Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-qc88w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-03T05:05:55.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘That's for old so and so's!’: does identity influence older adults’ technology adoption decisions?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2019

Arlene J. Astell ,
Colleen McGrath  and
Erica Dove Open the ORCID record for Erica Dove [Opens in a new window]
Arlene J. Astell
Affiliation:
Research and Academics, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, Whitby, Ontario, Canada Occupational Sciences and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada School of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Colleen McGrath
Affiliation:
School of Occupational Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
Erica Dove*
Affiliation:
Research and Academics, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, Whitby, Ontario, Canada Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. Email: erica.dove@mail.utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The role of identity in older adults’ decision-making about assistive technology adoption has been suggested but not fully explored. This scoping review was conducted to understand better how older adults’ self-image and their desire to maintain this influence their decision-making processes regarding assistive technology adoption. Using the five-stage scoping review framework by Arksey and O'Malley, a total of 416 search combinations were run across nine databases, resulting in a final yield of 49 articles. From these 49 articles, five themes emerged: (a) resisting the negative reality of an ageing and/or disabled identity; (b) independence and control are key; (c) the aesthetic dimension of usability; (d) assistive technology as a last resort; and (e) privacy versus pragmatics. The findings highlight the importance of older adults’ desire to portray an identity consistent with independence, self-reliance and competence, and how this desire directly impacts their assistive technology decision-making adoption patterns. These findings aim to support the adoption of assistive technologies by older adults to facilitate engagement in meaningful activities, enable social participation within the community, and promote health and wellbeing in later life.

Keywords

identityself-imagedecision-makingtechnology adoption

Information

Type
Review Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 40 , Issue 7 , July 2020 , pp. 1550 - 1576
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Access Independent Living Services (2015) Aging with a Disability. Available at https://cilt.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Aging-with-a-Disability-Focus-Group-Report.pdf.Google Scholar
Arksey, H and O'Malley, L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research 8, 19–32.Google Scholar
Astell, AJ, Alm, N, Gowans, G, Ellis, M, Dye, R and Vaughan, P (2009) Involving older people with dementia and their carers in designing computer-based support systems: some methodological considerations. Universal Access in the Information Society 8, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astell, AJ, Malone, B, Williams, G, Hwang, F and Ellis, MP (2014) Leveraging everyday technology for people living with dementia: a case study. Journal of Assistive Technologies 8, 164–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, A and Ngwenyama, O (2010) Bridging the generation gap in ICT use: interrogating identity, technology and interactions in community telecenters. Information Technology for Development 16, 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berridge, C (2017) Active subjects of passive monitoring: responses to a passive monitoring system in low-income independent living. Ageing & Society 37, 537–560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowes, A and McColgan, G (2013) Telecare for older people: promoting independence, participation and identity. Research on Ageing 35, 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broady, T, Chan, A and Caputi, P (2010) Comparison of older and younger adults’ attitudes towards and abilities with computers: implications for training and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 41, 473–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownsell, S, Bradley, DA, Bragg, R, Catlin, P and Carlier, J (2000) Do community alarm users want telecare? Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 6, 199–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, P and Stets, J (2009) Identity Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, K and Chan, AHS (2013) Use or non-use of gerontechnology – a qualitative study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 10, 4645–4666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, K and Chan, AHS (2014) Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a Senior Technology Acceptance Model (STAM). Ergonomics 57, 635–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claes, V, Devriendt, E, Tournoy, J and Milisen, K (2015) Attitudes and perceptions of adults of 60 years and older towards in-home monitoring of the activities of daily living with contactless sensors: an explorative study. International Journal of Nursing Studies 52, 134–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen-Mansfield, J, Creedon, M, Malone, T, Kirkpatrick, M, Dutra, L and Herman, R (2005) Electronic memory aids for community-dwelling elderly persons: attitudes, preferences, and potential utilization. Journal of Applied Gerontology 24, 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copolillo, A, Collins, C, Randall, N and Cash, S (2002) The impact of experience and heuristics on everyday decisions to use mobility devices: the need for control in nine African-American older adults. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics 20, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, JF, D’Ambrosio, LA, Reimer, B and Pratt, MR (2007) Older adult perceptions of smart home technologies: implications for research, policy and market innovations in health care. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Lyon, France; IEEE Publishing, pp. 1810–1815.Google Scholar
