How Time, Living Situation, and Stress Related to Technology Influence User Acceptance and Usability of a Socialization Service for Older Adults and Their Formal and Informal Caregivers: Six-Month Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Considering the growing population of older adults, addressing the influence of loneliness among this demographic group has become imperative, especially due to the link between social isolation and deterioration of mental and physical well-being. Technology has the potential to be used to create innovative solutions to increase socialization and potentially promote healthy aging. Objective: This 6-month study examined the usability and acceptability of a technology-based socialization service and explored how stress and living situation affect older adults' and their ecosystem's perceptions of technology, investigating cross-sectional and longitudinal differences among and across user groups. Methods: Participants were recruited in Tuscany and Apulia (Italy) through a network of social cooperatives and a research hospital, respectively. A total of 20 older adults were provided with the same technology installed on a tablet and on a smart television. The technology has three functionalities: video calling, playing games, and sharing news. Additionally, 20 informal caregivers (IC) and 13 formal caregivers (FC) connected to the older adults were included in the study. After both initial training in the use of the system (T0) and 6 months of using the system (T6), questionnaires on usability, acceptability, and technostress were filled in by older adults, IC, and FC. Nonparametric or parametric tests were conducted to investigate group differences at both time points and changes over time. Additional analyses on older adults were done to assess whether differences in usability and acceptability were related to living situation (ie, alone or with someone). Furthermore, correlation analyses were performed between usability, acceptability, and stress toward technology at T0 and T6. Results: At both T0 and T6, older adults had lower usability scores than IC and FC and higher anxiety than IC. Over time, there was a significant decrease in older adults' attitudes toward technology score, depicting a negative attitude over time (T0 median 4.2, IQR 0.5; T6 median 3.7, IQR 0.8; Cohen d=0.7), while there was no change for IC and FC. At T0, those living alone had lower acceptability than those living with someone but this difference disappeared at T6. People or participants living with someone had a decline in anxiety, attitudes toward technology, enjoyment, and perceived usefulness. Stress toward technology affected usability and acceptability in the older adult group entering the study (ρ=-.85) but this was not observed after 6 months. In the IC group, stress affected trust at T0 (ρ=-.23) but not at T6. Conclusions: At the start of the study, older adults judged the system to be less usable and more stressful than did the caregivers. Indeed, at first, technostress was correlated with usability and acceptability; however, with repeated use, technostress did not influence the perception of technology. Overall, getting accustomed to technology decreased anxiety and stress toward technology.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».