Keywords

1 Introduction

Digital devices, such as cell phones, offer the potential to facilitate intra/intergenerational contact zones (ICZ), both virtual and face to face. These zones offer opportunities and spaces through which different generations can meet and interact towards building trusting relationships. There may even be the possibility of working on a joint project or addressing a particular issue together (Kaplan et al., 2020). Participants in an ICZ at a given time are actively (though not necessarily consciously) constructing and refining meanings as they engage with one another. They may also influence how these settings might function, particularly around the digital devices. Besides drawing attention to the physical configuration in which different generations congregate (with, in this case, the cell phone as mediating instrument), intergenerational researchers and practitioners need to consider sociocultural, political, economic, and historical environments that inform the way in which people view and value the zone as it flexibly manifests at a particular time. This chapter situates interactions between generations within a digitally transformed world in which technology is increasingly adopted as a means of communication and care provision on different levels.

More and more, technology is finding its way into a range of intergenerational activities (involvement in once-off events) or programmes (structured or in the form of longitudinal engagement) (Kaplan et al., 2017) to promote the ideal for age-inclusivity (Particio & Osorio, 2016). Cell phones exercise a mediating influence in these intentionally socially designed activities or programmes involving different generations. We report here on interactions in our we-DELIVER project—collecting data to develop a technology artefact and introducing it to the older participants—between the book-end generations of older participants and younger student fieldworkers (groups of people not related or previously known to each other) as they engaged in a formal intergenerational activity, in the public domain, around older persons’ use of cell phones.

1.1 Intergenerational Interactions in Informal and Formal Contexts in the Private and the Public Domain

Interpersonal contexts are distinguished as informal and formal. The informal context is situated in the private domain, where interactions are informed by a history, a systemic structure that developed over time, and by the dynamics of preserving the relational system (Smith-Acuña, 2011). The formal context is situated in the public domain where interactions are informed by agreed upon socializing norms and expectations for the interactions (Harrell, 2018). While face-to-face interactions between generations around the cell phone often evolve intuitively and serendipitously within the informal private domain, the public domain demands a more planned and programmatic approach. Interactions between the book-end generations for this purpose are analysed in our study by drawing on the self-interactional group theory (SIGT) (Roos, 2016).

1.2 Theoretical Framework

The self-interactional group theory is informed by interactional pattern analysis, humanistic theory, general systems theory, and interpersonal communications theory (Roos, 2016; Swart & Wiehahn, 1979; Vorster et al., 2013). Analysis using SIGT suggests intergenerational interactions on three levels: intrapersonal, interpersonal, and group. All three are continuously evolving and are informed by the broader sociocultural, political, and historical environments in which they occur (see Fig. 7.1). From a pragmatic view, analysis of the multidimensional and ever-changing interactions requires a specific focus or what Vorster (2011) refers to as punctuation, on a specific level: intrapersonal, interpersonal or group.

Fig. 7.1
figure 1

Key features of self-interactional group theory (adapted from Roos, 2016, p. 146) that proposes three interactive levels (intrapersonal, interpersonal, and group) of interaction as they apply to the engagement in the present study between the two groups of older persons and younger people

Full size image

The intrapersonal level describes the subjective impact (emotions) or “affective engagement variables” (Harrell, 2018, p. 257) between those who are interacting. People who are interacting with each other register the subjective impact consciously or unconsciously and react to it (Hill et al., 2007). This impact indicates what is transpiring on the interpersonal or group levels (Roos, 2016).

Five components are distinguished on the interpersonal level according to:

  1. 1.

    The definition of the relationship—as complementary, in which one person moves for control and the other adopts a submissive position; or parallel-defined, in which the two participants each accept an equal position (such as friends); or symmetrical, in which the participants struggle for control (Haley, 1963; Jackson, 1965);

  2. 2.

    The interpersonal context (formal and informal), which provides a frame or boundary for the intergenerational interactions between people who know each other (and are related or not related) or between people who are unfamiliar and not related (Roos, 2016; Vorster et al., 2013);

  3. 3.

    Relational qualities (Roos, 2016) or what Watzlawick et al. (2011) refer to as content and relationship components (see Table 7.1);

  4. 4.

    The motivation for the interaction, which could include addressing needs, such as affirmation, inclusion, or achievement of a social goal (e.g. obtaining information about older adults’ cell phone use or transferring knowledge); and

  5. 5.

    Dynamic interactional processes (Roos, 2016; Vorster et al., 2013).

The group level describes intra- and intergroup behaviour and dynamics in terms of the social stratification of differences, associated value and significance of the group, and the activation of group identities (Harrell, 2018; Roos, 2016; Tajfel, 1982).

Table 7.1 Examples of relational qualities (in no particular order)
Full size table

2 Method

A qualitative descriptive research design (Sandelowski, 2000, 2010) was applied; first, to obtain the subjective experiences of the interactions from the perspective of older persons and younger student fieldworkers and, second, to provide a detailed, focused account of the interactional experiences and their dynamics as they occurred in formal interpersonal contexts (Levitt et al., 2018; Willis et al., 2016).

