The adoption of a serious game to foster interaction between the elderly and the youth

Abstract

The number of lonely elderly is growing. Young people could provide part of the solution for this problem by spending more time with the elderly but negative intergenerational perceptions prevent this and create a generational gap. Serious gaming has the potential to develop positive intergenerational perceptions as shared leisure activities and improve health and well-being of elderly. Therefore the research question for this paper is what factors are essential for the adoption of a serious game to bring elderly and youth together? The qualitative study conducted 36 interviews amongst elderly (above 65) and youth (below 25) applying the USE IT interview protocol. The theoretical value of this paper found 13 design factors, from which five factors were found to correspond with the interviews: Weighing of different motivations young and old; Need for a learning component; Options for a short game; Ease of Use and Communication and nature of social interaction. The empirical study also found that the awareness of intergenerational games is very low and must be addressed. The games must be fun and secure and be available on a multiplatform in the browser so computers are not excluded.

Barriers and wellbeing-oriented enablers of intergenerational innovation in the digital age

“…Institutional barrier dimension. The institutional dimension is defined as administrative barriers that focus on organized rules and requirements, including barriers to shared resources [13,66,78], geographical distance [78] between cooperation partners, and high market uncertainty in product markets [8,56,68] for innovation partnerships. Data protection issues [63] and differences in educational levels [46,59,63] can complicate technology-mediated intergenerational collaborative innovation.…”

“…Barriers in this category include lack of independence [54,72,79], the high cost of technology investment [46,59,63], the complexity of virtual presence management [63,65], and generational differences in technological backgrounds [47,52,59,63,67,69]. Other barriers are lack of joyful activities [54,59,69,80] that can be integrated into real-life collaboration [46,50], the lack of technical training for digital collaboration [63], insufficient technological access [52,63,69] without a supportive technological environment [52,55,56,69,81], and the complexity of technology [56,65,82]. In some cases, the collaboration between the two generations could also be challenging because there is no right time for an appointment [21,32,83].…”

“…The selected publications may not have explicitly mentioned the type of collaborative IGC innovation activities. Some publications dealt with more general collaborative innovation activities [8,13,35,60,68], including exploration (ideation and design and development) and commercialization or market exploitation [13,44,56,84]. Even though the IGC potentially boosts innovation, we identified only three publications [8,56,68] highlighting IGC-related barriers that promote collaboration in commercial activities.…”

“…Some publications dealt with more general collaborative innovation activities [8,13,35,60,68], including exploration (ideation and design and development) and commercialization or market exploitation [13,44,56,84]. Even though the IGC potentially boosts innovation, we identified only three publications [8,56,68] highlighting IGC-related barriers that promote collaboration in commercial activities. Table 4 shows the wellbeing determinants as enablers of IGC identified from the literature.…”

“…The determinant has been identified in the design and development, and exploration. The types of interventions involved in enjoyment are the use of hybrid technology by combining the physical and digital spheres in a collaborative activity, the use of persuasive technology, and location-based gamification [52,56,69,70].…”