Promoting Personalized Reminiscence Among Cognitively Intact Older Adults Through an AI-Driven Interactive Multimodal Photo Album: Development and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reminiscence, a therapy that uses stimulating materials such as old photos and videos to stimulate long-term memory, can improve the emotional well-being and life satisfaction of older adults, including those who are cognitively intact. However, providing personalized reminiscence therapy can be challenging for caregivers and family members. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to achieve three objectives: (1) design and develop the GoodTimes app, an interactive multimodal photo album that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to engage users in personalized conversations and storytelling about their pictures, encompassing family, friends, and special moments; (2) examine the app's functionalities in various scenarios using use-case studies and assess the app's usability and user experience through the user study; and (3) investigate the app's potential as a supplementary tool for reminiscence therapy among cognitively intact older adults, aiming to enhance their psychological well-being by facilitating the recollection of past experiences. METHODS: We used state-of-the-art AI technologies, including image recognition, natural language processing, knowledge graph, logic, and machine learning, to develop GoodTimes. First, we constructed a comprehensive knowledge graph that models the information required for effective communication, including photos, people, locations, time, and stories related to the photos. Next, we developed a voice assistant that interacts with users by leveraging the knowledge graph and machine learning techniques. Then, we created various use cases to examine the functions of the system in different scenarios. Finally, to evaluate GoodTimes' usability, we conducted a study with older adults (N=13; age range 58-84, mean 65.8 years). The study period started from January to March 2023. RESULTS: The use-case tests demonstrated the performance of GoodTimes in handling a variety of scenarios, highlighting its versatility and adaptability. For the user study, the feedback from our participants was highly positive, with 92% (12/13) reporting a positive experience conversing with GoodTimes. All participants mentioned that the app invoked pleasant memories and aided in recollecting loved ones, resulting in a sense of happiness for the majority (11/13, 85%). Additionally, a significant majority found GoodTimes to be helpful (11/13, 85%) and user-friendly (12/13, 92%). Most participants (9/13, 69%) expressed a desire to use the app frequently, although some (4/13, 31%) indicated a need for technical support to navigate the system effectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our AI-based interactive photo album, GoodTimes, was able to engage users in browsing their photos and conversing about them. Preliminary evidence supports GoodTimes' usability and benefits cognitively intact older adults. Future work is needed to explore its potential positive effects among older adults with cognitive impairment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".