技术不用时烦恼好老化

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 GERONTOLOGY
Carla Greubel , Daniel López Gómez , Susan van Hees , Ellen H.M. Moors , Alexander Peine
{"title":"技术不用时烦恼好老化","authors":"Carla Greubel ,&nbsp;Daniel López Gómez ,&nbsp;Susan van Hees ,&nbsp;Ellen H.M. Moors ,&nbsp;Alexander Peine","doi":"10.1016/j.jaging.2025.101324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In ageing research, policy, and practice, older adults' non-use of digital technologies is often discussed as an involuntary state that risks marginalising older adults. In recent years, critical appraisals of technology non-use in gerontological literature have opened up dominant definitions of non-use as a problem, re-constructing older adults' engagement with technology as diverse and deliberate practices. To understand the multifaceted nature of what is considered non-use, however, these studies have often focused on older adults who self-identify as non-users, or on criteria of non-use that these researchers themselves established.</div><div>In this paper, we suggest a more processual and dialogical approach. Drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews and participant observation with providers and participants of a digital social care service for the prevention of social isolation and loneliness in old age, we show that ascriptions of ‘non-users’ to older adults may come from different actors, and that they may be in conflict with how the older adults define their engagement with technologies. Taking those <em>frictions</em> between different ascriptions of use and non-use into consideration, as well as the <em>socio-material negotiations</em> through which such frictions are responded to, our analysis reveals how non-use is intertwined with notions of ‘good ageing’. In the context of digital health and social care services for older people, whose mission is to facilitate ‘good ageing’, negotiations about use and non-use are in fact negotiations about different ways of understanding and enacting good ageing in practice.</div><div>Reflecting on insights from our study, we propose ways to improve the ability of human and non-human actors to respond to each other's diverse forms of understanding and enacting good ageing. Cultivating such ‘response-ability’ may open alternatives to a gradual disengagement for older persons participating in digital health and social care services by allowing more diverse forms of good ageing to co-exist. As a result, non-use can shift from being a problem or concern to being an indication of ways of improving ‘good ageing’ together.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47935,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aging Studies","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101324"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When technology non-use troubles good ageing\",\"authors\":\"Carla Greubel ,&nbsp;Daniel López Gómez ,&nbsp;Susan van Hees ,&nbsp;Ellen H.M. Moors ,&nbsp;Alexander Peine\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaging.2025.101324\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In ageing research, policy, and practice, older adults' non-use of digital technologies is often discussed as an involuntary state that risks marginalising older adults. In recent years, critical appraisals of technology non-use in gerontological literature have opened up dominant definitions of non-use as a problem, re-constructing older adults' engagement with technology as diverse and deliberate practices. To understand the multifaceted nature of what is considered non-use, however, these studies have often focused on older adults who self-identify as non-users, or on criteria of non-use that these researchers themselves established.</div><div>In this paper, we suggest a more processual and dialogical approach. Drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews and participant observation with providers and participants of a digital social care service for the prevention of social isolation and loneliness in old age, we show that ascriptions of ‘non-users’ to older adults may come from different actors, and that they may be in conflict with how the older adults define their engagement with technologies. Taking those <em>frictions</em> between different ascriptions of use and non-use into consideration, as well as the <em>socio-material negotiations</em> through which such frictions are responded to, our analysis reveals how non-use is intertwined with notions of ‘good ageing’. In the context of digital health and social care services for older people, whose mission is to facilitate ‘good ageing’, negotiations about use and non-use are in fact negotiations about different ways of understanding and enacting good ageing in practice.</div><div>Reflecting on insights from our study, we propose ways to improve the ability of human and non-human actors to respond to each other's diverse forms of understanding and enacting good ageing. Cultivating such ‘response-ability’ may open alternatives to a gradual disengagement for older persons participating in digital health and social care services by allowing more diverse forms of good ageing to co-exist. As a result, non-use can shift from being a problem or concern to being an indication of ways of improving ‘good ageing’ together.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aging Studies\",\"volume\":\"75 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101324\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aging Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890406525000180\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aging Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890406525000180","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在老龄化研究、政策和实践中,老年人不使用数字技术经常被视为一种非自愿状态,有可能使老年人边缘化。近年来,在老年学文献中,对不使用技术的批判性评价开辟了不使用技术作为一个问题的主导定义,将老年人与技术的接触重新构建为多样化和有意识的实践。然而,为了理解什么被认为是不使用的多面性,这些研究通常集中在那些自我认定为不使用的老年人身上,或者集中在这些研究人员自己建立的不使用标准上。在本文中,我们建议采用一种更具程序性和对话性的方法。通过对预防老年人社会孤立和孤独的数字社会护理服务的提供者和参与者进行深入的定性访谈和参与者观察,我们表明,对老年人的“非用户”的归属可能来自不同的行为者,并且它们可能与老年人如何定义他们与技术的接触相冲突。考虑到使用和不使用的不同属性之间的摩擦,以及对这些摩擦做出反应的社会-物质协商,我们的分析揭示了不使用是如何与“良好老化”概念交织在一起的。在以促进“良好老龄化”为使命的老年人数字保健和社会保健服务的背景下,关于使用和不使用的谈判实际上是关于在实践中理解和实施良好老龄化的不同方式的谈判。根据我们研究的见解,我们提出了提高人类和非人类行为者对彼此不同形式的理解和实施良好老龄化的能力的方法。培养这种“反应能力”可以通过允许更多样化的良好老龄化形式共存,为老年人逐渐脱离参与数字保健和社会护理服务提供其他选择。因此,不使用可以从一个问题或关注转变为一种共同改善“美好老化”的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When technology non-use troubles good ageing
In ageing research, policy, and practice, older adults' non-use of digital technologies is often discussed as an involuntary state that risks marginalising older adults. In recent years, critical appraisals of technology non-use in gerontological literature have opened up dominant definitions of non-use as a problem, re-constructing older adults' engagement with technology as diverse and deliberate practices. To understand the multifaceted nature of what is considered non-use, however, these studies have often focused on older adults who self-identify as non-users, or on criteria of non-use that these researchers themselves established.
In this paper, we suggest a more processual and dialogical approach. Drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews and participant observation with providers and participants of a digital social care service for the prevention of social isolation and loneliness in old age, we show that ascriptions of ‘non-users’ to older adults may come from different actors, and that they may be in conflict with how the older adults define their engagement with technologies. Taking those frictions between different ascriptions of use and non-use into consideration, as well as the socio-material negotiations through which such frictions are responded to, our analysis reveals how non-use is intertwined with notions of ‘good ageing’. In the context of digital health and social care services for older people, whose mission is to facilitate ‘good ageing’, negotiations about use and non-use are in fact negotiations about different ways of understanding and enacting good ageing in practice.
Reflecting on insights from our study, we propose ways to improve the ability of human and non-human actors to respond to each other's diverse forms of understanding and enacting good ageing. Cultivating such ‘response-ability’ may open alternatives to a gradual disengagement for older persons participating in digital health and social care services by allowing more diverse forms of good ageing to co-exist. As a result, non-use can shift from being a problem or concern to being an indication of ways of improving ‘good ageing’ together.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
17.40%
发文量
70
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Aging Studies features scholarly papers offering new interpretations that challenge existing theory and empirical work. Articles need not deal with the field of aging as a whole, but with any defensibly relevant topic pertinent to the aging experience and related to the broad concerns and subject matter of the social and behavioral sciences and the humanities. The journal emphasizes innovations and critique - new directions in general - regardless of theoretical or methodological orientation or academic discipline. Critical, empirical, or theoretical contributions are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信