Advertisement

Gero-Technology: Old Age in the Electronic Jungle

Chapter
  • 2.9k Downloads
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Aging book series (BRIEFSAGING)

Abstract

Gero-technology refers to the design and use of technologies that both promote independence and autonomy in old age and strengthen the support networks of older people. A central concept in gero-technology in Europe today is Ambient Assisted Living (AAL), which describes technology that helps older people to live an active life and remain socially included. It is assumed that technology can help to alleviate the increasing need for care-givers for older people.

Keywords

Prospective Memory Smart Home Digital Divide User Acceptance Ambient Assist Live 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agree, E. M., Freedman, V. A., Cornman, J. C., Wolf, D. A., & Marcotte, J. E. (2005). Reconsidering substitution in long-term care: when does assistive technology take the place of personal care? Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 60B(5), S272–S280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, S. M., Foster, A., & Berg, K. (2001). Receiving help at home: the interplay of human and technological assistance. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 56B(6), S374–S382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, M., & Gordon, J. (1991). A dumping ground for granny. Newsweek, 118(26), 64.Google Scholar
  4. Bolton, G. E., & Katok, E. (1998). An experimental test of the crowding out hypothesis: the nature of beneficent behavior. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 37(3), 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlson, K. M., & Spencer, R. W. (1975). Crowding out and its critics. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 57(12), 2–17.Google Scholar
  6. Daviglus, M. L., Bell, C. C., Berrettini, W., Bowen, P. W., Connolly, E. S., Cox, N. J., et al. (2010). Preventing Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement, 27(4), 1–30.Google Scholar
  7. Destatis (2011). Older people in Germany and the EU. Wiesbaden: Federal Statistical Office of Germany.Google Scholar
  8. Doughty, K., Cameron, K., & Garner, P. (1996). Three generations of telecare of the elderly. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 2(2), 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunér, A., & Nordström, M. (2007). The roles and functions of the informal support networks of older people who receive formal support: a Swedish qualitative study. Ageing and Society, 27(1), 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Egan, T. (1992). Old, ailing and finally a burden abandoned. The New York Times, March 26, 1992. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9F0CE6D9133CF935A15750C0A964958260. Accessed 27 June 2012.
  11. Eurostat (2011). Active ageing and solidarity between generations: a statistical portrait of the European Union 2012. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  12. Eurostat (2012). Internet use and activities. Excel-file. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=isoc_bde15cua&lang=en. Accessed 26 June 2012.
  13. Geven, A., Tscheligi, M., Sorin, A., & Aronowitz, H. (2008). Presenting a speech-based mobile reminder system. Paper presented at the third workshop on speech in mobile and pervasive environments, Amsterdam. http://www.fp7-hermes.eu/uploads/media/publications/Geven_HERMES_SIMPE2008.pdf. Accessed 27 June 2012.
  14. Gilleard, C., & Higgs, P. (2008). Internet use and the digital divide in the English longitudinal study of ageing. European Journal of Ageing, 5(3), 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haux, R., Hein, A., Eichelberg, M., Appell, J.-E., Appelrath, H.-J., Bartsch, C., Bisitz, T., Bitzer, J., Blau, M., Boll, S., Buschermöhle, M., Büsching, F., Erdmann, B., Fachinger, U., Felber, J., Fleuren, T., Gietzelt, M., Goetze, S., Gövercin, M., Helmer, A., Heuten, W., Hohmann, V., Huber, R., Hülsken-Giesler, M., Jacobs, G., Kayser, R., Kerling, A., Klingeberg, T., Költzsch, Y., Künemund, H., Kunze, J., Ludwig, W., Marschollek, M., Martens, B., Meis, M., Michael Meyer, E., Meyer, J., Nebel, W., Neyer, F.J., Okken, P.-K., Remmers, H., Rölker-Denker, L., Rohdenburg, T., Schilling, M., Schulze, G.C., Song, B., Spehr, J., Steinhagen-Thiessen, E., Tegtbur, U., Thoben, W., Van Hengel, P., Wabnik, S., Wahl, F., Wegel, S., Wilken, O., Winkelbach, S., Wist, T., Wittrock, M., Wolf, K.-H., Wolf, L., & Zokoll-Van DerLaan, M. (2010). The Lower Saxony research network design of environments for ageing: towards interdisciplinary research on information and communication technologies in ageing societies. Informatics for Health and Social Care, 35(3), 92–103.Google Scholar
  16. Hennen, L. (2002). Positive Veränderung des Meinungsklimaskonstante Einstellungsmuster. Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Umfrage des TAB zur Einstellung der deutschen Bevölkerung zur Technik (positive changes in public opinionconstant attitudes: results of a representative survey of the TAB on attitudes towards technology among Germans). Berlin: Büro für Technikfolgenabschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag.Google Scholar
  17. Kohli, M., & Künemund, H. (Eds.). (2000). Die zweite Lebenshälfte. Gesellschaftliche Lage und Partizipation im Spiegel des Alters-Survey (The second half of life. Social situation and participation mirrored by the ageing survey). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
  18. Künemund, H. (2006). Changing welfare states and the “sandwich generation”—increasing burden for the next generation? International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 1(2), 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Künemund, H. (2008a).Granny-dumping– die Zukunft des Alters? (Granny-dumping—the future of ageing?). In A. Amann, & F. Kolland (Eds.). Paradiese des Alters? Freiheit und Notwendigkeit (Paradises of Ageing? Freedom and necessity) (pp. 221–234). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  20. Künemund, H. (2008b). Intergenerational relations within the family and the state. In C. Saraceno (Ed.), Families, ageing and social policy—intergenerational solidarity in European welfare states (pp. 105–122). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  21. Künemund, H., & Rein, M. (1999). There is more to receiving than needing: theoretical arguments and empirical explorations of crowding in and crowding out. Ageing and Society, 19(1), 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mann, W.C., & Helal, S. (2007). Technology and chronic conditions in later years: reasons for new hope. In H.-W. Wahl, C. Tesch-Römer, & A. Hoff (Eds.) New dynamics in old age: individual, environmental and societal perspectives (pp. 271–289). Amityville: Baywood.Google Scholar
  23. Mollenkopf, H., & Kaspar, R. (2005). Elderly people’s use and acceptance of information and communication technologies. In B. Jaeger (Ed.), Young technologies in old hands—an international view on senior citizens’ utilization of ICT (pp. 41–58). Copenhagen: DJOF Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Morris, M. G., & Venkathesh, V. (2000). Age differences in technology adoption decisions: implications for changing work force. Personnel Psychology, 53(2), 375–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Motel-Klingebiel, A., Wurm, S., & Tesch-Römer, C. (2010). Altern im Wandel. Befunde des Deutschen Altersurvey (Ageing in change: findings of the German ageing survey). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  26. Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (1986). User centered system design: new perspectives on human-computer interaction. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Peacock, S. E., & Künemund, H. (2007). Senior citizens and Internet technology: reasons and correlates of access versus non-access in a European comparative perspective. European Journal of Ageing, 4(4), 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Roberts, R. D. (1984). A positive model of private charity and public transfers. Journal of Political Economy, 92(1), 136–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van den Broek, G., Cavallo, E., Odetti, L., & Wehrmann, C. (2009). Ambient assisted living roadmap. Berlin: VDI/VDE-IT.Google Scholar
  31. van Oorschot, W., & Arts, W. (2005). The social capital of European welfare states: the crowding out hypothesis revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 15(1), 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2010). Computer use by older adults: a multi-disciplinary review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 870–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Recommended Readings

  1. Burdick, D.C., & Kwan, S. (Eds.) (2004). Gerotechnology: research and practice in technology and aging. New York: Springer. This book gives an overview of ideas and applications of gero-technology. Google Scholar
  2. Charness, N., & Schaie, K.W. (Eds.) (2003). Impact of technology on successful aging. New York: Springer. This volume explains the connection between gero-technology and successful ageing. Google Scholar
  3. Sixsmith, A. (Ed.) (forthcoming). Technology for active aging. New York: Springer. This volume discusses how gero-technology can be used to facilitate active ageing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GerontologyUniversity of VechtaVechtaGermany

Personalised recommendations