Courtney, KL, Demiris, G and Hensel, B (2007) Obtrusiveness of information-based assistive technologies as perceived by older adults in residential care facilities: a secondary analysis. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine 32, 241–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Courtney, K, Demiris, G, Rantz, M and Skubic, M (2008) Needing smart home technologies: the perspectives of older adults in continuing care retirement communities. Informatics in Primary Care 16, 195–201.Google ScholarPubMed
Coventry, L and Briggs, P (2016) Mobile technology for older adults: Protector, motivator or threat? In Zhou, J and Salvendy, G (eds.) Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Design for Aging. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9754. Cham, Switzerland; Springer Publishing, pp. 424–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Create Center (2017) Center for Research and Education on Ageing and Technology Enhancement. Available at http://www.create-center.org.Google Scholar
Czaja, SJ, Charness, N, Fisk, AD, Hertzog, C, Nair, SN, Rogers, W and Sharit, J (2006) Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Ageing and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Ageing 21, 333–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, R, Mann, W and Lutz, B (2012) How older adults make decisions regarding smart technology: an ethnographic approach. Assistive Technology 24, 168–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13, 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demiris, G, Hensel, B, Skubic, M and Rantz, M (2008) Senior residents’ perceived need of and preferences for ‘smart home’ sensor technologies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 24, 120–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demiris, G, Rantz, M, Aud, M, Marek, K, Tyrer, H, Skubic, M and Hussam, A (2004) Older adults’ attitudes towards and perceptions of ‘smart home’ technologies: a pilot study. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine 29, 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeSmet, A, Thompson, D, Baranowski, T, Palmeira, A, Verloigne, M and De Bourdeaudhuij, I (2016) Is participatory design associated with the effectiveness of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion? A meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 18, e94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dionigi, R (2002) Leisure and identity management in later life: understanding competitive sport participation among older adults. World Leisure 3, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dionigi, RA (2015) Stereotypes of aging: their effects on the health of older adults. Journal of Geriatrics 2015, 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dove, E and Astell, AJ (2017) The use of motion-based technology for people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a literature review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 19, e3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fok, D, Polgar, JM, Shaw, L and Jutai, J (2011) Low vision assistive technology device usage and importance in daily occupations. Work 39, 37–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forlizzi, J, DiSalvo, C and Gemperle, F (2004) Assistive robotics and an ecology of elders living independently in their homes. Human–Computer Interaction 19, 25–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frennert, S, Eftring, H and Ostlund, B (2013) What older people expect of robots: a mixed-methods approach. In Herrmann, G, Pearson, MJ, Lenz, A, Bremner, P, Spiers, A and Leonards, U (eds.) Social Robotics. ICSR 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 8239. Cham, Switzerland; Springer Publishing, pp. 19–29.Google Scholar
Gardner, P (2014) The role of social engagement and identity in community mobility among older adults ageing in place. Disability and Rehabilitation 36, 1249–1257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giesbrecht, EM, Miller, WC and Woodgate, RL (2015) Navigating uncharted territory: a qualitative study of the experience of transitioning to wheelchair use among older adults and their care providers. BMC Geriatrics 15, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gooberman-Hill, R and Ebrahim, S (2007) Making decisions about simple interventions: older people's use of walking aids. Age and Ageing 36, 569–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gramstad, A, Storli, SL and Hamran, T (2014) Exploring the meaning of a new assistive technology device for older individuals. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 9, 493–498.Google ScholarPubMed
Greenhalgh, T, Wherton, J, Sugarhood, P, Hinder, S and Procter, R (2013) What matters to older people with assisted living needs? A phenomenological analysis of the use and non-use of telehealth and telecare. Social Science and Medicine 93, 86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hakobyan, L, Lumsden, J and O'Sullivan, D (2015) Participatory design: how to engage older adults in participatory design activities. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction 7, 78–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harré, R (2012) Positioning theory: moral dimensions of socio-cultural psychology. In Valsiner, J (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Culture and and Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 191–206.Google Scholar
Hernández-Encuentra, E, Pousada, M and Gómez-Zúñiga, B (2009) ICT and older people: beyond usability. Educational Gerontology 35, 226–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, R, Betts, LR and Gardner, SE (2015) Older adults’ experiences and perceptions of digital technology: (dis)empowerment, wellbeing, and inclusion. Computers in Human Behavior 48, 415–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindin, MJ (2007) Role theory. In Ritzer, G (ed.), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 3959–3962.Google Scholar
Hirsch, T, Forlizzi, J, Hyder, E, Goetz, J, Stroback, J and Kurtz, C (2000) The ELDer project: social, emotional and environmental factors in the design of eldercare technologies. Paper presented at the Conference on Universal Usability, November 16–17, Washington, DC, pp. 72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, K (2008) Falls in older people: the place of telemonitoring in rehabilitation. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 45, 1183–1194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurd, LC (1999) ‘We're not old!’: older women's negotiation of aging and oldness. Journal of Aging Studies 13, 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joddrell, P and Astell, AJ (2016) Studies involving people with dementia and touchscreen technology: a literature review. JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies 3, e10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, JL, Davenport, R and Mann, WC (2007) Consumer feedback on smart home applications. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation 23, 60–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, E, Axelsson, K, Zingmark, K and Savendtedt, S (2011) The challenge of coming to terms with the use of a new digital assistive device: a case study of two persons with mild dementia. Open Nursing Journal 5, 102–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolb, SM (2012) Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: valid research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies 3, 83–86.Google Scholar
Londei, ST, Rousseau, J, Ducharme, F, St-Arnaud, A, Meunier, J, Saint-Arnaud, J and Giroux, F (2009) An intelligent video monitoring system for fall detection at home: perceptions of elderly people. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 15, 383–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, S (2012) Bodies, technologies, and ageing in Japan: thinking about old people and their silver products. Journal of Cross-cultural Gerontology 27, 119–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lund, M and Nygård, L (2003) Incorporating or resisting assistive devices: different approaches to achieving a desired occupational self-image. Occupation, Participation and Health 23, 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupton, D and Seymour, W (2000) Technology, selfhood and physical disability. Social Science and Medicine 50, 1851–1862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCreadie, C and Tinker, A (2005) The acceptability of assistive technology to older people. Ageing & Society 25, 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, C and Astell, A (2016) The benefits and barriers to technology acquisition: understanding the decision-making processes of older adults with age-related vision loss (ARVL). British Journal of Occupational Therapy 80, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, C, Ellis, M, Hwang, F, Williams, E, Archer, L, Harney-Levine, S, Wright, D and Astell, A (2016) Exploring the use of participatory methods to understand older adults’ experiences of technology adoption: findings from the Challenging Obstacles and Barriers to Assisted Living Technologies (COBALT) project. Paper presented at the Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) 2016 International Conference, July 20–22, Toronto.Google Scholar
Merkel, S and Kucharski, A (2019) Participatory design in gerontechnology: A systematic literature review. The Gerontologist, 59, e16–e25. doi:10.1093/geront/gny034CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molton, IR, Goetz, MC, Jensen, MP and Verrall, A (2012) Evidence for ‘accelerated aging’ in older adults with disability? Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 60, s239.Google Scholar
Nemmers, TM (2004) The influence of ageism and ageist stereotypes on the elderly. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics 22, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neven, L (2010) ‘But obviously not for me’: robots, laboratories and the defiant identity of elder test users. Sociology of Health and Illness 32, 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nihei, M, Inoue, T and Fujie, M (2008) Psychological influence of wheelchairs on the elderly persons from qualitative research of daily living. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics 20, 641–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Normie, L (2011) Technology for ageing in place. Global Ageing Issues and Action 7, 45–53.Google Scholar
