. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of a whole-school reading for pleasure program. Issues in Educational Research, 32(1), 89–104. https://www.iier.org.au/iier32/collins.pdf
12
13
Cremin, T., Mottram, M., Bearne, E., & Goodwin, P. (2008). Exploring teachers’ knowledge of children’s literature. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(4), 449–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802482363
14
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
15
Dera, J., Brouwer, S., & Welling, A. (2023). #BookTok’s appeal on ninth‐grade students: An inquiry into students’ responses on a social media revelation. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 67(2), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1303
17
Federación de Gremios de Editores de España. (2024). Hábitos de lectura y compra de libros en España 2023. Federación de Gremios de Editores de España. https://federacioneditores.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/lectura-y-compra-de-libros-2023.pdf
18
Gonçalves-Da-Silva, F. (2026). Prácticas y percepciones de lectura en adolescentes y jóvenes: Estudio exploratorio, 2025. Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (OEI). https://oei.int/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/digital-oei-praucticas-y-percepciones-de-lectura-en-adolescentes-y-jouvenes-estudio-exploratorio-2025.pdf
19
González-Ramírez, C. (2022). Prácticas de mediación de lectura literaria en el contexto escolar chileno: El quehacer del profesor mediador. Revista Sophia Austral, 28, 13. https://doi.org/10.22352/SAUSTRAL20222813
20
Harrison, R., Jones, B., Gardner, P., & Lawton, R. (2021). Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): An appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 144. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y
21
Henning, J., & Crow, S. R. (2023). Reading perceptions of intrinsically motivated high school juniors. School Libraries Worldwide, 28(2), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.29173/slw8716
23
Johansson, M. (2021). Literary socialisation through education: A comparative study of Swedish and French upper secondary school students’ reception of a narrative text. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2021.21.02.03
24
Leu, D. J., McVerry, J. G., O’Byrne, W. I., Kiili, C., Zawilinski, L., Everett‐Cacopardo, H., Kennedy, C., & Forzani, E. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: Expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.55.1.1
25
Loh, C. E. (2024). What makes adolescents want to read? Examining adolescents’ contemporary print and new media (fiction) leisure reading through mobile ethnography. Language and Education, 38(4), 596–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2024.2326099
26
Loh, C. E., & Binny, A. L. (2024). “I use the library sometimes just to lose myself”: School libraries supporting students’ wellbeing and flourishing. IFLA Journal, 51(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352241276840
27
McKirdy, P. (2021). Do primary school libraries affect teenagers’ attitudes towards leisure reading? IFLA Journal, 47(4), 520–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035220983359
28
Merga, M. K. (2021a). How can BookTok on TikTok inform readers’ advisory services for young people? Library & Information Science Research, 43(2), 101091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101091
29
Merga, M. K. (2021b). The role of the library within school-level literacy policies and plans in Australia and the United Kingdom. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 54(3), 469–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211022410
30
Merga, M. K., & Ferguson, C. (2021). School librarians supporting students’ reading for pleasure: A job description analysis. Australian Journal of Education, 65(2), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944121991275
31
Merga, M. K., & Roni, S. M. (2025). “An uphill battle”: School library professionals fostering student reading engagement. English in Education, 59(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2025.2456718
32
33
Mora-Venegas, P. F. D., & Villanueva-Roa, J. de D. (2022). La lectura, ¿placer obligado?: Caso del colegio Villa Santa María de la Comuna de El Bosque, Santiago de Chile. Campo Abierto. Revista de Educación, 41(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.17398/0213-9529.41.1.123
34
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2021). PIRLS 2021 assessment framework. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://pirls2021.org/framework
35
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results: What students know and can do (Volume I). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
36
OECD. (2021). 21st-century readers: Developing literacy skills in a digital world. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a83d84cb-en
37
Reads, T. (2023). The impact of reading challenge programs on student reading for pleasure and literacy achievement. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 72(3), 313–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2023.2212942
38
Rivera-Jurado, P., & Romero-Oliva, M. F. (2020). El adolescente como lector accidental de textos literarios: Hábitos de lectura literaria en educación secundaria. Ocnos, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.18239/ocnos_2020.19.3.2313
39
Smith, J., & Nichols, T. P. (2023). Book choice and the affective economy of literacy. Journal of Literacy Research, 55(4), 325–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X231200812
41
Tassone, M. (2025). Literacy assessment in the early years of schooling in an era of neoliberalism. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 25(2), 422–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687984231161119
42
UNESCO. (2006). Education for all global monitoring report 2006: Literacy for life [Report]. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000144839
43
UNESCO. (2016). Reading the past, writing the future: Fifty years of promoting literacy. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245409
44
UNESCO. (2020). Informe de seguimiento de la educación en el mundo: Inclusión y educación. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718
45
UNESCO. (2021). Futures of education: Learning to become. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707
46
UNESCO-OREALC. (2020). Tercer Estudio Regional Comparativo y Explicativo (TERCE): Informe regional. Oficina Regional de Educación para América Latina y el Caribe. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374812
47
Webber, C., Wilkinson, K., Duncan, L. G., & McGeown, S. (2024). Adolescents’ perspectives on the barriers to reading for pleasure. Literacy, 58, 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12359
48
Whiting, P., Savović, J., Higgins, J. P. T., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., Davies, P., Kleijnen, J., & Churchill, R. (2016). ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 69, 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005
49
Zare, M., Kozak, S., Rodrigues, M. L., & Martin-Chang, S. (2023). The roots of reading for pleasure: Recollections of reading and current habits. Literacy, 57, 262–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12315