2.1 Research Context and Participants

Researchers and student fieldworkers of North-West University’s (NWU) three campuses obtained information about older South Africans’ cell phone use in three communities, in rural Lokaleng and urbanised Ikageng and Sharpeville, adjacent to the respective campuses. (For a summary of the communities’ population structure, household income and household structure, see Tables 3.1 and 3.2 in Chap. 3.)

Two trends, which concern the multigenerational structure of households in these three communities as well as household income, are of special relevance to generational dynamics (Stats SA, 2011).

  • Although older cohorts (65 years and older) represent a relatively small portion of the total population (Stats SA, 2011), they head a disproportionally large proportion of large multigenerational households with 5–7 members, as well as those with 8 or more members.

  • In the three areas studied in the we-DELIVER project, 1410 households were headed by individuals aged 65 years and older with a monthly income of R3,183 (US$224) or less; of these individuals, 108 (7.66%) received R800 or less per month. These income levels indicate that most of the older people heading these households were recipients of means-tested old age grants (Stats SA, 2011).

A summary of the research parameters is presented in Table 7.2, including the study site settings, languages spoken by the older participants, and subject disciplines of the student fieldworker participants, as well as the different types of data collected from each.

Table 7.2 Research parameters
Full size table

Rich and detailed qualitative data obtained from older participants and student fieldworkers representing different generational perspectives were used in the analysis and discussion of the findings (Ellingson, 2009; Morse 2015).

2.2 Procedure and Data Collection

We adopted two heuristic constructs, situatedness and relationality, to guide our ethical conduct in planning and implementing the community-based project in relation to the different members of the research team and to the older participants (see Chap. 4). Students from different disciplines were invited to participate as volunteer fieldworkers, and as younger participants in the intergenerational research activity. These younger persons represented the South African language groups in the different community settings (used as a proxy for sociocultural groups) and they came from rural and urban areas. In a few instances, the students were from the same communities as the older participants, but they were not relatives.

On joining the project, the student fieldworkers attended preparatory presentations on the following topics: contextualizing ageing internationally and in South Africa; community engagement (including interacting with older participants); conducting qualitative interviews; and completing questionnaires by using survey analytics on electronic devices. All of them thereafter were involved in some aspect of the project, such as collecting data, providing administrative support, preparing or serving refreshments, or disseminating the Yabelana app and USSD code. Fieldworkers received a financial token of appreciation from funding awarded for the project.

The locations of Lokaleng, Ikageng, and Sharpeville determined how access was gained and how older participants were recruited and sampled. Older men and women in Lokaleng and Sharpeville gathered as a group at a communal site, where data were collected. In Ikageng, transport was arranged on two occasions to take older individuals from various luncheon clubs (n = 32) to a venue large enough to host the older participants and the student fieldworkers.

On the days of data collection, willing older participants and student fieldworkers were paired to complete a questionnaire on digital devices about older persons’ cell phone use. Pairing in this way was informed by the assumption that a pre-existing moral relationship between the two generations would be activated (Edwards, 2009). Of the 302 older persons who completed questionnaires, 285 answered the last open-ended question, “How did you experience this data gathering session?” Older participants who were willing also took part in semi-structured interviews or focus groups. At the end of each data-collection event, older participants and student fieldworkers enjoyed refreshments and socialized.

The students, who had signed a confidentiality agreement, transcribed the semi-structured interviews and the focus groups verbatim. Findings were analysed and used to develop the Yabelana ecosystem (website, app and USSD code) (see Chap. 8). The same strategy that had been used for accessing older individuals for data collection was followed to introduce the Yabelana (app and USSD code) in Lokaleng and Sharpeville. To promote inclusivity, the older persons in Ikageng requested that the Yabelana app and USSD code be presented at their luncheon clubs, which meant that 32 different sites were visited. To reach the older persons across Ikageng, seven postgraduate research psychology volunteers assisted the two groups (older local participants and young student fieldworkers); they contacted the chairpersons of the luncheon clubs to arrange a suitable date and time for the visit. Transport was also arranged for the student fieldworkers involved in the data collection and who had agreed to introduce the Yabelana app and USSD code to the older individuals. The student fieldworkers joined the luncheon clubs’ formal programmes, which sometimes included doing exercises (see Chap. 4). Afterwards, the older individuals and student fieldworkers formed groups of no more than four people, in which the students introduced the Yabelana system. The students were then invited to write down their reflections of the interactions with older participants (see Box 7.1).

Box 7.1

Prompts to elicit student fieldworker participants’ written reflections

  • How did you experience interacting with older persons?

  • What did you learn about research/community engagement?

  • Include at least three verbal responses of the older persons during the interaction.

  • Did the older persons make any recommendations for improving the Yabelana App or USSD code?

  • Do you have any recommendations for improving the Yabelana App or USSD code?

Questions used in the focus group discussions with student fieldworker participants

  • How did you experience interacting with older persons as a group of younger people?

  • Is there a difference between interacting with unrelated or unfamiliar older participants and older persons related to you?

  • If so, why?

  • Probing questions were asked, such as: What helped you to be patient with the older participants?

2.3 Data Analysis

The documents with data transcribed verbatim were anonymized and uploaded on ATLAS.ti 8 and analysed. The analysis process took place in three phases to limit researcher bias (Morse 2015).

In Phase 1, five postgraduate students, who had not been involved in the project implementation, independently conducted a first round of analysis to include multiple and varied voices (Tracy, 2010). They analysed the data thematically following some of the steps suggested by Clarke and Braun (2013): read and re-read the documents to familiarize themselves with the data, determined initial codes and assigned labels. Next, student analysts and researchers engaged in a discussion of the provisional codes. This session aimed at obtaining “member reflections”, to offer an opportunity for reflexive collaboration (Tracy, 2010, p. 844).

Phase 2 involved an independent round of analysis. Codes were reviewed and merged with similar codes, or split when they were too broad. Relationships among codes were searched, and potential themes were reviewed, defined, named, and supported with verbatim quotations to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

In Phase 3, we conducted a deductive analysis (see Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) of the themes obtained in Phase 2 with the aim of identifying the specific strategies the student fieldworkers had employed in their interactions with the older participants. We applied the theory informing the interactional pattern analysis and SIGT (see Roos, 2016; Vorster, 2011; Vorster et al., 2013) to predetermine the codes that we used to identify the strategies. (see Theme 3 in Table 7.3).

Table 7.3 Themes and subthemes from interactions between older participants and student fieldworker participants relating to cell phones
Full size table

The analysis of the data aimed at producing new understanding of the social world of intergenerational relations—specifically, of the communities we were studying, and with the aim of informing and improving methods of intergenerational programming for future support purposes.

3 Findings

Themes relating to the interactional experiences of unrelated older participants and student fieldworker participants in the intergenerational activity are reported in Table 7.3, supported by the experiences of the interactions and relational dynamics between the two groups. The private domain had not been deliberately explored in this activity, but experiences of interactions between older and younger family members or acquaintances in the informal and private domain emerged spontaneously, offering useful points of differentiation between the two domains.

3.1 Generational Perspectives of Older Participants and Student Fieldworker Participants

The older participants shared with the student fieldworker participants the experiences of their interactions with younger relatives around their cell phone use. Before the intergenerational activity, the student fieldworker participants’ views of older persons in general were stereotypical and they perceived the older generation as different from them.

3.1.1 Older Participants Perspectives of Younger People Familiar to Them

The older persons were ambivalent about young people, viewing some of them as opportunistic. They referred to competing (positive/negative) emotions (Lüscher, 2002) in relation to their younger relatives.

Ambivalence The older participants explained to the student fieldworkers that related younger people were sometimes happy to provide assistance to the older generation because these are their elders: “They help us because we are their grandparents.” They reported that some of the younger people helped the older persons willingly and regularly. An older man told a student fieldworker how he received the help he needed from his grandchildren, and that they helped him regularly with his cell phone if he needed it. By contrast, some older participants recounted how some of their younger relatives responded to them in a judgemental and demeaning way when help was requested: “With me the problem is that my children are very impatient, if they show you something and then you take too long, they disregard you. Then they would say: ‘No! No! You are a slow learner’”. Many of the older participants described some of their younger relatives as impatient or unwilling, as illustrated by the following discussion between a student fieldworker and three older participants:

  • Student fieldworker: I heard some of you were saying your children don’t have patience when helping you with cell phones. What do they say when you ask them for help?

  • Older Participant 1: My own child told me that she can’t help me because I don’t grasp quickly.

  • Older Participant 2: My child says that he is too lazy to actually go the extra mile of helping me because I take time to grasp things.

  • Older Participant 3: My child says he is tired of teaching me one thing. I only know how to answer calls and speak to the people calling me.

Perceptions of Younger People as Opportunistic Older participants shared the perception that when related younger people assisted them with cell phones, some viewed the activity as an opportunity to help themselves to airtime:

You know, these children when they have access to your phone, they no longer answer your calls. They reject them and then make calls to their friends. When the phone rings and you ask them who it is, they tell you something that doesn’t make sense.

This participant said she therefore preferred to answer her phone herself: “So I would rather take care of my own calls, that way I am safe.” Another participant explained that she was obliged to keep a close watch on younger people to protect her airtime when they were helping her with her cell phone: “So now you have to sit next to them so that you can monitor whether or not they are doing what you asked them to do. Otherwise if you don’t do that, that little airtime you had is gone.”

Older participants also perceived some younger family members taking advantage of their elders’ ignorance about cell phones, as well as trying manipulatively to access their airtime. In the following conversation, an older woman explained how the younger people had tried to trick her into believing that she could get into debt with a prepaid cell phone account:

  • Older Participant: They say [nickname of participant] you have to buy R10 airtime. You have big debt—more than R20 [less than US$2]. The network people won’t give you [any] airtime.

