Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.



Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Regenerative and Technological Section / Original Paper

Subjective Technology Adaptivity Predicts Technology Use in Old Age

Kamin S.T. · Lang F.R. · Beyer A.

Author affiliations

Institute of Psychogerontology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Nuremberg, Germany

Related Articles for ""

Gerontology 2017;63:385-392

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.


Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Learn more

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply

Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00


Select

Subscribe

  • Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates


Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Regenerative and Technological Section / Original Paper

Received: September 26, 2016
Accepted: March 20, 2017
Published online: April 20, 2017
Issue release date: June 2017

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 5

ISSN: 0304-324X (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0003 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/GER

Abstract

Background: To date, not much is known about the psychological and motivational factors underlying technology use in late life. What are the interindividual determinants that lead older adults to invest in using technological innovations despite the age-related physiological changes that impose challenges on behavioral plasticity in everyday life? Objective: This research explores interindividual differences in subjective technology adaptivity - a general technology-related motivational resource that accounts for technology use in late life. More specifically, we investigate the influence of this factor relative to demographic characteristics, personality traits, and functional limitations in a longitudinal sample of community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We report results from a paper-and-pencil survey with 136 older adults between 59 and 92 years of age (mean = 71.4, SD = 7.4). Of those participants, 77 participated in a 2-year follow-up. We assessed self-reports of technology use, subjective technology adaptivity, functional limitations, and the personality traits openness to new experiences and neuroticism. Results: Higher levels of subjective technology adaptivity were associated with technology use at the first measurement as well as increased use over the course of 2 years. Conclusions: Subjective technology adaptivity is a significant predictor of technology use in old age. Our findings contribute to improving the understanding of interindividual differences when using technological innovation in late life. Moreover, our findings have implications in the context of user involvement and may contribute to the successful development of innovative technology for older adults.

© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel


References

  1. Schulz R, Wahl HW, Matthews JT, De Vito Dabbs A, Beach SR, Czaja SJ: Advancing the aging and technology agenda in gerontology. Gerontologist 2015;55:724-734.
  2. Charness N, Boot WR: Technology, gaming, and social networking; in Schaie KW, Willis SL (eds): Handbook of the Psychology of Aging, ed 8. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2016, pp 389-407.
  3. Charness N, Boot WR: Aging and information technology use: potential and barriers. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2009;18:253-258.
  4. Fisk AD, Rogers WA, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J: Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, ed 2. Human Factors & Aging Series. Boca Raton, CRC Press, 2009.
  5. Lindenberger U, Lövdén M, Schellenbach M, Li SC, Krüger A: Psychological principles of successful aging technologies: a mini-review. Gerontology 2008;54:59-68.
  6. Elliot AJ, Mooney CJ, Douthit KZ, Lynch MF: Predictors of older adults' technology use and its relationship to depressive symptoms and well-being. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2014;69:667-677.
  7. Gell NM, Rosenberg DE, Demiris G, LaCroix AZ, Patel KV: Patterns of technology use among older adults with and without disabilities. Gerontologist 2015;55:412-421.
  8. Kamin ST, Lang FR: Cognitive functions buffer age differences in technology ownership. Gerontology 2016;62:238-246.
  9. Melenhorst AS, Rogers WA, Bouwhuis DG: Older adults' motivated choice for technological innovation: evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psychol Aging 2006;21:190-195.
  10. Melenhorst AS, Bouwhuis DG: When do older adults consider the internet? An exploratory study of benefit perception. Gerontechnology 2004;3:89-101.
  11. Chen K, Chan AHS: A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology 2011;10:1-12.
  12. Merkel S, Enste P, Hilbert J, Chen K, Chan AHS, Kwon S: Technology acceptance and aging; in Kwon S (ed): Gerontechnology: Research, Practice, and Principles in the Field of Technology and Aging. New York, Springer, 2016, pp 335-349.
  13. Lawton MP: Behavior-relevant ecological factors; in Schaie KW, Schooler C (eds): Social Structure And Aging: Psychological Processes. Hillsdale, Erlbaum, 1989, pp 57-78.
  14. Kamin ST, Lang FR: The Subjective Technology Adaptivity Inventory (STAI): a motivational measure of technology usage in old age. Gerontechnology 2013;12:16-25.
  15. Heckhausen J, Wrosch C, Schulz R: A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychol Rev 2010;117:32-60.
  16. Camp LJ, Lorenzen-Huber L: Privacy implications of aware, active, and adaptive technologies; in Kwon S (ed): Gerontechnology: Research, Practice, and Principles in the Field of Technology and Aging. New York, Springer, 2016, pp 91-114.
  17. Boise L, Wild K, Mattek N, Ruhl M, Dodge HH, Kaye J: Willingness of older adults to share data and privacy concerns after exposure to unobtrusive in-home monitoring. Gerontechnology 2013;11:428-435.
  18. Czaja SJ, Charness N, Fisk AD, Hertzog C, Nair SN, Rogers WA, Sharit J: Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol Aging 2006;21:333-352.
  19. Laguna K, Babcock RL: Computer anxiety in young and older adults: implications for human-computer interactions in older populations. Comput Human Behav 1997;13:317-326.
  20. McElroy JC, Hendrickson AR, Townsend AM, DeMarie SM: Dispositional factors in Internet use: personality versus cognitive style. MIS Q 2007;31:809-820.
  21. Correa T, Hinsley AW, de Zúñiga HG: Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users' personality and social media use. Comput Human Behav 2010;26:247-253.
  22. Barnett T, Pearson AW, Pearson R, Kellermanns FW: Five-factor model personality traits as predictors of perceived and actual usage of technology. Eur J Inf Syst 2015;24:374-390.
  23. McAdams DP, Pals JL: A new Big Five: fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. Am Psychol 2006;61:204-217.
  24. Iwarsson S, Slaug B: Housing Enabler - A Method for Rating/Screening and Analysing Accessibility Problems in Housing, ed 2. Lund, Veten & Skapen HB & Slaug Enabling Development, 2010.
  25. Lang FR, John D, Lüdtke O, Schupp J, Wagner GG: Short assessment of the Big Five: robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing. Behav Res Methods 2011;43:548-567.
  26. Alderman H, Behrman JR, Kohler HP, Maluccio JA, Watkins SC: Attrition in longitudinal household survey data: some tests for three developing-country samples. Demogr Res 2001;5:79-124.
  27. StataCorp: Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, StataCorp LP, 2015.
  28. StataCorp: Stata Multiple-Imputation Reference Manual: Release 14. College Station, Stata Press, 2015.
  29. Lang FR, Rohr MK, Williger B: Modeling success in life-span psychology: the principles of selection, optimization, and compensation; in Fingerman KL, Berg CA, Smith J, Antonucci TC (eds): Handbook of Life-Span Development. New York, Springer Publishing Company, 2011, pp 57-85.
  30. Wahl HW, Iwarsson S, Oswald F: Aging well and the environment: toward an integrative model and research agenda for the future. Gerontologist 2012;52:306-316.
  31. Wahl HW, Oswald F: Theories of environmental gerontology: old and new avenues for person-environmental views of aging; in Bengtson VL, Settersten RA (eds): Handbook of Theories of Aging, ed 3. New York, Springer, 2016, pp 621-641.
  32. Kamin ST, Luft T, Miehling J, Williger B, Lang FR, Wartzack S: Subjektive Adaptionsfähigkeit im Kontext der alternssensiblen Produktentwicklung; in Krause D, Paetzold K, Wartzack S (eds): Design for X. Beiträge zum 25. DfX Symposium 2014. Hamburg, TuTech Verlag, 2014, pp 99-110.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Regenerative and Technological Section / Original Paper

Received: September 26, 2016
Accepted: March 20, 2017
Published online: April 20, 2017
Issue release date: June 2017

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 5

ISSN: 0304-324X (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0003 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/GER


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.