A way to aging well: A qualitative study to identify psychological barriers and facilitators to the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) by older adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using information and communication technologies (ICT) can be a major challenge for older people. Some data exists in the literature on the elements that enable their use, but none has focused specifically on the elderly. ICT provide individuals with a means to interact with each other, thus, ICT represent a factor facilitating interactions. However, although such technologies are ever more present in our physical environment, some older adults still do not use ICT, suggesting that other barriers could exist. The aim of this study was therefore to identify the psychological barriers that prevent older people from using ICT and to identify the facilitators. These facilitators could promote the use of ICT and thus enable older adults to age well through maintaining a high level of social interactions. Thirteen older adults participated in a semi-structured interview and Nvivo 12 software was used to analyze the content. Three themes were identified: sense of self-efficacy, perception of available resources, and individual and environmental components. Each of these themes included sub-themes which were either facilitators or barriers and those of the first two themes (sense of self-efficacy, and individual and environmental components) can fluctuate from facilitator to barrier depending on the individual. By identifying psychological facilitators and barriers to older adults’ use of ICT can help public and not-for-profit organizations to develop training designed for this public. Promoting older adults’ use of ICT could provide a means to maintain social interactions and, thus, contribute to successful aging.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it