  • Student fieldworker: And then?

  • Older Participant: Then they will ask me: “Could I please contact my mother?” Then she takes the phone to the room and contacts her mother with it. The phone returns without any money. They take the airtime. When I check the balance, she ate [used up] all the airtime that I bought.

3.1.2 Student Fieldworkers’ Perspective of Older Persons

Student fieldworker participants in the intergenerational activity drew a distinction between older persons in general and familiar older individuals.

Views about Older Persons in General The student fieldworkers indicated that they viewed older persons generally in a stereotypical manner, being aware of the differences between the two generations.

Stereotypical Views Several students expressed ageist and stereotypical views of older persons, as one of them explained: “I had the idea that the [older] participants would be short of energy and disinterested. My expectations prior to the meeting was that I would not understand the participants.” A postgraduate student involved in the analysis of the student fieldworkers’ reflections summarized the stereotyping tendency as follows:

While reading the reflections of the students these biases and stereotypes regarding older people became clear as most of them have some form of preconceived notion of elderly people.

Different from Younger People The student fieldworkers highlighted the differences between themselves and the older generation as it expresses itself in behaviour:

I feel that we all know that we have to be patient with older people, but in reality, because of the differences between us, we tend to be impatient and even rude. I think that we tend to be more patient with children and other people close to our age, but as soon as we engage with an older person, we forget our manners.

Views about Familiar Older Persons (Related or Unrelated) The students described their interactions with their older relatives in terms of the subjective impact associated with feeling judged, and the fact that they were expected to accept older persons manoeuvring for control in the relationship with older persons in the leading and younger people in a submissive position. This description refers to experiences within what is called a complementary defined relationship (Haley, 1963; Jackson, 1965), as illustrated in the discussion between the researcher and three student fieldworkers in which they distinguished between interacting with older relatives and unfamiliar older participants in the study:

  • Researcher: Why is it easier when you give information about using cell phones to people that you don’t know so well?

  • Student fieldworker 1: They won’t judge you.

  • Student fieldworker 2: Because older people don’t like listening to younger children. You’re not as experienced compared to them.

  • Student fieldworker 3: There is a shift from someone that you know who is always with you and you are always impatient towards. It’s a different [from a] person you just met. You become this respectful down-to-earth [person] and you are patient and just want to help them.

Our study further illustrated the principle that interactions between older and younger people are informed by socializing practices in a particular sociocultural environment. A student fieldworker explained, for example, knowing the right way to behave towards unfamiliar older participants in the study: “I think it was how I was raised. Especially, coming from a rural area, I was taught to respect [the] elderly so it wasn’t difficult for me to treat them with respect.”

The students also reflected on the relational history that informs interactions between older and younger people:

With people you know you have really built a perception about that particular person. You know their traits already. But with a new person you have to learn who they are before you react to them.

3.2 Outcomes of the Intergenerational Activity

The perspective of older participants is presented first, followed by that of the student fieldworker participants. The presentation of both perspectives focuses on subjective impact, relational qualities, and needs and social goals in relation to the generational other. The two generations also reflected on the outcomes of the intergenerational activity in the study in regard to older and younger relatives.

3.2.1 Older Participants in Relation to Younger Student Fieldworker Participants and Younger Relatives

This section begins with the older participants’ experiences of the student fieldworkers followed by their experiences of their younger relatives.

Student Fieldworkers The subjective impact that older participants expressed was used to identify effective relational qualities in respect of their interactions with the student fieldworkers. In this interpersonal context, the older persons were able to express their needs and social goals for the interaction.

Positive Emotions and Effective Relational Qualities The older participants expressed appreciation in relation to student fieldworkers, as one of them explained: “Your patience moved us.” They expressed their gratitude in a manner typical of their sociocultural context, according to student fieldworkers who reflected on the intergenerational activity: “The older people also presented dancing and singing to show gratitude to us as students for our visit to the social club.” For some older individuals, interactions with the student fieldworkers were relaxing and soothing: “It was helpful and it helped me release some stress.”

We found that the student fieldworkers displayed the following effective relational qualities which generated the subjective impact on the older participants:

  • Patience (unconditional acceptance; emotional empathy);

  • Understanding (cognitive empathy and perspective taking);

  • Friendliness (clarity of self-presentation; perspective taking);

  • Attentive listening (unconditional acceptance; affective empathy);

  • Demonstration of respect (cognitive empathy, perspective taking and unconditional acceptance);

  • Being well mannered (adopting a complementary relational definition, with the older persons in a controlling position and the younger people in a submissive position; unconditional acceptance); and

  • Being audible and clear (clarity of self-presentation; perspective taking).

These effects are illustrated by the following older persons’ comments, as recorded in the student reflections:

I enjoyed it [the interaction] because you were very friendly, you listened, you were very understanding, and you smiled a lot.

I am very happy that you were patient with me and showed me respect. It was heartfelt.

[I am] very happy. The helper [student fieldworker] was patient and audible and very respectful. The helper helped me to understand the [Yabelana] app efficiently. I could understand what she told me and used the language I understand.

I was satisfied. The children were well mannered [good manners].

Needs and Social Goals Satisfied When interacting with student fieldworkers in the formal intergenerational activity, the older participants expressed their needs (inclusion and affirmation) and social goals (transference of knowledge/wisdom, and learning from student fieldworkers).

The older participants contrasted their need to be included with their experiences of exclusion. One of them explained: “Young people should always do this because we feel left out as older people.” They felt that younger people should include older persons because of their age, which makes them needy for care and attention, a sentiment captured in a student’s reflection about the older people: “They encouraged us to do more for them and always to consider elderly people as they are the most vulnerable.”

The intergenerational activity and involvement of student fieldworkers also succeeded in addressing the older participants’ need for affirmation, as was illustrated by two comments from the older persons:

It’s a good thing [obtaining information about older people’s cell phone use] because it makes us feel acknowledged as older people and know that young generations care about our needs.

It was a wonderful day that I spent with the students, and they really asked us about important things and people in our lives.

Being affirmed as an individual contributed to a sense of being safe, cared for, and stimulated, as was made clear in the following appreciative observations from older participants: “I get comfort that there is someone who is interested about my well-being” and “I felt comfortable and at home. I wish that you people would always be here to give us this kind of feeling of a younger and fresher life.”

In relation to social goals, older participants wanted to transfer or share their new knowledge or wisdom further, to others. This was captured by a student fieldworker: “They were so happy that they found something important to learn and they can’t wait to teach their children.” Some also instructed the younger student fieldworkers to “work harder than what they do” and gave them advice about how to approach life in general and interact with other generations:

They give me words of wisdom and encouragement, taught me how to approach people and situations in life.

They taught me that you should never give up in your life to learn new ideas from new generations.

The older participants also acknowledged, after interacting with the student fieldworkers, that there was more to learn about cell phones: “I feel very glad and humbled to take part in such a project. It made me realize that I need help with a lot of things” and “I feel excited because I’ve learned some new things I didn’t know of.” The older individuals wanted to learn more, and specifically from the student fieldworkers. This was illustrated in a student fieldworker reflection: “They said we should come more often with other things to teach.”

Familiar Younger People The older persons were happy and excited about their newly acquired knowledge and skills in using their cell phones independently. A student fieldworker explained: “Normally older people call the young ones [to help them]. So they were happy that they can do it without them [the younger people].” The older participants expressed a sense of autonomy from obtaining relevant information without having to ask familiar (related or unrelated) younger people for help: “Now I don’t have to worry about asking for emergency numbers as this app [Yabelana] does it for me.”

3.2.2 Student Fieldworkers in Relation to Older Participants and Familiar Older Persons

This section reports on student fieldworker participants’ views about the older participants in the study, followed by their experiences of their own older relatives.

Older Participants The student fieldworkers experienced the older participants in the intergenerational activity positively, as warm and authentic people, but there were also challenges relating to expectations, needs and goals.

Positive Emotions and Effective Relational Qualities Some student fieldworkers described an “amazing” subjective impact, and experienced the older participants as “very kind and genuine people, with incredible love and care”. They found the older persons to be friendly, open, and enthusiastic (self-presentation), as well as warm (unconditional acceptance):

They [the older persons] were friendly and open to us, as well as to learning about the app. They were also comfortable in talking to us and letting us help them with the app.

We were given a warm welcome by the community and the tribal authority.

They expressed this enthusiasm several times verbally and they also smiled and showed happiness when we participated in their social club.

The student fieldworkers also felt acknowledged when the older participants asked them their names and surnames, which a student explained was a sign of respect: “So for the fact that they wanted to know my surname made me feel she is respecting me. They spoke to me like one of them.” The experience of respect was registered as a pleasant subjective impact: “Oh I loved it. Everyone knew my name at the end. I was like my name is [name of student fieldworker] and the auntie [older person] says: ‘It [your name] means water and it so like you.’ It was so cute.” Such demonstrations of respect for the younger student fieldworkers came as a pleasant surprise, as one of the students pointed out: “Old people will teach you lot of things you didn’t expect, for example the respect that they give you, the attention they have, and the manner that shows you that they are willing to understand what you are questioning or teaching them about.”

Challenging Expectations, Needs, and Goals Some student fieldworkers also experienced challenges in their interactions with older participants. These resulted from the student fieldworkers’ attempts to: (1) reconcile themselves with the sociocultural accepted norms of showing respect to the older individuals (2) adopt a complementary definition of the relationship with older persons, with the latter in a leading position and the younger people in a submissive position (3) accommodate older individuals’ age-specific needs, and, at the same time (4) keep the particular goal of the interaction in mind; to support the older individuals’ cell phone use.

The challenges were described as follows by one of the student fieldworkers: “Interacting with the older people was an amazing experience but challenging at the same time, since you had to be patient when interacting with them and respectful at the same time”; adapting to the pace of older persons contributed to challenging experiences: “It was not any easy task as you, as the facilitator, had to accommodate the needs and flow with their pace as some would often request toilet or water breaks or even just to freshen up a bit.” The process of repeating new knowledge was also exhausting and frustrating for some, as another student fieldworker explained: “Some [older persons] asking the same questions over and over again. It was hard, I even got a headache. I had to say one thing ten times.”

Need of Affirmation Addressed The student fieldworkers experienced affirmation when the older participants acknowledged their patience: “They [older persons] also said they want us to come back to them [in future]. They particularly want us because they saw that we were patient. [They say]: ‘We need you’.” The older persons also wanted a photo taken of them with the younger people: “They were like ‘[name of student fieldworker], come take a picture with me.’ I was really shocked. So that they wanted to take a picture with me was really nice.”

Previous Assumptions Changed After engaging with the older participants, the student fieldworkers reported that their initial assumptions about the older generation had changed for the better. They revisited their views and, with hindsight, reflected about older persons with greater compassion than before:

Personally, it was a good experience because now I understand that not all elderly people cannot use smart phones without any assistance and just found that actually dealing with the elderly is not boring as I thought.

This experience has changed my perception about older people and I have realized that even if they have some disabilities due to old age they can still perform well in some tasks and remember what they were taught.

The intergenerational activity sensitized the student fieldworkers’ by making them realise that they should not judge people without knowing them. As one of them confirmed: “This project has shown me that I have to be sensitive towards the people I engage with in the community and not underestimate them.”

New Appreciations The older persons’ drive to find out more about cell phones was a new experience for a student fieldworker, who said: “I’ve learned a lot from the old people. I learned that they also want to find new ways to understand cell phones.” The student fieldworker participants discovered that older persons also shared a basic need to feel valued and acknowledged: “Because in as much as they are old, they also want to be treated like they matter and they are important.”

Their new-found awareness of older individuals’ needs stimulated the students’ understanding of the value of their efforts to improve older persons’ quality of life, particularly in low-resourced environments. Two student fieldworkers explained their feelings of satisfaction:

Knowing that you are contributing to making a person’s life better. Especially the elderly and since that people at Lokaleng don’t have much.

I felt like somehow I was able to contribute to their lives being a bit easier because with the services that they got from the app. It was able to meet a lot of needs which they were short of.

Familiar Older Persons Awareness of the plight of older individuals in the intergenerational activity also raised the younger people’s awareness of the (potential) needs of their own grandparents and older community members:

[I am] also thinking we are also leaving our own grandparents and grandmothers back home. And to think that they also could need the same services and this can also be helpful if it could just spread out to the community and every other community that has elderly people too.

The student fieldworkers reflected that they now felt they ought to be more tolerant of their older relatives: “Just because me and my gran have different likes and dislikes, and different views on things, doesn’t mean that I can disregard her opinions and be impatient when explaining mine.” They also pointed out that they could make their relationships with older relatives work more effectively, as one of the student fieldworkers observed: “I realized that I can improve my own relationship with my grandmother, and that it is important for me to have a healthy positive relationship with her.”

3.3 Creating an Optimal Context for Interactions

Effective interactions between older participants and student fieldworkers were the outcome of the ways in which the student fieldworkers built relationships with the older people through respectful dialogue (see Theme 3, Table 7.3).

Organizing the Physical Space The physical space in which interactions take place can be either conducive or unfavourable. To use the physical space to create an effective interpersonal context, a student fieldworker changed the height setting of her chair to make it level with an older man’s chair. She explained: “When we started, I noticed that my chair was significantly higher than his and felt that this might influence our interaction. I changed the chair level to meet his before I started.”

Creating a Clear Interpersonal Context The starting point for effective interactions is a clear interpersonal context; when context is unclear, meaning is obscured (Watzlawick et al., 2011). A student described the detailed process she had used to initiate an optimal interpersonal context for the following goal-orientated interaction with the older participants:

I started by introducing myself and asking them how they are doing and how life is in general. I also asked them whom they were living with and how they experience the relationships. After a few minutes of introduction, they were comfortable and willing to share some information. I told them why we are there and started explaining everything about the [Yabelana] app, and showed and explained how the USSD works.

The reason for creating a clear interpersonal context was to build a trusting relationship before introducing the Yabelana system, as two student fieldworkers explained: “I had to create a trustful relationship with them so that we get to a point where they are able to freely communicate with me and have a fruitful interaction” and “Building rapport at the beginning of a session [aims] to better teach the elderly about technology.”

Defining the Relationship with the Older Persons The student fieldworkers initially adopted the socioculturally accepted complementary relationship, with the older persons in a leading and the student fieldworkers in a submissive position (see Sect. 7.1.2 above). A student illustrated the adoption of this relational definition, saying: “Keeping in mind that I have to be sensitive in making sure that I do not order them [older persons] around but instead ask questions. This is because older people like feeling in control, relevant and respected.” Had this culturally accepted relational definition been challenged by the younger people at the outset in favour of a symmetrical relationship, effective interactions as well as the goal of facilitating the use of the technology could have been compromised.

The relational definition guiding the interaction can, however, change. During the course of the interactions observed towards the end of the intergenerational activity in our study, when older and younger people interacted more like friends, a parallel relationship was indicated, as illustrated when an older women jokingly asked a student fieldworker: “Will you be my husband?”

Flexibility We observed from the data that student fieldworkers demonstrated flexible interpersonal roles in adapting to older persons’ engagement with cell phones. Two student fieldworkers explained how they strategized to take account of individual needs:

You have to work very slowly with the old people. Some will pick it up really quickly and others take longer. So you have to adapt to however they are working.

I learned that people are different, and you have to handle them differently and adapt to the behaviour.

Empathy, Unconditional Acceptance, and Perspective Taking Emotional empathy was displayed when the student fieldworkers correctly identified the emotions of older participants and acted accordingly, as one fieldworker explained:

There was this other lady, I think she was just holding back because she was struggling to understand and she told me to move on to the next person. So I told her: “No, that’s fine, you’ll learn.” I think she got scared because obviously she doesn’t know you and I tell her: “No it’s okay. Let’s just take a moment.” [I] got them comfortable and tell them they are here to learn.

Another student fieldworker emphasized cognitive empathy, perspective taking and unconditional acceptance: “I exercised patience and compassion, as older adults may not [be] familiar with technology and [may] have cognitive problems. Patience and compassion are needed when interacting with older adults.” The student fieldworkers listened attentively to the older persons, thereby demonstrating unconditional acceptance, as evidenced by the following comment from one of the students: “I also listened to them when they had things to say. I did this because I knew it will show them that I value who they are as well as what they are saying.”

Perspective taking involves a cognitive interpretation of the older individual’s situation, whereby the student fieldworkers adjusted their behaviour (demonstrating flexibility) to meet the older participants’ needs for support with technology. “I have to develop a sense of patience when working with different people because they find it very difficult to understand how the app works. I was very patient. I introduced the app to them very slowly to [accommodate] their cognition.” Adopting the perspective of the older persons informed the ways in which the younger people talked to the older persons and the words they used: “When talking with older people you need to watch and be aware of the language you use and speak to them with respect and patience.”

Self-presentation The student fieldworkers presented themselves clearly in terms of their pronunciation, articulation and speech tempo, and used comprehensible words. The student fieldworkers applied this strategy in a context-sensitive manner, as was evident from the following two reflections:

I used the language which they [the older people] understand (Setswana) and maintained eye contactFootnote 1 so that they don’t feel disrespected.

I used clear Setswana in interacting and communicating with the older people to make sure that they understood everything, and I made sure. I talk loud enough for them to hear me because I understand how they are struggling to hear.

We believe that the optimal interpersonal context created by the student facilitators could have resulted from the preparatory discussions they had attended before setting out on the intergenerational activity, as part of their formal professional training:

If you go to an environment you need to be professional. From a professional perspective I know you have to, regardless of their age, respect people for who they are. So from that perspective that's why I was patient with them.

4 Discussion

The interactional experiences resulting from the formal intergenerational activity in our project, involving younger participants engaging with older persons around the latter’s cell phone use, demonstrated important connections and contrasts between relationships of older and younger people in their public worlds. Even though we did not explicitly study private domain intergenerational interactions, salient details emerged during the public domain discussions between the two groups in our study as well as in the students’ subsequent reflections. The intergenerational activity in our study yielded information of profound use for delivering programmes designed to assist technology adoption among older persons, and it confirmed the value of involving, in such efforts, in a formal and public domain, younger generations who had no relational history with the older participants.

The interactions between older participants and student fieldworkers in a formal and public domain presented in different ways. Positive emotions (subjective impact) that accompanied the engagement of the older and younger participants in our intergenerational activity expanded the capacity of both groups to be receptive to each other (see also Fredrickson, 2001; Frederickson, 2013). In combination with the warm and satisfying impacts, the effective relational qualities acted as mechanisms to produce predictable conducive outcomes; the older participants and the student fieldworker participants both reported that their needs for affirmation were addressed and both groups felt that they were able to achieve social goals in the interactions. Similar interplay between context and relational mechanisms that resulted in optimal outcomes was also found in another intergenerational activity (Chigeza et al., 2020) in which older and younger participants engaged in a formal, public domain. However, in our study, the younger people also registered a subjective impact associated with negative emotions in relation to the older participants, which they managed to contain and despite of it they could still create an optimal interpersonal context for the interactions. The exercise appears to confirm a tendency among people to react in ways that correspond to the impact they subjectively register; furthermore, through training or experiential exposure, they may learn to overcome such tendencies in order to respond effectively (see Roos, 2016; Vorster, 2011). Our finding that training can successfully lead to the facilitation of optimal interactions holds promise for the planning of future formal intergenerational programmes.

