Abstract
Motivated children are more likely to comprehend and enjoy their reading than their non-motivated peers. However, research has predominantly explored the role of reading motivation in neurotypical children and overlooked its potential benefits for children with a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In this study, we aimed to a) explore the views of ADHD and non-ADHD children about their experiences of reading motivation and overall reading and b) test for any qualitative differences in the reading motivation profiles and reading experiences of the two groups. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 children: 12 with ADHD and 12 non-ADHD. We explored children's views about their reading experiences in relation to motivation, with a focus on choice and reward. We also tested for qualitative differences between groups. We identified three themes, including motivations to engage in reading, basic needs satisfaction and classroom context. We found that themes were mostly similar across children, with some between-group differences. Reading practices promoting and supporting reading motivation could benefit both ADHD and non-ADHD children. Future reading research should seek the perspectives of children, especially neurodivergent children, including those with ADHD, whose voices remain under-represented.
Introduction
The educational system of England places reading at the heart of the school curriculum and school life (Department for Education [DfE], 2013, 2023). Reading is a highly valued skill, and poor literacy has been linked with low academic attainment, negative school experiences, exclusion and poor mental health (Clark & Picton, 2018). Similar to the development of core reading skills, including word reading and listening comprehension, the curriculum emphasises reading for pleasure (DfE, 2012, 2023). Reading for pleasure (commonly named as reading enjoyment) refers to the type of reading that children do freely for personal satisfaction or initially do upon request but then continue out of personal interest (Clark & Rumbold, 2006). The link between reading motivation, reading for pleasure and increased reading attainment (e.g., typically measured via standardised reading assessments) has been reported systematically (DfE, 2023). Despite this, only one in three young people in the UK enjoys reading, regardless of their backgrounds, and this drop is particularly pronounced for those in primary school and males (Clark et al., 2025). Gender differences can be influenced by societal attitudes and masculinity norms, with reading often perceived as ‘boring’ and ‘more for girls than boys’ (Clark & Douglas, 2011), and with boys reporting lower confidence in their reading skills compared to girls (McGeown et al., 2015).
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Reading and Motivation
Drawing upon the neurodiversity perspective (Sonuga-Barke, 2023), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a naturally occurring variation in neurocognitive functioning, rather than a disorder as commonly viewed in the medical model of disability, characterised by differences in attention, hyperactivity and impulsivity levels which can present both strengths and challenges that are shaped largely by the (classroom) context. Clinically, ADHD is classified into three types: the predominantly inattentive type, in which mainly inattention is present; the predominantly hyperactive/impulsive type, in which hyperactivity and impulsivity, but not inattention, are present; and the combined type, in which both inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity are present (American Psychological Association [APA], 2013). The male-to-female ratio among ADHD young people is estimated at 3.9:1, with females often under-diagnosed (Martin et al., 2024). This under-diagnosis in females is partly due to diagnostic overshadowing by other mental health conditions (e.g., anxiety, depression), initial misdiagnosis—females are more likely to present as inattentive and thus more likely to be missed, as inattentiveness often does not prompt timely referral compared to hyperactivity/impulsivity, which is more easily noticed in males—and a later age of proper diagnosis (Martin et al., 2024).
ADHD children often struggle more with reading than their non-ADHD peers, as this requires the skill to focus on relevant textual information and maintain attention for prolonged periods, despite distractions (Parks et al., 2022). These skills are important; however, both the reading environment and motivation play a major role in reading. For instance, ADHD children are reported to have lower academic motivation (e.g., intrinsic motivation) than their non-ADHD peers (Smith et al., 2019), which could contribute to poor reading accuracy, an important component of successful reading comprehension (Oakhill et al., 2014). Children with ADHD often perceive their classrooms as providing limited opportunities for autonomy (Rogers & Tannock, 2018). They are also more likely to encounter upsetting experiences in the school environment, both academic (e.g., repetitive or unengaging tasks) and social (e.g., conflicts with teachers). Such challenges can impose a significant emotional burden and contribute to a vicious cycle of negative school experiences (Lukito et al., 2025; Pavlopoulou et al., 2025), which, in turn, may undermine their reading/academic motivation and attainment.
Reading motivation is a multifaceted construct. Here, this refers to the factors that drive children to engage in reading, including values and goals for reading, reading attitudes, self-competence beliefs and children's sense of autonomy (Wigfield et al., 2016). Motivated children are more likely to spend time on reading, make effective use of key reading strategies (e.g., inference-making) and develop good vocabulary and decoding skills, which in turn can increase their reading comprehension (Becker et al., 2010; Miyamoto et al., 2019). The more children engage in reading and enjoy it, the more likely they are to form positive beliefs about themselves as readers, which can, in turn, enhance their well-being (Clark & Teravainen-Goff, 2018). Reading for pleasure has also been associated with higher cognitive performance (e.g., increased attention, reduced hyperactivity) and better mental health outcomes (e.g., reduced stress and depression) both in childhood and adolescence (Mak & Fancourt, 2020; Sun et al., 2024).
