View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Information Communication Technology Use to Improve eHealth Literacy, Technophobia, and Social Connection among Community Dwelling Older Adults

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Information Communication Technology Use to Improve eHealth Literacy, Technophobia, and Social Connection among Community Dwelling Older Adults
Language: English
Authors: Lee, Othelia EunKyoung, Kim, Do-Hong, Lee, Hyenjoo, Beum, Kyung Ah
Source: Educational Gerontology. 2022 48(10):445-457.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 13
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Older Adults, Information Technology, Internet, Computer Use, Knowledge Level, Technological Literacy, Social Isolation, Value Judgment, Anxiety, Self Efficacy, Access to Computers, Intergenerational Programs, Foreign Countries, Mentors, Undergraduate Students, Computer Attitudes
Geographic Terms: South Korea
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Computer Anxiety Scale
DOI: 10.1080/03601277.2022.2045727
ISSN: 0360-1277
1521-0472
Abstract: The Intergenerational Forum (IF), an innovative intervention, offers andragogic programs for community-dwelling older adults, enabling them to engage in youth-led tutorials to learn about Information Communication Technology (ICT). This study examines the outcome of a 12-week class focused on encouraging intergenerational exchange and mutual aid between college students and older adults. Fifty older adults in South Korea participated in the 12-week IF program. First, older adults' Internet usage patterns were examined. Using a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design with multiple outcome measures, we compared older mentees' e-health literacy, technophobia, feelings of social isolation, and social capital following the IF classes. Our findings suggest that older adults' adoption and employment of ICT skills improved their overall eHealth literacy and perceived usefulness of the Internet. Consequently, older IF participants with technophobia saw a decrease in anxiety, and an improvement in their confidence in using computer technology throughout the study period. Study findings imply that developing educational programs specifically designed for community dwelling elders with restricted access to ICT and little digital literacy is both desirable and feasible.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1358127
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHEqalE-7NEQBcd65W4jvNCAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDD5yLGdJRo23HDCbIQIBEICBmxIZOX_B0GEOkO5cVpTrmUjI9oeU9AFccEBFRdvV5pbAW1TgD18SAdF6OznyDgTblSCS9o-bFmwFgiqDFBoZ3t8VSfitd5-Ge7CJRICTIBdYyvEVnErrlS4rnc2Rs8TKoUA4NUp2mXlFObjFWaMB6WO-q43W-ZkkjoCxM53zQuYRR5QSINgl358iyfaaAyaFW5O9ZEQiKyolkVz9
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0158997835;egr01oct.22;2022Sep12.05:35;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0158997835-1">Information Communication Technology Use to Improve eHealth Literacy, Technophobia, and Social Connection among Community Dwelling Older Adults </title> <p>The Intergenerational Forum (IF), an innovative intervention, offers andragogic programs for community-dwelling older adults, enabling them to engage in youth-led tutorials to learn about Information Communication Technology (ICT). This study examines the outcome of a 12-week class focused on encouraging intergenerational exchange and mutual aid between college students and older adults. Fifty older adults in South Korea participated in the 12-week IF program. First, older adults' Internet usage patterns were examined. Using a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design with multiple outcome measures, we compared older mentees' e-health literacy, technophobia, feelings of social isolation, and social capital following the IF classes. Our findings suggest that older adults' adoption and employment of ICT skills improved their overall eHealth literacy and perceived usefulness of the Internet. Consequently, older IF participants with technophobia saw a decrease in anxiety, and an improvement in their confidence in using computer technology throughout the study period. Study findings imply that developing educational programs specifically designed for community dwelling elders with restricted access to ICT and little digital literacy is both desirable and feasible.</p> <p>Information and communication technology (ICT) may transcend the geographical barriers of interconnection by facilitating social interaction of various forms (e.g., audio and visual) between older adults and their loved ones. Digital literacy refers to the ability to use ICT to find, evaluate, create, and communicate information, requiring both cognitive and technical skills and knowing how to use the Internet and operate a computer (American Library Association, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]). In this era of digital transformation, understanding how to use ICT to gather health-related information is essential for maintaining independence and managing one's overall health. Older adults who are not technologically savvy may face barriers, which limit their access to important health-related information. Furthermore, digital illiteracy among older adults could lead to deprivation of certain welfare benefits and decreased social connection.</p> <p>Norman and Skinner ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref2">28</reflink>]) define eHealth literacy as the ability to appraise health information from electronic sources and apply the knowledge gained to addressing or solving a health problem (e.g., electronic communication between patients and providers, electronic medical records, patient portals, and personal health records). As heavy users of healthcare services, older adults need to be able to understand how to use electronic health technology, or they may risk experiencing barriers in accessing important information about their own personal health (Choi & DiNitto, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref3">5</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-2">ICT use: benefits and challenges</hd> <p>Positive effects of ICT use were reported in terms of non-cognitive skills such as self-esteem and self-control (Czaja et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref4">9</reflink>]). Self-efficacy, the personal belief in one's capability to perform behaviors is necessary to attain specific ICT skills (Myhre et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref5">25</reflink>]). Researchers hypothesize that older adults who experience enhanced self-efficacy in using e-health systems are more likely to report positive outcomes in managing their health-related concerns. Previous research supports an overall positive impact of ICT use on increased self-efficacy and e-Health literacy (Shapira et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref6">31</reflink>]; Sims et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref7">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>ICT use empowers older adults, engaging them in critical thinking and decision-making. ICT also and provides users with access to information and resources (Fang et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref8">10</reflink>]). Self-confidence gained through acquiring ICT skills further enhanced subjective well-being (Czaja et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref9">9</reflink>]). Furthermore, this self-confidence leads to self-efficacy, which goes beyond the use of ICT and leads to increased participation in social activities (Chopik, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref10">6</reflink>]). ICT-related self-efficacy is also positively related to performance and intention of older adults for learning of ICT (Cotten et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref11">8</reflink>]). Learning about Internet use seemed to contribute to 22 nursing home residents (mean age of 80) well-being and sense of empowerment (Shapira et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref12">31</reflink>]).</p> <p>A large number of older adults face challenges in computer troubleshooting and experience technophobia related to the use of ICT due to their limited digital literacy. Previous research highlighted the digital divide, predominantly characterized by age, gender, race, education, and income. In a representative sample drawn from the National Health and Aging Trends Study, Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref13">14</reflink>]) found that older men who historically had higher competency with technology were more likely to use ICTs than their female peers were. In particular, those with low income and without a high school education were at a great risk to experience the digital divide (Hong & Cho, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref14">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>Therefore, ICT use plays an important role in building social capital, which refers to individual and community resources derived from one's social networks and support systems (Williams, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref15">35</reflink>]). With regard to older adults' Internet usage, those with larger social resources and networks tend to secure positive reinforcement to learn to use the Internet and to receive emotional and instrumental support by their social network (Choi & DiNitto, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref16">5</reflink>]).</p> <p>Based on 25 studies conducted in 12 countries, published between 2002 and 2015, Chen and Schulz ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref17">4</reflink>]) reviewed that most existing studies evaluated the efficacy of ICT use on social-isolation. Overall, ICT use appeared to reduce social isolation, the concept consisted of two dimensions of (subjective) loneliness and (objective) social support. Loneliness was the most tested outcome variable, and yet, findings for loneliness were inconclusive, warranting additional research.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-3">Development of intergenerational forum in Korea</hd> <p>South Korea (hereafter Korea) is in a period of swift transformation in terms of culture, demography, and technology, and is simultaneously undergoing unprecedented population aging and extraordinary economic growth. Currently, the cohort aged 65 and older is at higher risk of living in poverty and is one of the most socioeconomically deprived age groups in Korea (Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref18">20</reflink>]). According to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref19">29</reflink>]), there has been a notable upsurge in death by suicides completed by individuals aged 55 and older during the past few decades in Korea. Since this segment of the population has experienced great challenges in adapting to new technology, studying their ICT use could provide a rich source of data, an increase in our understanding of older adults' health behaviors, as well as better informed strategies for elder care.</p> <p>The Pew Research Center reported that 67% of individuals aged 65 and older use the Internet and 43% own smartphones in the United States (Anderson & Perrin, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref20">2</reflink>]). According to Gallup Korea ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref21">11</reflink>]), among adults aged 60 and over, the proportion of smartphone ownership increased substantially from 20% in 2012, to 76% in 2019. In a comparative study about Internet usage in a sample of older adults in the U.S. and Korea, Lee et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref22">20</reflink>]) found a higher frequency of ICT use among Korean participants, despite their lower level of educational attainment. Thanks to a well-developed ICT infrastructure, Korea would be an ideal location to examine ICT behaviors among older adults.</p> <p>In a representative sample of older Koreans aged 50 or older (N = 6,306), Jun and Kim ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref23">13</reflink>]) examined the association between Internet use and suicidal ideation. The Internet is an important social and health activity tool that contributes to lowering suicidal ideation, revealing mediating roles of social relationships and depressive symptoms. Despite the proven benefits of e-health literacy interventions among older people, this age group is under-represented in healthcare promotion plans and disease prevention programs. Furthermore, educational interventions targeting younger age-groups may not be appropriate for older adults, as members of this age group oftentimes experience physiological, environmental, and age-related changes, which may limit their cognitive abilities.</p> <p>The authors developed and implemented the Intergenerational Forum (IF) following the andragogy principle that learners must recognize why they need to know something (Knowles, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref24">15</reflink>]). It was hypothesized that older adults who had positive perceptions of the Internet in terms of efficacy and helpfulness would be more likely to learn and utilize the ICT. Through the use of motivation tools such as videos or images that show different stages of computer and internet use, and with the proper social support and mentorship, online health communication abilities can be learned. Enhancing these skills can positively affect self-efficacy, and eventually improve older adults' e-health literacy.</p> <p>According to collaborative learning theory, peer-to-peer learning helps adult learners develop their oral communication, critical thinking, and leadership skills (Nokes-Malach et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref25">27</reflink>]). Keeping in mind the importance of communication and social interaction in learning, this study incorporated collaborative learning processes whereby learners learn from each other by working together to solve a problem, share their interest, and complete a task (Miyake & Kirschner, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref26">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Whereas intergenerational service-learning in higher education positively affects older adults and students, our review found little research to demonstrate the effectiveness and mutual benefits in intergenerational learning and exchanges. Leedahl et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref27">21</reflink>]) tested the efficacy of reverse mentoring in which students help older adults learn about technology, indicating improved attitude among students and interest in technology among older adults. Intergenerational exchange between young immigrants and older native Europeans in four countries produced collaborative learning with the use of ICT as well as social connections despite age and cultural differences (Leek & Rojek, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref28">22</reflink>]). Intergenerational 'Digital Partners' project in Spain also reported an overall satisfaction for both junior and senior participants (Seguí et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref29">30</reflink>]). While these studies examined satisfaction, they did not investigate specific outcomes such as digital literacy, technophobia, and social connections.</p> <p>In our previous study conducted in the United States, the intergenerational interactions created by the IF classes were shown to help decrease technophobia and social isolation among 55 low-income older adults, boosting confidence and eHealth literacy among the study participants (Lee & Kim, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref30">19</reflink>]). In this study, older participants described IF as a 'positive and unique' experience and expressed their heart-felt gratitude for the expertise and patience shown by their youth mentors.</p> <p>Theory-informed interventions, such as the IF e-health literacy program, have the potential to enhance behavioral and emotional outcomes (Chang et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref31">3</reflink>]). Such Innovative and theory-based interventions should be evaluated to assess their impact on ICT self-efficacy and improvements in e-health literacy and social integration. By replicating the IF program with older adults in Korea, this study investigated the following research questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Do older adult mentees who participated in the IF classes demonstrate significant changes in e-Health literacy and technophobia?</item> <p></p> <item> Do older adult mentees who participated in the IF classes demonstrate significant changes in social capital and social isolation?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0158997835-4">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158997835-5">Participants and design</hd> <p>Using the similar convenient sampling strategies employed with the U.S. participants, this study was conducted in two large senior centers in metropolitan Seoul, Korea. The IF program was marketed through different methods included printed brochures and posters and by words of mouth. Inclusion criteria was participants who are 65 and older who would like to learn about computer and the Internet. Individuals with a diagnosis of dementia and those with hearing impairment were excluded from the study. Fifty-two older adults aged 65 and older were initially recruited, and 50 (96.1%) completed the 12-week IF classes.</p> <p>This study used a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design with multiple measures to address the above research question for both intervention and comparison groups. For the purposes of this study, all participants were selected from the same senior centers. Members of both groups belong to social groups within these senior centers and voluntarily engage in leisure activities at the centers. For the comparison group, researchers recruited 54 older adults who participate in the same social and leisure activities as intervention group members, except for the IF technology classes. This research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the research team's university. Each participant provided informed consent. Signatures were also obtained from each research participant.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-6">Research procedures</hd> <p>A 12-week educational program was developed to provide guided instruction and intergenerational exchange between youths serving as mentors and older adults serving as mentees (Lee & Kim, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref32">18</reflink>]). Six cohorts of IF classes were offered, consisting of 8–10 mentees for each class. Class size was kept to a minimum to ensure that individualized tutorials could be delivered. All six IF classes were offered between 2017 and 2019.