Nygård, L (2008) The meaning of everyday technology as experienced by people with dementia who live alone. Dementia 7, 481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orellano-Colón, EM, Mann, WC, Rivero, M, Torres, M, Jutai, J, Santiago, A and Varas, N (2016) Hispanic older adult's perceptions of personal, contextual and technology-related barriers for using assistive technology devices. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities 3, 676–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parette, P and Scherer, M (2004) Assistive technology use and stigma. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities 39, 217–226.Google Scholar
Pino, M, Boulay, M, Jouen, F and Rigaud, AS (2015) Are we ready for robots that care for us? Attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots. Frontiers in Ageing Neuroscience 7, 1–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Porter, EJ (2005) Wearing and using personal emergency response system buttons. Journal of Gerontological Nursing 31, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnik, L, Allen, S, Isenstadt, D, Wasserman, M and Iezzoni, L (2009) Perspectives on use of mobility aids in a diverse population of seniors: implications for intervention. Disability and Health Journal 2, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolfe, C and Gardner, B (2016) Experiences of hearing loss and views towards interventions to promote uptake of rehabilitation support among UK adults. International Journal of Audiology 55, 666–673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, JW and Khan, RL (1987) Human aging: usual and successful. Science 237, 143–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanders, C, Rogers, A, Bowen, R, Bower, P, Hirani, S, Cartwright, M, Fitzpatrick, R, Knapp, M, Barlow, J, Hendy, J, Chrysanthaki, T, Bardsley, M and Newman, SP (2012) Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research 12, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seaborn, K, Pennefather, P and Fels, DI (2016) ‘Learn what we're going through’: attitudes of older powered chair users towards mixed reality games that involve power mobility. Universal Access in the Information Society 15, 699–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southall, K, Gagne, JP and Leroux, T (2006) Factors that influence the use of assistive technologies by older adults who have a hearing loss. International Journal of Audiology 45, 252–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spafford, M, Rudman, D, Leipert, B, Klinger, L and Huot, S (2010) When self-presentation trumps access: why older adults with low vision go without low-vision services. Journal of Applied Gerontology 29, 579–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, R, Lo, A, Secombe, C and Wong, YK (2009) Elderly persons’ perception and acceptance of using wireless sensor networks to assist healthcare. International Journal of Medical Informatics 78, 788–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steggell, CD, Hooker, K, Bowman, S, Choun, S and Kim, SJ (2010) The role of technology for healthy ageing among Korean and Hispanic women in the United States: a pilot study. Gerontechnology 9, 433–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokke, R (2016) The personal emergency response system as a technology innovation in primary health care services: an integrative review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 18, e187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, L, Little, L, Briggs, P, McInnes, L, Jones, E and Nicholson, J (2013) Location tracking: views from the older adult population. Age and Ageing 42, 758–763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
United Nations (2017) World Population Ageing 2017 – Highlights. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Available at http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WPA2017_Highlights.pdf.Google Scholar
Van Hoof, J, Kort, HSM, Rutten, PGS and Duijnstee, MSH (2011) Ageing-in-place with the use of ambient intelligence technology: perspectives of older users. International Journal of Medical Informatics 80, 310–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Venkatesh, V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research 11, 342–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venkatesh, V and Davis, FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46, 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, K and Callan, A (2011) Perceptions, preferences, and acceptance of information and communication technologies in older-adult community care settings in Ireland: a case-study and ranked-care program analysis. Ageing International 36, 102–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (2010) Definition of an Older or Elderly Person. Available at http://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/ageingdefnolder/en/index.html.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (2018) Assistive Devices and Technologies. Available at https://www.who.int/disabilities/technology/en/.Google Scholar
Wu, YH, Cristancho-Lacroix, V, Fassert, C, Faucounau, V, de Rotrou, J and Rigaud, AS (2014 a) The attitudes and perceptions of older adults with mild cognitive impairment towards an assistive robot. Journal of Applied Gerontology 20, 1–15.Google Scholar
Wu, YH, Damnée, S, Kerhervé, H, Ware, C and Rigaud, AS (2015) Bridging the digital divide in older adults: a study from an initiative to inform older adults about new technologies. Clinical Interventions in Ageing 10, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, YH, Wrobel, J, Cornuet, M, Kerhervé, H, Damnée, S and Rigaud, A (2014 b) Acceptance of an assistive robot in older adults: a mixed-method study of human–robot interaction over a 1-month period in the Living Lab setting. Clinical Interventions in Ageing 9, 801–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar