The Use of Communication Technologies by Older Adults: Exploring the Benefits from the User's Perspective
By A. Melenhorst, Wendy A. Rogers, Evan C. Caylor. 2001
194 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Demography, Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology, Occupational Therapy
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/529999a7eb170788fae6f0cc82a65198bb214ffb
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Demography
In Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Citations in the corpus
- Perceptions and Use of Gerotechnology: Implications for Aging in Place (2008, background): “Research indicates there are two stages of user motivation, “felt-need” and perceived benefits of the technology ( McCreadie & Tinker, 2005 ; Melenhorst, Rogers, & Caylor, 2001 ).”
- Older people and mobile phones: A multi-method investigation (2008, background): “Melenhorst et al. (2001) used focus group discussions to investigate perceived context-related benefits of mobile phones for older persons.”
- Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance (2007, background): “Melenhorst, Rogers, and Caylor (2001) explain the acceptance and decision to use communication technologies in terms of a cost-benefit analysis.”
- PERSPECTIVE: Older Adults' Adoption of Technology: An Integrated Approach to Identifying Determinants and Barriers (2015, background): “They are attracted to technology that’s deemed useful and provides clear benefits to their current lifestyle, and are generally reluctant to use if they cannot see the advantages it may bring (Melenhorst et al., 2001; Steele, Lo, Secombe, and Wong, 2009; Walsh and Callan, 2010).”
- Older Adults Perceptions of Technology and Barriers to Interacting with Tablet Computers: A Focus Group Study (2017, result): “This finding is consistent with previous studies suggesting the perception of potential benefits was more indicative of technology acceptance than perception of cost (Melenhorst et al., 2001; Mitzner et al., 2010).”