</p> <p>Tutorials were provided by 30 undergraduate students who were taking introductory social work courses. Undergraduate volunteers provided a total of 1,512 hours of mentoring. The researchers created a tutorial video for an online learning management system demonstrating how to interview older adults. Youth mentors were required to watch this video before meeting with older adults at the IF classes. The tutorial provided tips on culturally sensitive communication with older people and suggestions for effective instructional methods. As aspiring social workers, student mentors were given a unique educational opportunity. The study provided mentors with experience conducting interviews, and opportunity for increased interpersonal engagement with elders through intergeneration exchanges shared during the youth-led ICT tutorials (Lee & Kim, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref33">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>Based on collaborative learning theory, each IF class is structured where by older mentees come together to complete their learning goals. Informal collaborative learning groups consist of smaller teams of youth mentor and older mentee assigned to work together, temporarily on a specific task (Miyake & Kirschner, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref34">24</reflink>]). First, each team of youth mentor and senior mentee is responsible for his/her goal setting. Then, with assistance from the youth mentor, older mentee would work on their task and share their accomplishment with the large group (Nokes-Malach et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref35">27</reflink>]). In each class, older mentees were asked to identify their learning goals. The subsequent discussion centered on what the older mentees wanted to learn about technology, the types of devices that they had, and the ways in which they currently used technology.</p> <p>During the first half of class, basic instruction was given to provide older mentees the opportunity to learn about the Internet and their own unique computerized devices (e.g., smartphones, computers, and tablets). Based on skills and interests, each youth mentor was paired with an older mentee to assist with their particular issues (e.g., sending/receiving text message and/or photos, searching health information, playing videos, etc.). The second half of classes focused on participants' individualized digital technology needs and interests (e.g., informational searches, social media, material and photo uploading, setting reminders, etc.).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-7">Measurements</hd> <p>For each participant, a pretest was conducted by the research team a week prior to the IF classes and a posttest was done a week following the IF classes. These surveys were administered by six graduate students with training in research study protocol. Minimal data was lost due to their contribution and combined expertise. The following are instruments used to examine the participants' e-Health literacy, technophobia, social isolation, and social capital in relation to older mentees' processes of learning and mastering the ICT skills via IF classes and intergenerational interactions. Study participants' prior experiences of using the Internet were assessed, including frequency of Internet use, challenges faced, issues of accessibility, types of devices, and individual use patterns.</p> <p>To better understand the respondents in both the IF intervention and comparison groups, participants were asked to provide their age, gender, educational attainment, marital status, current employment status, and family size. Health status variables included the number of impairments in activities of daily living (ADL), and also in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The ADL categories included using the bath or shower, using the toilet, getting dressed or putting on outdoor clothing, combing or brushing hair, getting into and out of bed, and feeding. The IADL categories included using the telephone, preparing and cooking meals, grocery shopping, doing housework, taking medications, and managing money.</p> <p>Stressors in life were rated using the 5-checklist adopted from the Health and Retirement Study. The sample items included factors such as not having enough money or enough friends, and dependency on others due to disability, etc. The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (Sheikh & Yesavage, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref36">32</reflink>]) was used to measure participants' depressive symptoms.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-8">E-Health literacy</hd> <p>The e-Health Literacy Scale (e-HEALS, Norman & Skinner, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref37">28</reflink>]) is a tool assessing older adults' comfort level, knowledge, and skills in searching and applying electronic health information to health challenges. This 8-item scale includes questions about knowledge of available health information and searching for appropriate information, as well as using this information to make health-related decisions. Researchers asked participants to agree or disagree with certain prompts, including 'I know what health resources are available on the Internet,' and 'I know where to find helpful health resources on the Internet.' The e-HEALS score is calculated by averaging all eight items; the higher the score, the higher the level of eHealth literacy. For this study, the scale showed a high degree of internal consistency reliability with alpha of.85.</p> <p>Two supplemental questions were used to assess older adults' perceived usefulness of the Internet. The first question asked participants about their use of the Internet in order to make health-related decisions. The second question asked participants for their opinion on the perceived importance of having access to health-related resources on the Internet. The questions were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale, with higher scores indicating higher degrees of literacy.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-9">Technophobia</hd> <p>Technophobia was measured in terms of confidence and anxiety about learning ICT skills. Items that were relevant for older adults were adapted from the Computer Anxiety Scale (CAS), which measures perceptions around a person's anxiety relating to computers. Researchers included 12 confidence and 4 anxiety items (Marcoulides, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref38">23</reflink>]). To measure confidence and anxiety, participants were asked to agree or disagree with certain beliefs about their own ICT use. An example for confidence items includes 'I think I am capable of learning to use a computer/Internet.' An example for anxiety includes 'Computers/The Internet are not too complicated for me to understand.' Higher scores indicated more confidence and lower anxiety. The internal consistency reliability for this sample was satisfactory (<emph>α </emph>=.90).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-10">Social isolation</hd> <p>The 9-item Social Isolation Scale was used to measure loneliness and perceived (lack of) social support (Cornwell & Waite, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref39">7</reflink>]). Three of the nine items measure loneliness with the following questions: 'How often do you feel that you lack companionship?,' 'How often do you feel left out?,' and 'How often do you feel isolated from others?' Six of the nine items measure perceived absence of social support from loved ones. The sample questions include, 'How often can you open up to members of your family/friends if you need to talk about your worries?,' and 'How often can you rely on them for help if you have a problem?' In this Likert-type scale, the higher the score, the higher the level of perceived social isolation. The scale showed a satisfactory level of internal consistency in this sample (<emph>α </emph>=.74).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-11">Social capital</hd> <p>The Internet Social Capital Scales (ISCS) assesses two dimensions of social capital, namely 'bridging' and 'bonding' (Williams, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref40">35</reflink>]). A sample question for the 10-item bridging capital scale is 'Interacting with people makes me feel like part of a larger community.' A sample question for the 10-item bonding question is 'There is someone I can turn to for advice about making very important decisions.' Those with higher scores possess bonding and bridging support, which contributes to increased self-confidence and trust of their social network connections. This Likert-type, 20-item scale had good internal consistency for this sample (<emph>α </emph>=.81).