Advertisement

A Tale of Two Divides: Technology Experiences Among Racially and Socioeconomically Diverse Older Adults

  • Shelia R. CottenEmail author
  • Jessica Francis
  • Travis Kadylak
  • R. V. Rikard
  • Tim Huang
  • Christopher Ball
  • Julia DeCook
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9754)

Abstract

Using information and communication technologies (ICTs) can improve older adults’ overall well-being and can be a catalyst for social integration and inclusion into society. While older adults are often compared to other age cohorts, based on previous digital divide research, there may be a significant amount of variation within older adult populations with regards to their ICT experiences, attitudes, and uses. Our study seeks to explore the potential gap by examining and comparing ICT uses, views, and experiences among older adults from diverse racial/ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. Four semi-structured focus groups (n = 40) were conducted with older adults from two separate cities in Mid-Michigan in the United States: Greater Lansing area and Detroit. Our findings reveal that older adults’ experiences, uses, and perceptions about ICTs differ down racial and socio-economic lines. Our study demonstrates that there are potential sub-divides within traditionally digitally divided populations.

Keywords

Older adults Digital divide ICTs Race Socioeconomic status 

References

  1. 1.
    Blit-Cohen, E., Litwin, H.: Elder participation in cyberspace: a qualitative analysis of israeli retirees. J. Aging Stud. 18(4), 385–398 (2004). doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2004.06.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cotten, S.R., Anderson, W.A., McCullough, B.M.: Impact of internet use on loneliness and contact with others among older adults: cross-sectional analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 15(2), e39 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cotten, S.R., Ford, G., Ford, S., Hale, T.M.: Internet use and depression among retired older adults in the united states: a longitudinal analysis. J. Gerontol. Ser. B: Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 69(5), 763–771 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Winstead, V., Anderson, W.A., Yost, E.A., Cotten, S.R., Warr, A., Berkowsky, R.W.: You can teach an old dog new tricks: a qualitative analysis of how residents of senior living communities may use the web to overcome spatial and social barriers. J. Appl. Gerontol. 32(5), 540–560 (2013). doi: 10.1177/0733464811431824 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McMellon, C.A., Schiffman, L.G.: Cybersenior empowerment: how some older individuals are taking control of their lives. J. Appl. Gerontol. 21(2), 157–175 (2002). doi: 10.1177/07364802021002002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tsai, H.-y., Shillair, R., Cotten, S.R., Winstead, V., Yost, E.: Getting grandma online: are tablets the answer for increasing digital inclusion for older adults in the U.S.? Educ. Gerontol. 41, 695–709 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith, A.: Older adults and technology use: usage and adoption. Pew Research: Internet Project, pp. 1–7 (2014). https://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/usage-and-adoption/
  8. 8.
    van Deursen, A.J., Helsper, E.J.: A nuanced understanding of Internet use and non-use among the elderly. Eur. J. Commun. 30(2), 171–187 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Dijk, J., Hacker, K.: The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. Inf. Soc. 19(4), 315–326 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Dijk, J.: Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 34(4), 221–235 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Czaja, S.J., Charness, N., Fisk, A., Hertzog, C., Nair, S., Rogers, W., Sharit, J.: Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement (CREATE). Psychol. Aging 21(2), 333–352 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J.: Age differences in attitudes toward computers. J. Gerontol. Ser. B: Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 53B(5), P329–P340 (1998). doi: 10.1093/geronb/53B.5.P329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Robinson, L., Cotten, S.R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T.M., Stern, M.J.: Digital inequalities and why they matter. Inf. Commun. Soc. 18(5), 569–582 (2015). doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zickuhr, K., Smith, A.: Pew Research: Internet Project: Home Broadband 2013 (2013). http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/08/26/home-broadband-2013/
  15. 15.
    Anderson, N.: Digital technologies and equity: gender, digital divide and rurality. In: Teaching and Digital Technologies: Big Issues and Critical Questions, p. 46 (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    US Census Bureau State & County QuickFacts (2015). http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26/2646000.html
  17. 17.
    DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., Shafer, S.: From unequal access to differentiated use: a literature review and agenda for research on digital inequality. In: Neckerman, K., Shafer, S. (eds.) Social Inequality, pp. 355–400. Russell Sage Foundation, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Deursen, A., Van Dijk, J.: The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media Soc. 16(3), 507–526 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shelia R. Cotten
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jessica Francis
    • 1
  • Travis Kadylak
    • 1
  • R. V. Rikard
    • 1
  • Tim Huang
    • 1
  • Christopher Ball
    • 1
  • Julia DeCook
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Media and InformationMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations