| Literature DB >> 31911953 |
Anna Schlomann1, Alexander Seifert2,3, Susanne Zank1, Christiane Woopen4,5, Christian Rietz6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A good person-environment-fit has positive effects on well-being in old age. As digital technologies are an integral part of older adults' environments, we predicted that the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) is associated with subjective well-being among the oldest-old. Specifically, we compared different user groups of ICT devices (nonusers, users of nonweb-connected ICT, users of web-connected ICT) and analyzed the relations among ICT use and three domains of subjective well-being (loneliness, anomie, autonomy). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a quantitative data analysis using data from the first representative state-wide survey study in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany on quality of life and well-being of the oldest-old (n = 1,698; age range: 80-103; 9% long-term care). Multiple regression analyses were applied.Entities:
Keywords: Digitization; Germany; Internet; Subjective well-being; Technology use
Year: 2020 PMID: 31911953 PMCID: PMC6938466 DOI: 10.1093/geroni/igz050
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Innov Aging ISSN: 2399-5300
ICT Use by Individual Characteristics
| Total ( | % total of the sample | No ICT | Nonweb ICT | Web ICT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38.5 | 35.6 | 25.9 | ||
| Age ( |
| 86.91 (4.38) | 84.73 (3.55) | 83.92 (3.26) |
| Sex ( | % female | 46.3 | 35.5 | 18.2 |
| % male | 25.1 | 35.8 | 39.1 | |
| Education ( | % low level | 57.3 | 34.5 | 8.2 |
| % medium level | 35.0 | 38.6 | 26.4 | |
| % high level | 17.8 | 29.8 | 52.4 | |
| Housing situation ( | % private home | 34.3 | 37.7 | 28.0 |
| % long-term care | 80.1 | 16.0 | 3.8 | |
| Care level ( | % no care level | 28.7 | 39.5 | 31.7 |
| % any care level | 60.4 | 26.7 | 12.9 | |
| Participation in the labor force ( | % employed at any point in time | 60.2 | 35.9 | 3.8 |
| % never employed | 37.0 | 35.6 | 27.4 |
Note: ICT = information and communication technologies; M = mean; SD = standard deviation, percentages in rows, proxy interviews excluded.
ICT Use by Indicators of Social Inclusion
| No ICT | NonWeb ICT | Web ICT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of children ( |
| 2.04 (1.45) | 2.14 (1.42) | 1.97 (1.27) |
| Number of grandchildren/great-grandchildren ( |
| 4.14 (5.82) | 3.49 (4.00) | 3.13 (3.32) |
| Frequency: time with other people ( |
| 2.51 (.95) | 2.61 (.96) | 2.70 (.85) |
| Frequency: participation in social activities, e.g., drinking coffee ( |
| 1.40 (1.75) | 1.67 (1.71) | 1.76 (1.72) |
Note: ICT = information and communication technologies; M = mean; SD = standard deviation, proxy interviews excluded.
Domains of Subjective Well-Being Within the Different ICT User Groups
| Loneliness ( | Anomie ( | Autonomy ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Total | 1.31 | 0.63 | 2.48 | 0.82 | 3.57 | 0.71 |
| No ICT | 1.41 | 0.68 | 2.61 | 0.85 | 3.33 | 0.81 |
| Nonweb ICT | 1.30 | 0.65 | 2.52 | 0.83 | 3.66 | 0.66 |
| Web ICT | 1.18 | 0.51 | 2.25 | 0.73 | 3.79 | 0.49 |
Note: ICT = information and communication technologies; M = mean; SD = standard deviation, proxy interviews excluded.
Linear Regression Analyses to Predict Loneliness
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .24 (.04) | .18 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .16 (.04) | .12 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .22 (.04) | .16 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .14 (.04) | .11 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .11 (.05) | .08 | .017 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .11 (.04) | .09 | .009 |
| Model fit |
|
Note: b = unstandardized regression coefficients; ICT = information and communication technologies; SE = standard errors; β = standardized regression coefficients; model 2 includes, as covariates the number of children, number of grandchildren/great-grandchildren, frequency of time spent with other people, and frequency of social activities; model 3 include, as additional covariates, age (mean-centered), sex (ref. female), education level (ref. low level), care level (ref. no care level), long-term care (ref. private home), and participation in the labor force (ref. never employed).
Linear Regression Analyses to Predict Anomie
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .34 (.05) | .20 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .27 (.05) | .16 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .30 (.05) | .17 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .25 (.05) | .15 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .17 (.06) | .10 | .004 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | .21 (.05) | .12 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
|
Note: b = unstandardized regression coefficients; ICT = information and communication technologies; SE = standard errors; β = standardized regression coefficients; model 2 includes, as covariates the number of children, number of grandchildren/great-grandchildren, frequency of time spent with other people, and frequency of social activities; model 3 include, as additional covariates, age (mean-centered), sex (ref. female), education level (ref. low level), care level (ref. no care level), long-term care (ref. private home), and participation in the labor force (ref. never employed)
Linear Regression Analyses to Predict Autonomy
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.45 (.04) | −.31 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.18 (.05) | −.12 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.43 (.04) | −.29 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.17 (.04) | −.12 | <.001 |
| Model fit |
| ||
|
| |||
| No ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.23 (.05) | −.16 | <.001 |
| Nonweb ICT (ref. Web ICT) | −.13 (.04) | −.09 | .003 |
| Model fit |
|
Note: b = unstandardized regression coefficients; ICT = information and communication technologies; SE = standard errors; β = standardized regression coefficients; model 2 includes, as covariates the number of children, number of grandchildren/great-grandchildren, frequency of time spent with other people, and frequency of social activities; model 3 include, as additional covariates, age (mean-centered), sex (ref. female), education level (ref. low level), care level (ref. no care level), long-term care (ref. private home), and participation in the labor force (ref. never employed).