The increasing prevalence of electronic textbooks (e-texts) in psychology courses necessitates rigorous evaluation of whether students read and learn from electronic texts as well as they do with printed texts. Some meta-analyses indicate a small but reliable advantage of printed text over electronic text on measures of reading comprehension, but recent studies examining interactive e-texts have reported no such print modality advantage. The present study was designed with both experimental control and ecological validity in mind, as college participants were recruited for a paid experiment in which they were randomly assigned to read a chapter of an introductory psychology text in one of three modalities: print book, static pdf, or interactive e-text. We gave participants 1 week to complete their reading at their own pace-wherever and whenever they chose-before administering to them a realistic test for which we created financial performance incentives. Results indicated that students completed their reading assignments in similar fashion across text modality, with the exception that highlighting was most common in the print text condition (although electronic highlighting was available and modeled for participants in the pdf and interactive e-text conditions). Analyses of test performance revealed no evidence for a print text advantage on multiplechoice, fill-in-the-blank, or short-answer questions. Indeed, participants were most likely to score high enough to earn a performance bonus in the interactive e-text condition.