Older Adults and Information and Communication Technologies in the Global North

Abstract

At all ages, people are incorporating information and communication technologies (ICTs) into their lives. It is not that they have stopped talking with each other in-person, it is that ICTs complement their interactions when they cannot be together face-to-face. Since the 1990s, email has provided a routine way to stay in touch and sustain meaningful contact over distance. But not all age groups have adopted ICTs with the same enthusiasm. Research in the Global North has consistently reported that age plays an important role in ICT adoption and use (Anderson and Perrin 2017). For example, older adults have been the least likely to use ICTs, and even when they do use ICTs, they are less active in their use (Blank and Groselji 2014; Haight, Quan-Haase, and Corbett 2014; Schreurs, Quan-Haase, and Martin 2017). Yet, this is changing. As more older adults use ICTs, analysts are wondering how such ICTs affect older adults' social networks (Wang, Zhang and Wellman 2018; Wellman, Quan-Haase and Harper forthcoming): Are ICTs helping older adults build, maintain, or diminish personal networks? And how are they supporting or limiting the exchange of social support both for local and long-distance social networks? Moreover, are ICTs affecting different types of social ties differently-be they kin, friend, neighbor, workmate, or churchgoer; or strong or weak? This is not just a shift in the means of communication, with one medium replacing another. In many situations, it is a fundamental shift in the structure of people's connections: from group-based interaction in a single, local, and solidary community to multiple, far-flung

Close ties, near and far away: patterns and predictors of geographic network range among older Europeans

“…Nevertheless, many older adults also maintain connections over longer distances. Such diversity is part of the trend of networked individualism, where people’s relationships shift from local, densely connected communities toward multiple far-reaching, loosely knit, and personalized networks (Harper et al 2020 ). Adults in more recent cohorts have fewer children than their older peers—and these adult children are also more likely to live farther away from their parents to pursue career opportunities and build families (Hank 2007 ).…”

“…Nevertheless, some non-kin relationships are more resilient to longer ranges than others, especially when their sentimental value and proven reliability outweigh the reduced reciprocity over longer distances (Fischer 1982 ; de Jong Gierveld and Perlman 2006 ). Thanks to technological developments, older adults can better sustain many connections over longer distances and enjoy more interactions, emotional support, and shared moments with them, which promotes a sense of engagement and belonging (Quan-Haase et al 2017 ; Harper et al 2020 ).…”

“…It has become more common for older adults to sustain family connections over longer distances, as a result of higher life course residential mobility in both older and younger generations, family complexities, and preferences for intimacy at a distance (Rosenmayr and Köckeis 1963 ; Finchum 2005 ; Hank 2007 ; Viry 2012 ; Wrzus et al 2013 ; Goldman and Cornwell 2018 ; Fihel et al 2021 ). Although long-range connections with friends and non-kin can discontinue when reciprocity is limited, some special relationships persist over time regardless of the distance barrier (Fischer 1982 ; Viry 2012 ; Harper et al 2020 ). In the face of such complexities, “diverse” networks are likely to vary not only in relationship composition but also in proximity, as individuals adjust their social convoy to their changing needs and life circumstances.…”

“…On the other hand, individuals with the most resources often have had the highest lifetime residential mobility. They are also most likely to have the resource and willingness to sustain their connections with family and friends beyond proximity or revive them when needed (Finchum 2005 ; Bloem et al 2008 ; Viry 2012 ; Harper et al 2020 ). In summary, our study will incorporate predictors from earlier research to describe how our geographic-focused typology converges or departs from conventional typologies.…”

“…Meanwhile, younger adults often move away from rural areas after graduating from universities (Rérat 2014 ; Lovén et al 2020 ) and thereby become long-range connections in their parent’s core network. Second, although communication technologies have alleviated geographic constraints on one’s access to support from core confidants, older adults are less likely than the young to be proficient or active users (Mok et al 2010 ; Harper et al 2020 ; Cornwell and Goldman 2021 ). Limited digital skills can make it harder to sustain core connections over longer distances, though many older adults actively develop these skills when such need arises (Quan-haase et al 2018 ; Harper et al 2020 ).…”