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-12">Data analysis</hd> <p>Descriptive statistics were applied to summarize and organize the data. Next, paired <emph>t</emph>-tests were employed to compare pretest and posttest scores for the four major outcomes, including e-Health literacy, technophobia, social isolation, and social capital for both intervention and comparison groups. In addition, the effect size for paired samples, Cohen's <emph>d</emph>, was calculated (Lakens, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref41">16</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-13">Results</hd> <p>Older IF participants' demographic profiles are displayed in Table 1. Participants in both the IF and comparison groups presented similar sociodemographic characteristics, with the exception of age, gender, and educational attainment. On average, the IF participants were older (<emph>M</emph> = 72.9) than the comparison group participants (<emph>M</emph> = 69.9, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref42">102</reflink>) = −2.3, <emph>p</emph> <.05). Of the 50 IF participants, 60% were male, and 40% were female. More males were represented in the IF group, whereas more females were represented in the comparison group (χ2 (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref43">1</reflink>) = 10.9, <emph>p</emph> <.001). In addition, 50% of the comparison group reported having a college education, whereas only 22% of the IF group had a college degree. Interestingly, those with lower educational attainment chose to participate in the IF program (χ2 (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref44">4</reflink>) = 12.5, <emph>p</emph> <.01).</p> <p>Table 1. Demographic characteristics of IMU senior mentees.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td><italic>Control</italic><italic>(n = 54)</italic></td><td><italic>Intervention</italic><italic>(n = 50)</italic></td><td><p id="ilm0001"><graphic href="uedg_a_2045727_ilm0001.gif" content-type="Graph" /><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mrow xmlns=""><mrow><mi>χ</mi></mrow></mrow><mn xmlns="">2</mn><mfenced open="(" close=")" xmlns=""><mrow><mi>d</mi><mi>f</mi></mrow></mfenced></math></p></td><td><italic>p</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Characteristics</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td><italic>%</italic></td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td><italic>%</italic></td><td /><td /></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Gender Female</td><td>39</td><td>72.2</td><td>20</td><td>40</td><td>10.98(1)</td><td><.001</td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>15</td><td>27.8</td><td>30</td><td>60</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Education Less than high school</td><td>11</td><td>20.4</td><td>19</td><td>38.0</td><td>12.48(4)</td><td>.01</td></tr><tr><td>Completed some high school</td><td>2</td><td>3.7</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>High school graduate</td><td>11</td><td>20.4</td><td>18</td><td>36.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Some college</td><td>2</td><td>3.7</td><td>2</td><td>4.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>College graduate and above</td><td>27</td><td>50.0</td><td>11</td><td>22.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Marital Status Married</td><td>39</td><td>72.2</td><td>32</td><td>64.0</td><td>5.71(5)</td><td>.34</td></tr><tr><td>Widowed</td><td>9</td><td>16.7</td><td>15</td><td>30.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Divorced/separated</td><td>3</td><td>5.5</td><td>1</td><td>2.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Never married</td><td>1</td><td>1.9</td><td>2</td><td>4.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Working (Yes)</td><td>15</td><td>27.8</td><td>9</td><td>18.0</td><td>1.53(1)</td><td>.22</td></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>Mean</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>Mean</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>t (df)</italic></td><td><italic>p</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Age</td><td>69.91</td><td>7.24</td><td>72.88</td><td>5.74</td><td>−2.31(102)</td><td>.02</td></tr><tr><td>Family size</td><td>1.46</td><td>1.19</td><td>1.18</td><td>0.95</td><td>1.31 (101)</td><td>.19</td></tr><tr><td>Years of living alone</td><td>2.49</td><td>5.89</td><td>2.88</td><td>6.45</td><td>−.32 (100)</td><td>.75</td></tr><tr><td>Number of health conditions</td><td>1.28</td><td>1.20</td><td>1.28</td><td>1.13</td><td>−.01(102)</td><td>.10</td></tr><tr><td>Life stress</td><td>0.66</td><td>1.33</td><td>0.51</td><td>1.06</td><td>0.63 (100)</td><td>.53</td></tr><tr><td>ADLs</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.82</td><td>0.48</td><td>1.58</td><td>−1.51 (102)</td><td>.13</td></tr><tr><td>IADLs</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.62</td><td>1.70</td><td>−1.89 (102)</td><td>.06</td></tr><tr><td>Geriatric depression</td><td>3.06</td><td>2.69</td><td>3.65</td><td>2.81</td><td>−1.04 (92)</td><td>.30</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>For IF participants, the family size on average was 1.18 (<emph>SD </emph>= 0.95). Only about one-fifth had lived alone (22%, for a mean of 2.88 years, <emph>SD </emph>= 6.45). The vast majority of participants were healthy, reporting little limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs, <emph>M</emph> =.48)) and instrumental ADLs (IADLs, <emph>M</emph> =.62). The majority of participants had at least one chronic illness, and 82% of the participants had an average of 1.28 chronic illnesses (<emph>SD </emph>= 1.13).</p> <p>Overall, older IF participants reported a lower number life stressors, and, therefore, lower levels of stress (<emph>M</emph> =.51, <emph>SD </emph>= 1.06). Based on a GDS score of 3.65 (<emph>SD </emph>= 2.81), these participants also appeared to present lower levels of depression. Similar patterns were observed for the comparison group.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-14">Internet use and activities</hd> <p>Respondents' Internet use patterns were shown in Table 2. A notable difference in the use of Internet was discovered among the IF participants and the comparison group (χ2(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref45">2</reflink>) = 27.34, <emph>p</emph> <.001). While all IF participants identified as current users of Internet, only slightly over half of the comparison group identified as current users (57.4%). For the comparison group, approximately one-fifth of the older adults reported never having used the Internet (20.4%), and one-fifth identified as previous users (22.2%) who no longer used the Internet. Close to three-quarters of both the IF (76.0%) and comparison group (70.4%) had e-mail addresses. About one-half of IF participants (54%) and 35.2% of the comparison group reported using the Internet once a day or every few days. The difference in frequency of Internet use was not significant.</p> <p>Table 2. Health information technology use among IMU senior mentees.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Characteristics</td><td><italic>Control (n = 54)</italic></td><td><italic>Intervention</italic><italic>(n = 50)</italic></td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>n</italic></td><td><italic>%</italic></td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td><italic>%</italic></td><td><p id="ilm0002"><graphic href="uedg_a_2045727_ilm0002.gif" content-type="Graph" /><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mrow xmlns=""><mrow><mi>χ</mi></mrow></mrow><mn xmlns="">2</mn><mfenced open="(" close=")" xmlns=""><mrow><mi>d</mi><mi>f</mi></mrow></mfenced></math></p></td><td><italic>p</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Internet Never used</td><td>11</td><td>20.4</td><td /><td /><td>27.34(2)</td><td><.001</td></tr><tr><td>Previous user</td><td>12</td><td>22.2</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Current user</td><td>31</td><td>57.4</td><td>50</td><td>100</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>No Answer</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Have e-mail address</td><td>38</td><td>70.4</td><td>38</td><td>76.0</td><td>2.37 (1)</td><td>.12</td></tr><tr><td>Use frequency Once a day</td><td>7</td><td>13.0</td><td>10</td><td>20.0</td><td>6.34 (5)</td><td>.28</td></tr><tr><td>Every few days</td><td>12</td><td>22.2</td><td>17</td><td>34.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Once a week</td><td>3</td><td>5.6</td><td>2</td><td>4.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>A few times a month</td><td>6</td><td>11.1</td><td>1</td><td>2.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Once a month</td><td>10</td><td>18.5</td><td>10</td><td>20.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Never use</td><td>5</td><td>9.3</td><td>10</td><td>20.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Accessibility Always easy</td><td>19</td><td>35.2</td><td>10</td><td>20.0</td><td>6.41 (4)</td><td>.17</td></tr><tr><td>Somewhat easy</td><td>10</td><td>18.5</td><td>18</td><td>36.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Not so easy</td><td>7</td><td>13.0</td><td>11</td><td>22.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Difficult</td><td>6</td><td>11.1</td><td>9</td><td>18.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Very difficult</td><td>1</td><td>1.9</td><td>2</td><td>4.0</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>No Answer</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Challenges Pain in the limbs</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>4</td><td>8.0</td><td>4.49(1)</td><td>.03</td></tr><tr><td>Unsteady hands</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>2.0</td><td>1.09(1)</td><td>.30</td></tr><tr><td>Difficulty sitting</td><td>3</td><td>5.6</td><td>8</td><td>16.0</td><td>2.99(1)</td><td>.08</td></tr><tr><td>Concentration</td><td>6</td><td>11.1</td><td>7</td><td>14.0</td><td>.20(1)</td><td>.66</td></tr><tr><td>Tired eyes</td><td>31</td><td>57.4</td><td>31</td><td>62.0</td><td>.23(1)</td><td>.63</td></tr><tr><td>Device Tablet</td><td>7</td><td>13</td><td>5</td><td>10.0</td><td>.22(1)</td><td>.64</td></tr><tr><td>Computer</td><td>32</td><td>59.3</td><td>37</td><td>74.0</td><td>2.53(1)</td><td>.11</td></tr><tr><td>Phone</td><td>39</td><td>72.2</td><td>34</td><td>68.0</td><td>.22(1)</td><td>.64</td></tr><tr><td>Types of Use Research health and other information</td><td>38</td><td>70.4</td><td>36</td><td>72.0</td><td>.03(1)</td><td>.86</td></tr><tr><td>Send/receive mails</td><td>18</td><td>33.3</td><td>20</td><td>40.</td><td>.50(1)</td><td>.48</td></tr><tr><td>Play games</td><td>17</td><td>31.5</td><td>9</td><td>18.0</td><td>2.52(1)</td><td>.11</td></tr><tr><td>Online banking</td><td>16</td><td>29.6</td><td>13</td><td>26.0</td><td>.17(1)</td><td>.68</td></tr><tr><td>Watch video</td><td>15</td><td>27.8</td><td>24</td><td>48.0</td><td>4.53(1)</td><td>.03</td></tr><tr><td>Buy products</td><td>10</td><td>18.5</td><td>6</td><td>12.0</td><td>.85(1)</td><td>.36</td></tr><tr><td>Read papers</td><td>9</td><td>16.7</td><td>6</td><td>12.0</td><td>.46(1)</td><td>.50</td></tr><tr><td>Participate in social media</td><td>2</td><td>3.7</td><td>3</td><td>6.0</td><td>.299(1)</td><td>.58</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Slightly over half of both the IF group (56.0%) and the comparison group (53.7%) reported proficiency and ease in using the Internet to search for information online. The other half did not feel comfortable in using the Internet because of limited functional and physical abilities. The most frequently reported limitations were tired eyes and difficulty concentrating.</p> <p>For both IF and comparison participants, searching for health-related and other information was the most popular activity (72% and 70.4%, respectively), followed by sending and receiving e-mails (40% and 33.3%, respectively). More IF participants (48%) reported watching online videos than did the comparison group (27.8%; χ2(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>) = 4.53, p <.05). Other popular online activities included online banking for both groups and playing online games for the comparison group.</p> <p>Most older mentees needed assistance in order to understand the basic functions of the Internet and smartphone apps. Even though the majority of IF mentees initially reported having experience using the Internet, many of them were unaware of features that could be useful to them. While the majority of participants had e-mail accounts, many encountered challenges with remembering and recovering their passwords. Youth mentors offered instruction to the older mentees on how to create passwords, and how to use online filing systems to store, organize, and retrieve personal information. The youth mentors were instrumental in teaching technology lessons to older mentees, helping them develop skills to utilize social media and the Internet (i.e., KakaoTalk [mobile platforms with instant messaging and video calling], YouTube, Google search, etc.).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-15">Outcome evaluation of IF</hd> <p>Table 3 presents pretest and posttest scores in the four major outcomes measured in this study, namely e-Health literacy, technophobia, social isolation, and social capital. Following the 12-week IF classes, older mentees improved in their eHealth literacy (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref47">49</reflink>) = −4.23, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = −.60). The IF participants also reported perceived greater usefulness of Internet during this period (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref48">49</reflink>) = −3.50, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = −.49).</p> <p>Table 3. Intervention group: Comparison of Pretest and Posttest.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Pre-test</td><td>Post-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Item</td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>t</italic></td><td><italic>df</italic></td><td><italic>p</italic></td><td><italic>d</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>eHealth literacy</td><td>3.45</td><td>0.60</td><td>3.72</td><td>0.54</td><td>−4.23</td><td>49</td><td>0.00</td><td>−0.60</td></tr><tr><td>Usefulness of Internet</td><td>3.68</td><td>0.84</td><td>4.08</td><td>0.70</td><td>−3.50</td><td>49</td><td>0.00</td><td>−0.49</td></tr><tr><td>Importance of Internet</td><td>3.98</td><td>0.62</td><td>4.10</td><td>0.61</td><td>−1.43</td><td>49</td><td>0.16</td><td>−0.20</td></tr><tr><td>Technophobia Confidence</td><td>2.59</td><td>0.47</td><td>2.87</td><td>0.47</td><td>−5.05</td><td>49</td><td>0.00</td><td>−0.71</td></tr><tr><td>Anxiety</td><td>2.88</td><td>0.63</td><td>3.07</td><td>0.63</td><td>−2.77</td><td>49</td><td>0.01</td><td>−0.39</td></tr><tr><td>Social isolation</td><td>16.20</td><td>3.54</td><td>15.68</td><td>3.11</td><td>1.43</td><td>49</td><td>0.16</td><td>0.20</td></tr><tr><td>Social Capital</td><td>55.32</td><td>6.39</td><td>57.58</td><td>6.54</td><td>−3.65</td><td>49</td><td>0.00</td><td>−0.52</td></tr><tr><td>Depression</td><td>3.62</td><td>2.83</td><td>3.22</td><td>2.54</td><td>1.32</td><td>44</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.20</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 4. Control group: comparison of pretest and posttest.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Pre-test</td><td>Post-test</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Item</td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>t</italic></td><td><italic>df</italic></td><td><italic>p</italic></td><td><italic>d</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>eHealth literacy</td><td>3.68</td><td>0.59</td><td>3.76</td><td>1.01</td><td>−0.44</td><td>41</td><td>.66</td><td>−0.07</td></tr><tr><td>Usefulness of Internet</td><td>3.86</td><td>0.65</td><td>3.88</td><td>0.83</td><td>−0.16</td><td>41</td><td>.88</td><td>−0.02</td></tr><tr><td>Importance of Internet</td><td>4.05</td><td>0.70</td><td>3.90</td><td>0.93</td><td>1.14</td><td>41</td><td>.26</td><td>0.18</td></tr><tr><td>Technophobia Confidence</td><td>2.50</td><td>0.53</td><td>2.58</td><td>0.56</td><td>−1.48</td><td>53</td><td>.15</td><td>−0.20</td></tr><tr><td>Anxiety</td><td>2.82</td><td>0.72</td><td>3.00</td><td>0.75</td><td>−2.04</td><td>53</td><td>.05</td><td>0.28</td></tr><tr><td>Social isolation</td><td>16.17</td><td>3.13</td><td>14.56</td><td>3.35</td><td>3.20</td><td>53</td><td>.00</td><td>−0.44</td></tr><tr><td>Social Capital</td><td>55.78</td><td>5.66</td><td>57.17</td><td>55.78</td><td>−1.32</td><td>53</td><td>.19</td><td>−0.18</td></tr><tr><td>Depression</td><td>3.06</td><td>2.69</td><td>3.15</td><td>2.79</td><td>−0.30</td><td>47</td><td>.76</td><td>−.044</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 5. Means, adjusted means, and standard deviations by grouping condition.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Pre-survey</td><td>Post-survey</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Control</td><td>Intervention</td><td>Control</td><td>Intervention</td></tr><tr><td>Item</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td>Adjusted Mean</td><td><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</td><td>Adjusted Mean</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>eHealth literacy</td><td>3.68 (0.59)</td><td>3.45 (0.60)</td><td>3.76 (1.01)</td><td>3.70</td><td>3.72 (0.54)</td><td>3.77</td></tr><tr><td>Usefulness of Internet</td><td>3.86 (0.65)</td><td>3.68 (0.84)</td><td>3.88 (0.83)</td><td>3.85</td><td>4.08 (0.70)</td><td>4.11</td></tr><tr><td>Importance of Internet</td><td>4.05 (0.70)</td><td>3.98 (0.62)</td><td>3.90 (0.93)</td><td>3.88</td><td>4.10 (0.61)</td><td>4.12</td></tr><tr><td>Technophobia Confidence</td><td>2.50 (0.53)</td><td>2.59 (0.47)</td><td>2.58 (0.56)</td><td><bold>2.61*</bold></td><td>2.87 (0.47)</td><td><bold>2.84*</bold></td></tr><tr><td>Anxiety</td><td>2.82 (0.72)</td><td>2.88 (0.63)</td><td>3.00 (0.75)</td><td>3.01</td><td>3.07 (0.63)</td><td>3.05</td></tr><tr><td>Social isolation</td><td>16.17 (3.13)</td><td>16.20 (3.54)</td><td>14.56 (3.35)</td><td>14.56</td><td>15.68 (3.11)</td><td>15.67</td></tr><tr><td>Social Capital</td><td>55.78 (5.66)</td><td>55.32 (6.39)</td><td>57.17 (55.78)</td><td>57.00</td><td>57.58 (6.54)</td><td>57.77</td></tr><tr><td>Depression</td><td>3.06 (2.69)</td><td>3.62 (2.83)</td><td>3.15 (2.80)</td><td>3.34</td><td>3.22 (2.54)</td><td>3.02</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 *<emph>p</emph> <.05</p> <p>Considering two dimensions of technophobia, anxiety toward technology was significantly reduced in IF group participants throughout the study (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref49">49</reflink>) = −2.77, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>d</emph> = −.39). Consequently, IF group participants reported an overall increase in the level of confidence in using technology (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref50">49</reflink>) = −5.05, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = −.71).</p> <p>Within the comparison group, significant changes were observed during the study period in the two outcomes of technophobia and social isolation. Comparison group participants' anxiety toward technology was reduced (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref51">53</reflink>) = −2.04, <emph>p</emph> <.05, <emph>d</emph> = 0.28). In addition, their feelings of social isolation were lower in the posttest (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref52">53</reflink>) = 3.20, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.44), after the 12-week period.</p> <p>Not shown in the tables, an Independent samples <emph>t</emph>-test was conducted to evaluate whether the pretest mean scores of the intervention and comparison groups were equal. The results did not show a significant difference in the mean scores for the intervention and comparison groups in all study outcome variables (e-Health literacy, technophobia, social isolation, etc.). The means and <emph>SDs</emph> of the pretest scores were reported in Tables 3 and 4.</p> <p>An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to examine differences in the grouping conditions (intervention vs. comparison groups) on the posttest scores after controlling for the pretest scores. The assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes was checked. Scatterplots with regression lines for the two groups seemed parallel for all study variables. The covariate (pretest scores) by group interaction is not statistically significant at all (<emph>p</emph> >.1). Thus, the assumption of homogeneity of regression lines required for ANCVOA was found to be tenable. The means, adjusted means, and standard deviations by each grouping condition are reported in Table 5. Results of ANCOVA indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the grouping conditions on the adjusted posttest means at the <emph>p</emph> <.05 level for all variables, except for confidence. The effect size partial eta squared measures for the variables with non-significant differences were.04 or below, which are considered small. The adjusted mean confidence posttest score for the intervention group (<emph>M</emph> = 2.87, <emph>SD </emph>= 0.47,</p> <p>GRAPH</p> <p> <ephtml> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mrow><msub><mi>M</mi><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>d</mi><mi>j</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></math> </ephtml> = 2.84) was significantly different from the comparison group (<emph>M</emph> = 2.58, <emph>SD </emph>= 0.56,</p> <p>GRAPH</p> <p> <ephtml> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mrow><msub><mi>M</mi><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>d</mi><mi>j</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></math> </ephtml> = 2.61) (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref53">1</reflink>, 101) = 9.99, <emph>p = </emph>.002,</p> <p>GRAPH</p> <p> <ephtml> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msubsup><mrow><mrow><mi>η</mi></mrow></mrow><mi>p</mi><mn>2</mn></msubsup></math> </ephtml> =.09), and the effect size partial eta squared of.09 (90% CI [.02,.19]) indicated a small effect.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-16">Discussion</hd> <p>Despite the well-documented positive effect of ICT use in older adults, relatively limited intervention research has been conducted to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of sustainable community-based programs offering ICT instruction for older adults. Our findings suggest that older adults' adoption and employment of ICT skills improved their eHealth literacy and perceived usefulness of Internet by taking a 12-week class focused on encouraging intergenerational exchange and mutual aid between college students and older adults.</p> <p>Taking a learner-centered approach based on conceptual model of self-efficacy and adult learning principles may facilitate behavior changes that allow older adults to become more interested in adopting new technology. Consistent with previous studies, these findings suggest that innovative instruction, such as incorporating an intergenerational exchange and connection, may promote ICT use and decrease technophobia among community dwelling older adults (Chopik, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref54">6</reflink>]; Cotten et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref55">8</reflink>]; Czaja et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref56">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>During the same period, older adults in the comparison condition also experienced a decrease in feelings of social isolation and anxiety toward technology. It is interesting to note that compared to IF participants, those in the comparison group were slightly younger, female, and more highly educated. Perhaps, comparison group participants were also able to obtain more social support from family and friends around their ICT use, resulting in decreased technophobia and social isolation (Fang et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref57">10</reflink>]; Hong & Cho, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref58">12</reflink>]; Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref59">14</reflink>]).</p> <p>ICT has the potential to help older users stay connected with family, friends, neighbors, and new contacts with shared interests across geographical boundaries via virtual interactions (Chen & Schulz, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref60">4</reflink>]). In particular, the IF program was instrumental in bridging information gaps by providing tailored training and mentoring to older adults with low levels of digital literacy. Consistent with previous research, greater improvements in technology-related items suggest that ICT learning experiences would be particularly beneficial for participants with lower levels of digital literacy (Chang et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref61">3</reflink>]; Shapira et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref62">31</reflink>]).</p> <p>In our cross-cultural study, Korean respondents reported lower levels of educational attainment, compared to the U.S. elders, prior to the IF intervention. Yet, Korean participants scored higher on technology-related pretest items than the U.S. participants (Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref63">20</reflink>]), indicating that Korean elders had greater levels of e-Health literacy than the U.S. participants. Perhaps, in the high-tech oriented Korean culture, older adults find it necessary to acquire digital skills to stay connected with others. This further highlights the importance of motivation to learn ICT (Sims et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref64">33</reflink>]). In retrospect, recruitment in Korea studies have been easier since a greater number of older adults are interested and motivated to sign up for the IF program.</p> <p>Lee et al. ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref65">17</reflink>]) found that both in-person interactions and remote connections significantly alleviated depressive symptoms in Korean older adults in contrast to a U.S. study exhibiting a non-significant effect of remote contact on geriatric depression (Teo et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref66">34</reflink>]). These results highlight cross-cultural differences in ICT use and its relationship with health outcomes that needs to be further investigated in future study.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-17">Limitations</hd> <p>The findings of this study provide pilot data about ICT needs and pragmatic community-based educational programs for older adults, utilizing a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design. This study incorporated a comparison group to assess the causal impact of the IF program. Therefore, we were not able to conduct a true experimental design, or make random assignments. Future study should control threat to internal validity by implementing a randomized control trial.</p> <p>The generalizability of this study is also limited by the small, convenient sample as well as socially desirable responses. Obviously, selection bias exists in that those who use the ICT were attracted to participate in the IF classes. Another limitation of the study is the lack of assessment information about what the older users specifically learned, as well as the long-term sustained effects of this intervention beyond the IF classes. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a follow-up study of IF older mentees to examine and measure their specific Internet use patterns over time.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-18">Implications for practice</hd> <p>Innovative interventions are necessary to assist socioeconomically disadvantaged elders surmount the digital divide. Study findings in both the U.S. and Korea suggest that ICT use for the purposes of leisure activity, information search, and social connection would likely promote and enhance community-based elder care (Lee & Kim, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref67">19</reflink>]). This finding offers important implications for gerontologists, adult educators, and healthcare providers as it presents the potential to change health behaviors.</p> <p>The effects of ICT on mental health outcomes has been intensely researched. Yet, very few community-based efforts to help older adults as frequent users of healthcare services to equip with tools to survive in this era of digital transformation have been documented. Aging and being alone during the COVID pandemic, when social distancing and isolation is a requirement, could be harmful for older adults' mental health. More than ever, it is a time to teach older adults 'to fish' so that they can feed themselves for a lifetime. Service providers should stand up against ageism and help older adults master eHealth literacy and digital skills. To this end, appropriate funding and policy should be developed to support more intergenerational programs at the community level to enhance sustainable intergenerational exchanges that promote digital literacy skills of older adults. Ultimately, interventions such as these will help alleviate the costs associated with the treatment of geriatric depression.