Age and cohort effects in gerontechnology: A reconsideration

Background : Information about aging used in gerontechnology has two main sources. Longitudinal, experimental, and to a limited extent cross-sectional research addresses technology-relevant differences and similarities in people as they age. Other research designs such as cross-sequential methods compare generational or cohort differences in people of different ages compared at the same time. Information from both sources are needed in gerontechnology, but frequently the age interpretation is dominant, though this may not be warranted. Goals : (i) to show how person-environment interactions that change over time are related to multiple age and birth cohort effects, and (ii) to identify how longitudinal and crosssectional information on aging can best be used in gerontechnology. Method : We review the dynamics of changes in person-environment interactions in relation to several cohort and age effects. We differentiate among: (i) nonspecific cohort effects, e.g., increasing longevity; (ii) specific cohort effects important in gerontechnology, e.g., increasing health and functioning in cohort flow; and (iii) technology-related cohort effects, e.g., changing attitudes toward technology in cohort flow of older adults. In addition, we suggest four areas to consider of age effects, i.e. (i) sensory and motor functioning; (ii) cognitive performance; (iii) personality and self; and (iv) motivation and emotion, and discuss the interplay of such cohort and age categories in gerontechnology in exemplary manner. Results and conclusions : It is important to simultaneously consider the impact of the various cohort and age effects to major domains of gerontechnology, i.e., housing, communication, personal mobility and transportation, health and functioning, work environments, and recreation and self-fulfilment. Applications : By identifying the best evidence about aging and cohort effects as related to technology, gerontechnology can improve the practical applications for technology use in old age.

[1]  Hans-Werner Wahl,et al.  Awareness of age-related change: examination of a (mostly) unexplored concept. , 2010, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[2]  John W. Riley,et al.  Structural lag: Past and future. , 1994 .

[3]  J. Vaupel,et al.  Broken Limits to Life Expectancy , 2002, Science.

[4]  C. Phillipson,et al.  The SAGE Handbook of Social Gerontology , 2010 .

[5]  J. Fozard,et al.  Age changes in pure-tone hearing thresholds in a longitudinal study of normal human aging. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Toward a psychological science of advanced technology design for older adults. , 2010, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[7]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. , 1977, Psychological review.

[8]  W. Kearns,et al.  Tortuosity in Movement Paths Is Related to Cognitive Impairment , 2010, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[9]  U. Staudinger,et al.  Life Span Theory in Developmental Psychology , 2007 .

[10]  van Jemh Annelies Bronswijk,et al.  Homo Ludens: Adult creativity and quality of life , 2009 .

[11]  James L. Fozard.  Gerontechnology - Beyond Ergonomics and Universal Design , 2002 .

[12]  Susanne Iwarsson,et al.  Aging well and the environment: toward an integrative model and research agenda for the future. , 2012, The Gerontologist.

[13]  Denise C. Park,et al.  Handbook of the Psychology of Aging , 1979 .

[14]  Denise C. Park,et al.  The adaptive brain: aging and neurocognitive scaffolding. , 2009, Annual review of psychology.

[15]  K. Schaie,et al.  Longitudinal studies in aging research. , 2001 .

[16]  H. Bouma,et al.  Technology generation and age in using layered user interfaces , 2001 .

[17]  I. Sigel,et al.  HANDBOOK OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY , 2006 .

[18]  van Jemh Annelies Bronswijk,et al.  Gerontechnology as a field of endeavour , 2009 .

[19]  P. B. Baltes,et al.  Altern aus psychologischer Perspektive: Trends und Profile im hohen Alter , 1996 .

[20]  Karl Ulrich Mayer,et al.  Die Berliner Altersstudie , 2010 .

[21]  J. L. Fozard.  Impacts of Technology Interventions on Health and Self-Esteem , 2005 .

[22]  James L. Fozard,et al.  Age related changes in visual acuity , 1986, Experimental Gerontology.

[23]  J. Fozard,et al.  Age- and gender-specific reference ranges for hearing level and longitudinal changes in hearing level. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  P. Costa,et al.  Personality in adulthood , 1990 .

[25]  T. Kline,et al.  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONTRAST SENSITIVITY AND THE VISUAL PROBLEMS OF OLDER DRIVERS , 1992 .

[26]  Yang Yang.  Aging, Cohorts, and Methods , 2011 .

[27]  L. Carstensen.  The Influence of a Sense of Time on Human Development , 2006, Science.

[28]  Fabian J. Sting,et al.  How BMW is defusing the demographic time bomb. , 2010, Harvard business review.

[29]  Richard Schulz,et al.  A motivational theory of life-span development. , 2010, Psychological review.

[30]  H. Wahl,et al.  Connections between Vision, Hearing, and Cognitive Function in Old Age. , 2003 .

[31]  Jeffrey Craighead,et al.  Smart rehabilitation for the 21st century: the Tampa Smart Home for veterans with traumatic brain injury. , 2011, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[32]  M. Bernard,et al.  Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Models of Care for Older Adults: An Assessment of the National Institute on Aging Research Portfolio , 2010, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[33]  R. Coleman,et al.  Improving the quality of life for older people by design. , 1998, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[34]  William D. Kearns,et al.  Wireless telesurveillance system for detecting dementia , 2011 .

[35]  T Tamara Derksen,et al.  Enhancing mobility in later life, by H. Mollenkopf, F. Marcellini, I. Ruoppila, Z. Széman, M. Tacken; 2005 , 2006 .

[36]  K Warner Schaie,et al.  What Can We Learn From Longitudinal Studies of Adult Development? , 2005, Research in human development.

[37]  N Charness.  Ergonomics and ageing: the role of interactions. , 1998, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[38]  J. Fozard,et al.  Changes in vision and hearing with aging. , 2001 .

[39]  Shu-Chen Li,et al.  Psychological Principles of Successful Aging Technologies: A Mini-Review , 2008, Gerontology.

[40]  N. Charness,et al.  Designing for Older Adults , 2014 .

[41]  S. MacDonald,et al.  Linking biological and cognitive aging: toward improving characterizations of developmental time. , 2011, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[42]  Ethel Shanas,et al.  Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences , 1991 .

[43]  J. Rowe,et al.  Successful aging. , 1998, Aging.

[44]  J. Rotter.  Some Problems and Misconceptions Related to the Construct of Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement , 1975 .

[45]  Hans-Werner Wahl,et al.  Continuity and change in older adults' perceptions of out-of-home mobility over ten years: a qualitative–quantitative approach , 2011, Ageing and Society.

[46]  Frank Schieber,et al.  Vision and aging. , 2006 .

[47]  Hans-Werner Wahl,et al.  Aging independently : living arrangements and mobility , 2003 .

[48]  David Arenberg,et al.  Normal Human Aging: The Baltimore Longitudinal Study on Aging , 1984 .

[49]  van Jemh Annelies Bronswijk,et al.  Technology for quality of life: an enriched taxonomy , 2002 .

[50]  Longitudinal changes in hearing sensitivity among men: the Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[51]  P. Baltes,et al.  Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. , 1990 .

[52]  Alexander Peine,et al.  Social-structural lag revisited , 2011 .