In our study we observed how the younger people’s stereotypical perceptions about the older generation changed as a result of the intergenerational activity. The literature confirmed that older and younger people’s perceptions that developed over time in different interpersonal contexts typically change after participation in intergenerational activities or programmes (Chigeza et al., 2020; Roos et al., 2017; Smith-Acuña, 2011), drawing on contact theory explanations (Allport, 1954; Harrell, 2018; Tajfel, 2010). The findings indicated that programmes to assist with technology adoption by older people can benefit from the involvement of younger generations who are socioculturally attuned to the older individuals.

The recommendation that intergenerational programming should consider the formal and public domain as the most beneficial interpersonal space for implementation is juxtaposed by the reported experiences of interactions in the informal and private domains. Older participants expressed ambivalence associated with familiar younger people whom they ask for help with cell phones; while some younger people helped willingly and efficiently, others responded in a judgemental manner. Interactions between older and younger people around cell phone use and airtime in this interpersonal context are also seemingly saturated with controversy. We drew this conclusion from older participants’ accounts of difficult discussions with younger related people around air time and cell phone use; the older adults’ enthusiastic expression of a sense of agency to use the technology; and the relief some expressed that, after the interactions with the student fieldworkers, they were no longer solely dependent on familiar younger people to help them to use this technology. Younger people also reported strained interactions with familiar older persons in the informal and private domain.

We cannot generalize from these findings, or assume that the achievement of an optimal interpersonal context in a one-off intergenerational activity can change older and younger generations’ attitudes or behaviour when dealing with the other. Furthermore, our intergenerational activity involved student fieldworkers who had specifically been prepared for the task of creating an optimal interpersonal context before interacting with older individuals. It is possible that the students could have acted from a position of compliance in relation to their lecturers or older researchers; it would be worthwhile to consider power dynamics when planning formal ICT programmes for implementation in the public domain.

The findings from the intergenerational activity in this study underlines the potential of involving older and younger people in interpersonal contexts in the public domain, provided the programmes are designed to achieve optimal conditions and to overcome potential barriers between old and young. To this end, drawing on an intergenerational activity around older persons’ use of cell phones, some suggestions are offered in Box 7.2.

Box 7.2

Suggestions to inform the design of intergenerational technology aciticies or programmes

  • Plan intergenerational interactions for formal interpersonal contexts in the public domain with clear goals for the interactions.

  • Consider the interests of both older and younger generations.

  • Involve younger people who are familiar with the sociocultural context of the older people, and who know how to act and react in an acceptable manner, according to the relevant implicit norms, customs and practices.

  • Engage in reflective discussion to note reactive responses associated with intergroup differences.

  • Train facilitators using behavioural practitioners to create effective interactions that are likely to promote cooperation during intergenerational exchanges.

  • Prepare to create an optimal interpersonal context (sufficient trust, comfort, respect) before introducing technology to older participants through strategies such as:

    • organizing a conducive physical space for the interaction, which includes a space in which the participants are clearly visible, facing each other from a relatively close distance, without barriers (such as tables), and with their eyes at the same level;

    • accepting the initial relational definition older adults introduce, to avoid struggles for control that could compromise effective interactions;

    • creating a clear interpersonal context: the context determines the meaning of the interaction and can also alter behaviour; a clear context is created by determining the rationale for the interaction, and making certain that each side has sufficient knowledge about the purpose of the interaction and technology, and expectations to ensure that everyone is on the same page;

    • adopting a relationally focused approach from the outset of the engagement, and meeting older individuals in the here and now, on an appropriate emotional level; and

    • displaying effective relational qualities, such as empathy, unconditional regard and perspective taking, flexibility, and clear self-presentation.

5 To Conclude

The intergenerational activity described in this chapter engaged with issues surrounding the engagement of two book-end generations, as mediated through cell phone devices, within a formalized public domain of interaction. It demonstrated how the public domain can be a good arena for intergenerational productive activity, and that it can form a successful part of programmes designed to achieve conducive outcomes for older and younger people. Our findings demonstrate that optimal intergenerational interactions can change attitudes and behaviour for the better and thereby broaden the participants’ relational repertoires. They can also facilitate social cohesion between generations and transfer relational skills learned in one context to another. The activity reported here has implications for effective intergenerational ICT programme design, implementation and evaluation.

Cell phone devices have the ability to mediate potent opportunities for establishing constructive intergenerational contact zones within multigenerational settings, both in the private and public spheres of life. The right kinds of interaction around these cell phone devices can transcend common communication barriers between generations and help to build relationships, even as the use of ICTs expands among older persons. Given the probability of ongoing digital divides between generations as new technologies develop, ICT is likely to continue attracting attention as a component part of intergenerational projects for a long time to come.