Self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985) offers an empirically validated theory to explore reading motivation. Drawing on SDT, children have the innate propensity to satisfy their basic needs for competence, relatedness and autonomy. In educational settings, competence refers to a child's need to feel they can accomplish a meaningful task. Relatedness describes a child's need for connectedness with their teachers and classmates. Autonomy refers to a child's need for personal causation and a sense of control over learning (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Self-determination theory distinguishes between intrinsic motivation (a child's intrinsic drive to engage in reading out of interest or curiosity) and extrinsic motivation (a child's need to engage in reading driven by extrinsic factors such as attainment of high grades or rewards) and proposes that intrinsic motivation can be secured when these needs are being met. Self-determination theory has important educational implications, focusing on classroom-related factors that support or thwart children's reading engagement. Intrinsically motivated readers who read for the sake of reading are more likely to become lifelong readers (Wigfield et al., 2016). Regular reading and reading for pleasure during childhood are regarded as key factors in the development of reading ability and sustained engagement in reading later in life (DfE, 2012; Sullivan & Brown, 2015). For young ADHD readers, this is particularly important, as intrinsic motivation could have the potential to counterbalance some of the cognitive challenges they may experience and make it easier to sustain positive reading habits over time.
Choice and Reward
Choice has long been regarded as a key dimension of intrinsic motivation that encourages children to exercise a sense of autonomy over what to read, how to read or when to read (Flowerday et al., 2004; Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997). The ability to choose what to read has been found as a key avenue to reading enjoyment in young people (Clark et al., 2025). Choice has also been viewed as a trigger of interest, which, when continuously nurtured and supported by teachers, could lead to enhanced intrinsic motivation and reading (Hidi, 2000; Hidi & Renninger, 2006). Children who experience a sense of ownership (e.g., choice over the reading materials) often show increased reading enjoyment and comprehension, even after controlling for topic interest, reading ability and gender (Fridkin & Hurry, 2025). Choice as a trigger of interest can be linked to cognitive flow, hyperfocus and monotropism, all previously studied predominantly in adults. Flow is a state of deep concentration in engaging activities, where interest and enjoyment are essential (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In ADHD (and Autism), hyperfocus describes a state of deep immersion, where people may become so absorbed that they tune out everything else in their environment (Ashinoff & Abu-Akel, 2021; Rapaport et al., 2024). Monotropism, studied mainly in Autism and relevant to ADHD, involves intense focus on one or a few interests at a given time compared to neurotypical people who may engage with multiple interests at the same time (Dwyer et al., 2024; Murray et al., 2005). Limited reading research also suggests that interesting and novel reading materials—such as stories with less familiar characters or surprising endings—can enhance the reading performance of ADHD children (Beike & Zentall, 2012). Thus, choice may help ADHD children sustain attention on intrinsically meaningful reading tasks for longer periods.
Reward (e.g., for task completion) has been described as a central extrinsic motivator. Intrinsic motivation is more systematically linked with positive outcomes in neurotypical children, including increased reading frequency, breadth of reading and reading for pleasure, than extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation, for example, via the provision of rewards, has a more contested association with reading outcomes such as reduced intrinsic motivation and reading attainment. Findings are relatively mixed, with some studies (Becker et al., 2010; Schiefele & Loweke, 2018) suggesting that extrinsic motivation is associated with poor reading skills (e.g., reading literacy, reading amount). Other studies suggest that extrinsic motivation may not necessarily have a deleterious effect on children's reading, provided that children already perform at high reading levels (McGeown et al., 2012) or have moderate to high levels of intrinsic motivation (Park, 2011).
Reading Motivation: An Underexplored Concept in ADHD Children
Reading research has principally investigated the benefits of reading motivators, including choice and reward, with neurotypical children. The role of motivation in the reading of ADHD children has been systematically overlooked. Most ADHD studies (Dunlap et al., 1994; Powell & Nelson, 1997) have tested the effects of choice and reward during behavioural interventions that aim to modify children's behaviour (e.g., on-task behaviour) rather than target directly their learning, which limits their educational value. These studies are also dated and employ single case study designs, which restricts their methodological robustness and overall effectiveness. Behavioural interventions have been regularly criticised for aiming to ‘fix’ ADHD-related behaviours to align with neurotypical and societal norms (Bottema-Beutel & Pavlopoulou, 2021), rather than adapting the learning environment to support children in becoming skilled, motivated readers. Existing research shows that providing primary-aged children with attention differences/difficulties a choice of fiction reading materials can significantly enhance their reading comprehension (Kakoulidou et al., 2021).
