The purpose of these meta-analyses was twofold: 1) to determine whether experimentally - tested sight reading interventions positively influenced rhythmic or melodic sight reading performance and if so; 2) to explore whether the interventions differentially affected rhythmic and melodic sight reading. Two meta-analyses were conducted; one comprised experimental research measuring rhythmic sight reading (46 studies; 68 individual analyses) and another comprised research measuring melodic sight reading (21 studies; 35 individual analyses). Analyses revealed small overall effect sizes (Rhythmic: d = –0.34, 95% CI [–0.50, –0.19]; Melodic: d = –0.35, 95% CI [–0.59, –0.12]). Moderator variables were used to examine how effect size was influenced by treatment type and other study-level design elements. Treatment type significantly influenced both rhythmic and melodic sight reading. For rhythm, treatments that focused on counting systems and included movement or rhythmic drill positively affected sight reading. Melodic results are preliminary due to the limited number of studies, but based on the information available, treatments using collaboration activities or instrumental training positively affected sight reading. Varying notation did not improve sight reading. The type of sight reading (rhythmic, melodic) significantly affected the effectiveness of some treatments.