</p> <p>Older adults who practice ICT for social purposes benefit from increased social connections with friends or neighbors. Although remote, these connections have a positive impact on mental health. Social isolation is an extreme form of loneliness. It is estimated that Medicare costs to treat the health effects of loneliness in older adults can reach up to $6.7 billion a year (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref68">26</reflink>]). Consequently, the World Health Organization identifies social support as a main determinant of overall health. In current times of a viral pandemic, where the necessity of social distancing and virtual interactions is essential, it is critical to assist older adults in learning to use ICT proficiently so that they can remain connected and feel less isolated.</p> <p>According to the review by Chen and Schulz ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]), the affirmative ICT effect on social connectedness rarely carried on for more than 6 months after the intervention. Future research should focus on identifying which specific groups of older adults would most benefit from ICT use. More innovative interventions should be designed to ensure that older adults stay safe online. These interventions should be evaluated to determine which types of resources and training are most helpful to older adults, and which activities foster successful Internet use over time.</p> <p>More research should be conducted to discover the emerging impact of geron-technology, and the ways in which it impacts older adults' social connectedness. It is important to understand evolving patterns of ICT, and how its use may serve to increase, decrease, maintain, or avoid social connection among older adults. Service providers should collaborate with innovators and entrepreneurs to develop universally designed technologies that would be user-friendly and beneficial for older adults, as well as users of all ages.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-19">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-20">Data availability statement</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-21">Ethics approval statement</hd> <p>This research proposal was approved by the Institutional Review Board for Research with Human Subjects at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (Protocol No.: 18-09-18).</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-22">Patient consent statement</hd> <p>Informed consent was read to each participants, and signatures were obtained from each research participant.</p> <hd id="AN0158997835-23">Permission to reproduce material from other sources</hd> <p>There is no reproducible materials from other sources in this manuscript.</p> <ref id="AN0158997835-24"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> American Library Association. (2021). Digital literacy. https://literacy.ala.org/digital-literacy</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref20" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anderson, M., & Perrin, A. (2017). Technology use among seniors. Pew Research Center. https://<ulink href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/">www.pewinternet.org/2017/05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref31" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Chang, S. J., Yang, E., Lee, K. E., & Ryu, H. (2020). Internet health information education for older adults: A pilot study. Geriatric Nursing, S0197-4572 (20), 30302 – 30305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2020.10.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref17" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Chen, Y. R., & Schulz, P. J. (2016). The effect of information communication technology interventions on reducing social isolation in the elderly: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18 (1), e18. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4596</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref3" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Choi, N., & DiNitto, D. (2013). Internet use among older adults: Association with health needs, psychological capital, and social capital. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15 (5), e97. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2333</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref10" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chopik, W. J. (2016). The benefits of social technology use among older adults are mediated by reduced loneliness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 19 (9), 551 – 556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0151</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref39" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Cornwell, E. Y., & Waite, L. J. (2009). Measuring social isolation among older adults using multiple indicators from the NSHAP study. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 64B (Suppl. 1), i38 – i46. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbp037</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref11" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cotten, S. R., Ford, G., Ford, S., & Hale, T. M. (2014). Internet use and depression among retired older adults in the United States: A longitudinal analysis. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69 (5), 763 – 771. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbu018</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref4" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Czaja, S. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2018). Improving social support for older adults through technology: Findings from the PRISM randomized controlled trial. The Gerontologist, 58 (3), 467 – 477. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw249</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fang, Y., Chau, A. K. C., Wong, A., Fung, H. H., & Woo, J. (2018). Information and communicative technology use enhances psychological well-being of older adults: The roles of age, social connectedness, and frailty status. Aging & Mental Health, 22 (11), 1516 – 1524. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1358354</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallup Korea. (2019). A survey of use of smart phone, smart watch, and smart device. https://<ulink href="http://www.statista.com/statistics/897195/south-korea-smartphone-ownership-by-age-group">www.statista.com/statistics/897195/south-korea-smartphone-ownership-by-age-group</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hong, Y. A., & Cho, J. (2017). Has the digital health divide widened? Trends of health-related Internet use among older adults from 2003 to 2011. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72 (5), 856 – 863. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw100</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jun, H. J., & Kim, M. Y. (2017). What accounts for the relationship between Internet use and suicidal ideation of Korean older adults? A mediation analysis. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72 (5), 846 – 855. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw163</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, J., Lee, H. Y., Christensen, M. C., & Merighi, J. R. (2017). Technology access and use, and their associations with social engagement among older adults: Do women and men differ? The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72 (5), 836 – 845. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw123</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Knowles, M. S. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species. Gulf.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, M. A., Ferraro, K. F., & Kim, G. (2020). Digital technology use and depressive symptoms among older adults in Korea: Beneficial for those who have fewer social interactions? Aging & Mental Health, 25 (10), 1839–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1839863</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, O. E., & Kim, D. (2017). Intergenerational forum to enhance students' engagement and learning outcomes: A community-based participatory research study. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 15 (3), 241 – 257. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2017.1330043</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, O. E., & Kim, D. (2019). Bridging the digital divide for older adults via intergenerational mentor-up. Research on Social Work Practice, 29 (7), 786 – 795. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731518810798</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, O. E., Kim, D., & Beum, K. (2020). Cross-cultural factors affecting information and communication technology use and eHealth literacy among older adults in the US and South Korea. Educational Gerontology, 46 (9), 575 – 586. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2020.1790162</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leedahl, S. N., Brasher, M. S., Estus, E., Breck, B. M., Dennis, C. B., & Clark, S. C. (2019). Implementing an interdisciplinary intergenerational program using the Cyber Seniors® reverse mentoring model within higher education. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 40 (1), 71 – 89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2018.1428574</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leek, J., & Rojek, M. (2021). ICT tools in breaking down social polarization and supporting intergenerational learning: Cases of youth and senior citizens. Interactive Learning Environments, 1 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1940214</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marcoulides, G. A. (1989). Measuring computer anxiety: The computer anxiety scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49 (3), 733 – 739. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448904900328</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miyake, N., & Kirschner, P. A. (2014). The social and interactive dimensions of collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 418 – 438). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Myhre, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Glisky, E. L. (2017). Cognitive benefits of online social networking for healthy older adults. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72 (5), 752 – 760. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw025</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2020). Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults: Opportunities for the health care system. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25663</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nokes-Malach, T. J., Richey, J. E., & Gadgil, S. (2015). When is it better to learn together? Insights from research on collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 27 (4), 645 – 656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9312-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006). eHEALS: The ehealth literacy scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8 (4), e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2020). Suicide rates (indicator). https://doi.org/10.1787/a82f3459-en</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seguí, F. L., de San Pedro, M., Verges, E. A., Algado, S. S., & Cuyàs, F. G. (2019). An intergenerational information and communications technology learning project to improve digital skills: User satisfaction evaluation. Journal of Medical Internet Research Aging, 2 (2), e13939. https://doi.org/10.2196/13939</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shapira, N., Barak, A., & Gal, I. (2007). Promoting older adults' well-being through Internet training and use. Aging & Mental Health, 11 (5), 477 – 484. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607860601086546</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sheikh, J. I., & Yesavage, J. A. (1986). Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. In T. L. Brink (Ed.), Clinical Gerontology (pp. 165 – 173). Haworth.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sims, T., Reed, A. E., & Carr, D. C. (2017). Information and communication technology use is related to higher well-being among the oldest-old. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72 (5), 761 – 770. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw130</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teo, A. R., Choi, H., Andrea, S. B., Valenstein, M., Newsom, J. T., Dobscha, S. K., & Zivin, K. (2015). Does mode of contact with different types of social relationships predict depression in older adults? Evidence from a nationally representative survey. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 63 (10), 2014 – 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13667</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams, D. (2006). On and off the 'net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11 (2), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.x</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Othelia EunKyoung Lee; Do-Hong Kim; Hyenjoo Lee and Kyung Ah Beum</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref68"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1358127
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Information Communication Technology Use to Improve eHealth Literacy, Technophobia, and Social Connection among Community Dwelling Older Adults
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lee%2C+Othelia+EunKyoung%22">Lee, Othelia EunKyoung</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kim%2C+Do-Hong%22">Kim, Do-Hong</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lee%2C+Hyenjoo%22">Lee, Hyenjoo</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Beum%2C+Kyung+Ah%22">Beum, Kyung Ah</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Educational+Gerontology%22"><i>Educational Gerontology</i></searchLink>. 2022 48(10):445-457.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 13
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Older+Adults%22">Older Adults</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Technology%22">Information Technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Internet%22">Internet</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Use%22">Computer Use</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Knowledge+Level%22">Knowledge Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technological+Literacy%22">Technological Literacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Isolation%22">Social Isolation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Value+Judgment%22">Value Judgment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Anxiety%22">Anxiety</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Efficacy%22">Self Efficacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Access+to+Computers%22">Access to Computers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intergenerational+Programs%22">Intergenerational Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mentors%22">Mentors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Attitudes%22">Computer Attitudes</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22South+Korea%22">South Korea</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Computer+Anxiety+Scale%22">Computer Anxiety Scale</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/03601277.2022.2045727
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0360-1277<br />1521-0472
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The Intergenerational Forum (IF), an innovative intervention, offers andragogic programs for community-dwelling older adults, enabling them to engage in youth-led tutorials to learn about Information Communication Technology (ICT). This study examines the outcome of a 12-week class focused on encouraging intergenerational exchange and mutual aid between college students and older adults. Fifty older adults in South Korea participated in the 12-week IF program. First, older adults' Internet usage patterns were examined. Using a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design with multiple outcome measures, we compared older mentees' e-health literacy, technophobia, feelings of social isolation, and social capital following the IF classes. Our findings suggest that older adults' adoption and employment of ICT skills improved their overall eHealth literacy and perceived usefulness of the Internet. Consequently, older IF participants with technophobia saw a decrease in anxiety, and an improvement in their confidence in using computer technology throughout the study period. Study findings imply that developing educational programs specifically designed for community dwelling elders with restricted access to ICT and little digital literacy is both desirable and feasible.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1358127
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1358127
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/03601277.2022.2045727
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 13
        StartPage: 445
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Older Adults
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information Technology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Internet
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Use
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Knowledge Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technological Literacy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Isolation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Value Judgment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Anxiety
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Efficacy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Access to Computers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intergenerational Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mentors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: South Korea
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Anxiety Scale
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Information Communication Technology Use to Improve eHealth Literacy, Technophobia, and Social Connection among Community Dwelling Older Adults
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lee, Othelia EunKyoung
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kim, Do-Hong
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lee, Hyenjoo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Beum, Kyung Ah
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0360-1277
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1521-0472
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 48
            – Type: issue
              Value: 10
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Educational Gerontology
              Type: main
ResultId 1