There is limited research seeking children's accounts to understand their reading motivation experiences (McGeown et al., 2020). Some literature investigates the views of neurotypical children around reading motivation and reading for pleasure (Fridkin & Hurry, 2025), but not the views of children with ADHD. Seeking the perspectives of ADHD children could help design reading practices that better meet their needs, as these children often lack tailored support. During semi-structured interviews with 39 children aged 9–16 years old, Morsink et al. (2017) found that major themes related to everyday motivation, such as achieving a sense of togetherness, feeling competent, valuing social reinforcement and feeling free and independent, were valued as equally important by ADHD and non-ADHD children. ADHD children showed a greater aversion towards boring and lengthy tasks and an aversion towards the slow passing of time, mentioning being less attracted to familiar and predictable tasks. They also struggled more with cognitively challenging tasks when too much mental effort was required. Despite this often-challenging aspect of reading, many neurodivergent people enjoy and engage in reading fiction and non-fiction, finding emotional value in this (Chapple et al., 2021) and experiencing a sense of comfort, happiness and connection, for example, when reading fiction books featuring positive neurodivergent characters (Webber et al., 2024a).
Motivation has been found to be equally important for children with and without ADHD, although the former group may have a greater need for motivational support (Smith & Langberg, 2018). From a neuroscientific perspective, differences in the activity of the ADHD brain's reward circuitry mechanisms, specifically in the dopaminergic pathway, could lead ADHD children to need greater motivation to meet an optimal stimulation threshold (Volkow et al., 2011). From a social psychology perspective, ADHD children are more likely to perceive their classrooms as limiting their agency and self-expression (Rogers & Tannock, 2018), and, therefore, they may benefit more from learning environments that support autonomy.
Failure to seek ADHD children's perspectives in reading research poses several limitations. Studies traditionally use reading motivation questionnaires primarily developed for neurotypical children. For example, the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ; Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997) has proved very informative in measuring reading motivation and its relationship with reading outcomes; however, it is unclear whether testing also included children with different neurocognitive profiles, such as ADHD children. Additionally, qualitative measures of reading motivation could offer insight into the conditions under which young readers show enhanced or reduced motivation. Reading motivation is not a static construct that exists independent of context but can rather develop and flourish, for example, in autonomy-supportive and rewarding learning environments (Renninger & Hidi, 2016). Thus, classifying ADHD children as having poorer-than-average reading motivation is over-simplistic and may not fully reflect their motivational profiles.
Study Aims
This interview study 1 had two key aims. First, it sought the views of ADHD and non-ADHD children about their reading experiences and the role of motivation in reading, with a focus on choice and reward. Second, it explored potential qualitative differences in the motivational profiles and reading experiences of the two groups, as previous research has primarily sought the accounts of non-ADHD children. The use of specific questions around choice and reward, rather than broad questions with children, was considered sensible to address the specific study aims, considering the relatively abstract nature of the motivation concepts.
Methods
Participants
Twenty-four children took part in the interviews; 12 non-ADHD children and 12 ADHD children, aged 8–11 years old (Mean age = 9.33 years; SD = 0.79). Both groups had the same sex split, specifically four females and eight males per group. Children with a diagnosis of ADHD were initially sought and the non-ADHD group was recruited using a ‘snowball’ technique with one-to-one matching (Barkley & Fischer, 2011). The ADHD children were recruited through primary schools and through national ADHD groups and organisations on social media. Six ADHD children were on ADHD medication but were asked to stay medication-free at least 24 h before the interviews as part of a larger study.
The two groups were matched on sex, chronological age and baseline reading ability on a pair level. Children did not differ on receptive vocabulary (standardised vocabulary score; an indicator of general IQ) and socio-economic status (e.g., eligibility for free school meals). There were significant differences in English as an Additional Language (EAL) between the two groups χ2 (1, N = 24) = 4.8, p = .028 (two-tailed), φ = 0.45; children with ADHD (N = 12) did not have an EAL status, whereas four out of 12 children without ADHD had an EAL status. Some ADHD children had co-occurring differences/conditions, including Autism/Autistic traits (N = 6), sensory differences (N = 3), developmental co-ordination condition (N = 2), anxiety (N = 2), dyslexia/dyslexic traits (N = 2), dyspraxia/dysgraphia (N = 1) and oppositional defiant condition (N = 1). One non-ADHD child had dyslexic traits. Table 1 shows children's background information.
Participants’ Background Information.
Note. ADHD (N = 12), Non-ADHD (N = 12). ADHD = attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The two groups were matched based on chronological age, sex and baseline reading ability. BPVS-III = British Picture Vocabulary Scale (3rd Edition), raw scores were converted to standardised scores by chronological age (M = 100; SD = 15); MRQ = Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (raw scores); Baseline reading ability was measured based on children's reading comprehension scores (maximum score was 12).
Materials
British Picture Vocabulary Scale—3rd Edition (BPVS-III): The BPVS-III is extensively used to assess receptive vocabulary with both ADHD and non-ADHD young people (Dunn et al., 2009; Farran et al., 2020). The BPVS-III scores serve as an indicator of general IQ. This one-to-one 15-min computerised version includes 14 sets of 12 items (words), each of increasing difficulty. Raw scores were converted to standardised scores (M = 100; SD = 15) by age (in years and months).
Adapted version of the MRQ. An adapted version of the MRQ was used to determine baseline reading motivation (Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997). This version, modified by Fridkin (2018), included 38 items. Given its extensive use with neurotypical children, we chose this to also evaluate its applicability with ADHD children. Total scores were derived from the sum of all items. Complete MRQ data following imputation (data not completed at random) were included. Cronbach's alpha gave a value of .89, showing good-to-excellent reliability.
Baseline reading ability. Three stories, developed by the first author and piloted with same-aged children, were matched for word length and difficulty level to assess reading comprehension as part of a larger study. The stories included a set of open-ended and multiple-choice questions (maximum score was 12) and were developed using Key Stage 2 Statutory Tests as a model (see Kakoulidou, 2022 for a detailed description of the stories). These had a similar grammatical structure and a reading age of 8–9 years old. Each child received one of the three stories, and reading scores were used as an indicator of baseline reading ability.
Semi-structured interviews. Each child took part in an individual, audio-recorded, face-to-face semi-structured interview. The interview schedule included open-ended questions that explored children's reading experiences in relation to intrinsic motivation (choice), extrinsic motivation (rewards), interest and attention. The interviews focused on children's perceptions of their reading, including what makes books interesting or boring and easy or difficult to read or pay attention to. They also explored children's views on the role of choice and rewards during reading, as well as the teaching practices that support attention and reading in the classroom.
Procedures
The study received ethical approval for school and home testing as part of a larger study by the Department of Psychology and Human Development at University College London, Institute of Education. Information letters and opt-in consent forms were sent to parents/carers, either directly or via teachers before data collection. Twenty-three children were interviewed individually in a quiet school room, and one child was interviewed in their home. The study aims were discussed with children. Children offered verbal assent. No requests for withdrawal were received. The interviews took place during morning or afternoon sessions. Interviews varied in length (range = 9.27–20.36 min) but mean interview times did not differ between ADHD (16.12 min) and non-ADHD children (14.78 min).
Data Analysis and Reflexivity
Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using NVivo 12, following the six phases of Thematic Analysis by Braun and Clarke (2006). These include i) familiarisation with the data, ii) generation of initial codes, iii) searching for themes, iv) reviewing themes, v) defining and naming themes, and vi) producing the report. We applied a hybrid approach where we coded the full interviews, generated codes directly from the data (inductive) and used the SDT framework given the focus of our research questions on the role of choice and reward (deductive). Thematic Analysis was reflexive (Braun & Clarke, 2019), as we moved backwards and forwards between the data and analysis. The first author carried out the full thematic analysis with the last author conducting a thematic analysis on 20% of interviews. We examined all the data together, due to codes and themes being shared across the two groups and re-coded, where necessary. The first and last authors were familiar with reading motivation literature, and they had regular online meetings to discuss the analytic approach and ensure that important patterns were not overlooked. All authors reviewed the final themes. Themes were created within a ‘contextualist’ framework of critical realism (Botha, 2025) to explore children's subjective reading experiences (the empirical level), group differences in reading motivation and reading (the actual level) and the underlying mechanisms that affect reading motivation, including the classroom environment (the real level).
Positionality
Our neurodiverse team includes both neurotypical and neurodivergent members with lived experiences of neurodivergence (personal and family) and a range of professional expertise (educators, psychology researchers and clinicians), which informed the conceptualisation and/or interpretation of this study. The term neurodiverse is used to reflect this collective diversity. We have chosen not to identify individual authors’ neurocognitive profiles to respect privacy, while acknowledging that the study benefited from a range of lived and professional experiences. Inspired by the neurodiversity movement, we view ADHD as a neurodevelopmental difference rather than a disorder (Sonuga-Barke & Thapar, 2021). We also acknowledge the strong influence of context, in this case, the reading environment, on young people's reading outcomes, as well as the key role of teaching adaptations in supporting ADHD pupils, who often face greater challenges at school.
Results
We identified three main themes related to reading: 1) Motivations to engage in reading, 2) Basic needs satisfaction, and 3) Classroom context. Pseudonyms are used for all children.
Theme 1: Motivations to Engage in Reading
Both groups spoke of a range of factors motivating them to engage in reading. Some talked about the role of reading in escaping reality and their well-being: ‘If I have a good book, I get attached to it. It entertains me when I’m bored’ (Alice, non-ADHD); ‘My favourite things about books are that they can take you off to a new world’ (Jack, ADHD); ‘I love reading because you find out more stuff about people, and then you have a new world’ (William, ADHD).
Both groups also shared thoughts about the educational benefits of reading as this can improve vocabulary and help gain knowledge: ‘Reading gives you more knowledge and then you can be better at reading and understanding words’ (Liam, non-ADHD); ‘It's (reading) really interesting and you get to learn so many things’ (Jessica, non-ADHD); ‘When I read difficult books, I can find more stuff about the world’ (William, ADHD). Children expressed their preference towards different text types and genres. Most children enjoyed reading fiction over non-fiction books: ‘I like fantasy, make-believe books. Most children in my class like fantasy, like vampire diaries’ (John, ADHD); ‘I like fairytales’ (Jessica, non-ADHD); ‘I like airplane books’ (Thomas, ADHD); ‘I like mysteries, I always want to know more, and to see what happens next’ (Charlotte, ADHD);‘I like fictional books because they take you off to a different world. Normal non-fiction keeps you in the same world’ (Arthur, non-ADHD).
Children, particularly those with ADHD, expressed their preference towards challenging books, which are neither too easy nor too difficult to read: ‘I like challenging books. I don’t like the ones that are too hard to read, but I like to find the balance. I won’t just read easy books’ (Michael, ADHD); ‘I wouldn’t like it if it was just a small book, because I like books to challenge myself’ (Charlotte, ADHD). Nevertheless, a few showed a strong aversion towards extremely challenging books: ‘I don’t like it when there are too many people. It can get confusing’ (John, ADHD); ‘If there are lots and lots of characters, then I would get confused (Emma, non-ADHD).
Both groups highlighted the contribution of interest to both affective (e.g., enjoyment, liking) and cognitive engagement (e.g., task performance). Regarding affective engagement, many children were motivated to read out of personal interest: ‘The books I read are quite interesting’ (Ethan, ADHD); ‘I like adventure books because they are just too interesting to read’ (Jessica, non-ADHD); ‘I like fantasy, make-believe books. Most children in my class like fantasy, like vampire diaries’ (John, ADHD). In other cases, children stressed how teachers can help make reading more interesting, for example, by acting out: ‘Teachers can use facial expressions and funny language’ (William, ADHD); ‘Teachers can act out scenes from the books’ (Arthur, non-ADHD); ‘I like it when my teacher uses different voices to make reading funny’ (Elizabeth, ADHD).
Both groups explained that interesting books with catchy covers, funny characters or unexpected plot twists, motivated reading, leading to a loss of track of time: ‘I normally enjoy the book that I pick. It sucks you in the book and if you close the book, you are still focusing on this and you want to read more’ (Charles, non-ADHD). Losing track of time when reading interesting books was more mentioned among ADHD children, as illustrated by the quote below: I always lose track of time when I read an interesting book. I think it's because this book took my soul… When I flip the pages, it feels like I’m not flipping the pages. It feels like I’m on the same page, but I’m not. (Elizabeth, ADHD)
Conversely, boring books (e.g., boring plot, repetitive, predictable) were more likely to disengage them: ‘Whenever I read a boring book, then I find this annoying, and I don’t want to read it anymore. I have to change it’ (William, ADHD). ‘If the book is dull and boring, I start thinking about other stuff’ (Alice, non-ADHD).
All children across groups mentioned that their schools implemented a reward system, which included stickers, certificates, bookmarks, badges and extra playtime. The two elements identified about rewards were perceived value and factors affecting rewards. Perceived value was defined in terms of both interest/enjoyment value, which refers to the enjoyment children experience when receiving a reward, and utility value refers to whether children perceived rewards as useful during reading (Wigfield & Cambria, 2010). Some children enjoyed receiving a reward and felt proud of themselves as rewards were proof of their hard work and progress: ‘It's nice to get a reward for all the reading I’ve done’ (Anthony, ADHD); ‘Certificate is a good thing to have. It is a card that says kind things, but it's more than kind things. It means I’m good at reading’ (Jackson, non-ADHD); ‘It's like proof that you worked hard’ (Daniel, non-ADHD). Nevertheless, others expressed that they enjoy reading ‘for the sake of reading’ and did not feel that rewards are necessary for engagement. ADHD children were more likely than their non-ADHD peers to acknowledge that they engage in reading, regardless of the presence of a reward, primarily out of personal interest in the activity itself: ‘It's reading, you don’t need a reward’ (Abigail, ADHD); ‘I like reading. Certificates are just papers. There is nothing special about them’ (Grace, ADHD). As Jack (ADHD) describes below: It's quite nice to get a certificate and it's nice to get things like that, but I’d rather read for the sake of reading, rather than just read for the achievement or the toys. I don’t do it for the reward. I know a couple of children do it in our class.
Some children in both groups discussed factors that influenced the impact of rewards. They explained that whether or not rewards can increase reading engagement depends on the meaningfulness of rewards (whether they are perceived as valuable or not by children), age effects (younger versus older children) and levels of book interest (to what extent children are already interested in a book): ‘If it's just a sticker, no one would like it’ (Abigail, ADHD); ‘Rewards could help only some children. I know some people in my class that if they get a reward such as a pencil for their reading, they won’t like it’ (Arthur, non-ADHD); ‘Younger ones are more excited about rewards than older ones’ (Abigail, ADHD); ‘If it's a book they (children) want to read, they don’t need a reward. If it's a book they don’t like to read, they should get a reward for trying’ (Elizabeth, ADHD).
Theme 2: Basic Needs Satisfaction
This theme was named drawing on SDT, which posits that the fulfilment of the basic psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness and competence can promote and support intrinsic motivation. Several children mentioned that exercising choice over their reading helps them pick books based on their interests. Children preferred choosing their books because others might pick a book they find boring or inappropriate for their reading level: ‘I like choosing because others might pick a book that I don’t like, they might pick a horror book’ (Thomas, ADHD); ‘If someone else chooses the books, they might get my range wrong, they might go under or over’ (Jack, ADHD).
Some children in both groups expressed negative feelings including frustration or disengagement due to the lack of autonomy, for example, when they had limited opportunities to pick their reading material or when they were ‘forced’ to read material they did not enjoy: ‘When you are forced to read a book, you are bored to it’ (Sophia, non-ADHD); ‘I am happy that I get to choose the book. If the teacher just gave me a book, then I wouldn’t feel that comfortable with it’ (Anthony, ADHD): If someone picks a horror book and they tell me to read it, I’m not going to read it. But, if I choose it out myself, I know what genre I like, so I can choose the book I want. (Daniel, non-ADHD)
Both groups expressed a preference towards supported autonomy, but ADHD children shared a more positive affective response when their parents or friends supported them with book selection: ‘I like my mum and dad picking the books because then there's more adventure in the book. Because that way I don’t know which book they’ve got and what's happening in the book’ (Anthony, ADHD); ‘I choose books. However, sometimes my friends would say that a book is good, and other times my friend who reads the same (book) series may recommend the next one (book in the series)’ (Jack, ADHD); ‘Sometimes other people choose for me because I want to find something new that I like, then I end up liking it’ (Sophia, non-ADHD). Some children without ADHD stressed the need for teacher autonomy support through practices that promote child autonomy: ‘Teachers should listen to children's ideas for what books they should get’ (Liam, non-ADHD); ‘Teachers should let children choose what books they want to read, an adventure story, a mystery book or something completely different. Children can choose and maybe vote if they want an adventure or a mystery story’ (Arthur, non-ADHD); ‘I think that instead of all of us reading one certain book, there should be a survey on what the book should be’ (Emma, non-ADHD).
Relatedness referred to the ‘help’ offered by teachers or parents during reading and to positive feelings experienced by children when reading to others (e.g., parents, siblings) or when having other people read to them. This need for teacher–child relatedness and family–child relatedness was expressed to a greater degree by ADHD children: ‘Sometimes the teacher can read with them (children) and help them get the words correct’ (Ethan, ADHD); ‘Teachers should help children with reading if something doesn’t make sense’ (Henry, non-ADHD); ‘I love reading, especially when my mum and dad read to me. I think I like it more when other people read to me, but I do like it when I read to other people’ (Charlotte, ADHD). According to Elizabeth (ADHD): I like reading to my brother. I like reading to others because it doesn’t matter what voice you do. It doesn’t matter if you get a word wrong. You can always go back and correct it. It is very calm.
Competence was defined in two ways: children's general perceptions of themselves as readers, referred to as perceived competence, and their perceptions of their vocabulary knowledge, referred to as vocabulary competence. Regarding perceived competence, most children across both groups perceived themselves as good readers, wanted to improve and their self-perceptions were shaped by others’ feedback: ‘I feel that I am a good reader. I read the books that I like very quickly’ (Arthur, non-ADHD); ‘I think I’m a good reader because my parents always say to me that I am a good reader (Anthony, ADHD); ‘I feel that I’m a good reader. My teacher and my friend say it because every time that I read a book, I always get dramatic’ (Sophia, non-ADHD). Good vocabulary knowledge played a key role in whether children would feel competent to read a book: ‘In this book, all the words are big and made-up. It is hard to read’ (Ben, non-ADHD); ‘There is one book, where my belly is teasing. The words are all crunch, and I can’t read them’ (Ethan, ADHD).
Theme 3: Classroom Context
Both groups described classroom context, and particularly classroom noise as a key environmental factor affecting attention and reading engagement: ‘Everyone's talking, and I can’t concentrate. It is quite hard’ (Ethan, ADHD); ‘It's quite noisy in our class, and most of us like a quiet class, where we can read our books’ (John, ADHD); ‘If someone talks, you can’t concentrate’ (Jackson, non-ADHD). Several children emphasised that teachers should use structure and routine to support reading engagement. A few children without ADHD provided suggestions, such as repositioning disruptive pupils or setting consequences for those who do not read: ‘Teachers should give children a consequence or move them to different tables’ (Ben, non-ADHD); ‘They can separate children who talk’ (Jackson, non-ADHD); ‘Teachers can say to children that they can’t go outside during the playground if they don’t read the book. That's what our teacher does’ (Jessica, non-ADHD).
Discussion
Using semi-structured interviews, this study explored the reading motivation experiences of ADHD and non-ADHD children and possible group differences in their motivational profiles. Three major themes related to reading were identified, including motivations to engage in reading, basic needs satisfaction and classroom context. The interview themes between the two groups were mostly similar. This is in line with previous qualitative and quantitative studies (Morsink et al., 2017, 2021), which reported that young people with and without ADHD (aged 8 to 16 years old) value similar motivational factors such as autonomy, relatedness, interest and togetherness. In terms of the group differences, ADHD children offered more elaborate descriptions of supported autonomy, relatedness, the appropriate level of challenge during reading and perceived (reward) value than their non-ADHD peers.
Key Findings and Implications
Children’s Diverse Reading Motivations and Preferences
Both groups talked about key motivators for reading, including escaping reality, experiencing positive feelings, gaining knowledge and challenging themselves. Similar findings have been reported in research with neurotypical children (McGeown et al., 2020). Children discussed both the affective (e.g., enjoyment) and cognitive (e.g., enhanced reading performance) benefits of reading, underlining that interest has an affective component, which is typically positive, and a cognitive component that refers to the cognitive processes involved in reading (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). In terms of affective engagement, children engaged in reading primarily out of personal interest. Children's diverse reading preferences highlight the need for high-quality books across genres and text types in school libraries. Most favoured narrative books over non-fiction (Clark et al., 2025). As half were interviewed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and research shows many children turned to narrative genres such as adventure, fantasy and make-believe during lockdown to relieve stress (Clark & Picton, 2021), these preferences may have been partly shaped by contextual factors.
Interest can Support Reading Engagement
Children reported being more attentive when reading interesting books and less so when reading boring ones. This suggests that once a reading activity becomes interesting, children may allocate effortlessly their attention to engage in this. Contrarywise, children may show less engagement and cognitive effort when encountering boring tasks (Renninger & Hidi, 2016). By nurturing and supporting children's interests, teachers can foster greater reading engagement. When asked about the phenomenon of ‘losing track of time’, most children, particularly those with ADHD, explained that this is a relatively common experience with interesting books. This experience of being ‘hooked’ in reading resembles the concepts of cognitive flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), hyperfocus (Rapaport et al., 2024) and monotropism (Murray et al., 2005), examined primarily in Autism and ADHD research. Recent work (Dwyer et al., 2024) links hyperfocus in Autistic people to both positive (e.g., enjoyment, productivity) and challenging experiences (e.g., distraction). Further research is needed to clarify how distinct these concepts are and to explore their potential benefits for the cognitive and affective engagement of ADHD young readers.
Mixed Views on the Role of Rewards
All children talked about their school's reward systems. The use of rewards is a common practice in English schools to ‘reinforce the routines, expectations and norms of the school's behaviour culture’ (DfE, 2022, p. 15). When children were asked about the value of rewards during reading, feelings were relatively mixed. This inconsistency in children's views reflects the fragility of findings in research around the effects of rewards (Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Deci et al., 1999). Research with neurotypical children commonly reports the negative effects of rewards on reading outcomes; nevertheless, factors related to the type and presentation of rewards could moderate the strength of these negative effects (Hidi, 2016). In this study, children acknowledged that reward effects may differ based on age, task meaningfulness and book interest. For instance, reward effects may be positive, particularly during uninteresting tasks (Murayama & Kuhbandner, 2011).
Both groups appreciated rewards, likely signifying recognition of their effort and competence in reading. In previous research, young people with and without ADHD aged 8–16 years old perceived rewarded task elements (e.g., gifts, points given) as equally motivating during learning (Morsink et al., 2021). In the present study, children, and particularly those with ADHD, reported being more motivated to read ‘for the sake of reading’ rather than for a reward. This qualitative finding contradicts previous quantitative findings reporting that ADHD children demonstrate typically lower academic (intrinsic) motivation than their non-ADHD peers (Smith et al., 2019). This could be partially attributed to our sample characteristics since both ADHD and non-ADHD children showed similar baseline reading motivation scores, with no significant MRQ group differences. Most importantly, ADHD children represent a heterogeneous population, and not all necessarily show low reading motivation. In addition, children's own beliefs in their ability as readers (self-efficacy) can play a significant role in their reading engagement levels and reading for pleasure (Wigfield et al., 2016). Future research should explore the role of self-efficacy in young ADHD readers.
Need for Autonomy, Competence and Relatedness
Children's accounts highlight the value of autonomy support through story choices. At the same time, teachers should aim to explain the connections between the reading material and children's personal goals while being considerate of children's reading preferences (Assor et al., 2002). Due to increased school workloads, heightened teacher stress levels and limited school resources (Office for Standards in Education [Ofsted], 2019), it may not always be feasible for teachers to provide reading content that aligns with children's reading preferences. Thus, easily applicable teaching practices like story choice can provide another avenue for teachers to foster new, positive reading experiences, even in the absence of children's intrinsic interest. Autonomy could be viewed within SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985), which views choice as a key practice that promotes autonomy, motivation and reading comprehension (Wigfield et al., 2016). Contrariwise, controlling practices that ‘force’ children to engage in reading could thwart intrinsic motivation and reduce reading engagement and overall performance (Lee & Zentall, 2017). Children with ADHD expressed a greater need for the support of significant others when choosing a book. The unlimited choice during book selection is likely overwhelming (Clark & Phythian-Sence, 2008), as this requires a level of ambiguity and uncertainty. Therefore, this group may benefit more from teachers who offer structured autonomy support during reading (e.g., guidance tailored to children's reading interests).
Vocabulary knowledge influenced children's perceived competence as readers. In connection with supported autonomy, offering autonomy through book choice can be valuable; however, choices should be within the child's competence to prevent the reading experience from becoming overly cognitively challenging and mentally draining (Morsink et al., 2017). In our study, ADHD children demonstrated a greater preference for relatively challenging reading activities, those that are neither too difficult nor too easy, but are interesting and engaging, which may reflect their heightened need for stimulation and novelty (Beike & Zentall, 2012; Zentall, 1975). Previous experimental research shows that opportunities to exercise choice may decrease the motivation and performance of adults who feel that they lack competence and expertise in a task (Patall et al., 2014). In the context of reading, choice alone may not guarantee a positive experience; teachers should also provide options that match children's vocabulary knowledge and reading level (Flowerday & Schraw, 2000).
Several children expressed a need for connection with teachers and parents during reading. Children with ADHD shared more positive feelings when reading to significant others (e.g., parents) and/or when having other people read to them than their non-ADHD peers. For ADHD children, reading for prolonged periods may be cognitively challenging, and thus reading with significant adults through careful scaffolding and support could be particularly calming and motivating. Reading with teachers can also create a positive space for children to connect with them. This may be especially important for ADHD children who are more likely to experience reduced closeness and higher conflict with teachers (MacLean et al., 2023), which can negatively affect their reading, learning and well-being.
Impact of Classroom Environment
Many children reported greater distraction and irritation due to classroom noise (Massonnie et al., 2020). To minimise noise, a few non-ADHD children suggested that teachers implement structure by providing consequences to ‘noisy’ children, such as reduced playtime or separating children at different tables. In the English educational system, sanctions including moving seats, loss of break time and removal of privileges are common practices for managing behaviour (DfE, 2022). Thus, it is difficult to disentangle whether children mentioned these practices because they found these genuinely helpful in reducing classroom distractibility, or because these were most preferred by their teachers. Overall, we recommend that teachers prioritise proactive and positive classroom management practices, such as co-deciding expectations around classroom behaviour and routine with children (Sierens et al., 2009).
Limitations and Future Directions
This study has several limitations. First, the COVID-19 pandemic delayed recruitment, limiting the number of interviews compared to our original recruitment plan, though 12 participants per group is generally sufficient for rich qualitative data (Hennink & Kaiser, 2022). Future research should examine how intrinsic and extrinsic motivation influence reading outcomes in ADHD children, whether certain motivators are more effective for this group and how motivation varies across ADHD presentations (inattentive, hyperactive, combined) and genders. Second, home factors (e.g., parental involvement, home print environment, socio-economic status) and school factors (e.g., pupil–staff and peer relationships, staff knowledge of supporting ADHD pupils) can also influence reading motivation and merit further study (Clark & Picton, 2018; Clark et al., 2025; Russell et al., 2023; Ward et al., 2021). Third, the interview schedule focused on story choice, interest and reward, which may have overlooked other motivators and how these connect with broader experiences and pupils’ school or life journeys (McGreevy et al., 2024). Fourth, including another neurodivergent group, such as Autistic children, could provide additional insights into how choice and reward support reading motivation in children with different neurocognitive profiles (Gunn & Delafield-Butt, 2016; Wood, 2021).
Overall, qualitative research with children is much needed because reading motivation questionnaires, including the MRQ, have traditionally not been systematically tested with ADHD children and may therefore fail to capture the full spectrum of reading motivational dimensions (McGeown et al., 2020). Participatory literacy research that involves young people in co-design (Webber et al., 2024b) should also include historically under-represented groups, such as neurodivergent youth, to identify reading motivators relevant to their experiences and to test the effects of these motivators in educational interventions.
Conclusion
To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the reading motivation experiences of children with and without ADHD through their accounts. Both groups were driven by similar reading motivators, with ADHD children reporting to benefit more from supported autonomy, relatedness and intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation (e.g., rewards). These findings suggest that reading practices supporting motivation at a whole class, rather than individual level, could prove equally effective for ADHD and non-ADHD children. However, further classroom adaptations may be necessary as ADHD children may show a greater preference for certain types of reading support.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to all children, parents/carers and schools for their participation in the study. Myrofora Kakoulidou would also like to thank A.G. Leventis Foundation for supporting this study through a PhD scholarship and Frances Le-Cornu Knight for supervising this research as part of her PhD.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This PhD research was partially funded by the AG Leventis Foundation.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Generative AI Statement
The authors declare that no generative AI technology was used in the writing of the paper.
Data Availability Statement
Data are not openly available as no permission was sought from participants and their families.