Influencing Factors on Pre-implementation Acceptance of Geron-technology for the Elderly Residing in Community

지역사회 노인의 제론테크놀로지에 대한 사용 전 수용성에 영향을 미치는 요인

  • An, Jiwon (Department of Nursing Science, Far East University) ;
  • Park, Kyongok (Department of Nursing, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • 안지원 (극동대학교 간호학과) ;
  • 박경옥 (강릉원주대학교 간호학과)
  • Received : 2019.04.28
  • Accepted : 2019.07.20
  • Published : 2019.07.28


Geron-technology contributing to successful "Aging in place" increases the quality of life for the elderly and decreases the social caring cost. This study aims to identify influencing factors on pre-implementation acceptance of geron-technology for the elderly residing in a community. Data for 129 participants were analyzed. Results indicated that location, physical function, lack of technical support by family members, and the high financial cost as a 28% power were identified as the influencing factors on pre-implementation acceptance of geron-technology. Therefore, in the development of health and welfare strategy, these influencing factors should be considered in order to archive 'aging in place' for the elderly.


Technology;Gerontology;Aged;Rural population;Physical Functional Performance

DJTJBT_2019_v17n7_157_f0001.png 이미지

Fig. 1. Model of pre-implementation acceptance

Table 1. Samples' Characteristics

DJTJBT_2019_v17n7_157_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. The Level of Pre-implementation Acceptance and Barrier of Geron-technology

DJTJBT_2019_v17n7_157_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Correlation between Subjects’ Characteristics and Pre-implementation Acceptance

DJTJBT_2019_v17n7_157_t0003.png 이미지

Table 4. Influence Factors on Pre-implementation Acceptance of Geron-technology

DJTJBT_2019_v17n7_157_t0004.png 이미지


Supported by : National Research Foundation


  1. J. L. Wiles, A. Leibing, N. Guberman, J. Reeve & R. E. Allen. (2012). The meaning of "aging in place" to older people. Gerontologist, 52(3), 357-366. DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnr098
  2. A. M. Cook & J. M. Polgar. (2014). Assistive Technologies-E-Book: Principles and Practice. St. Louis: Elsevier Health Sciences. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-323-09631-7.00001-6
  3. J. K. Eckert, L. A. Morgan & N. Swamy. (2004). Preferences for receipt of care among community-dwelling adults. Journal of aging & social policy, 16(2), 49-65. DOI: 10.1300/j031v16n02_04
  4. S. T. Peek, E. J. Wouters, J. van Hoof, K. G. Luijkx, H. R. Boeije, & H. J. Vrijhoef. (2014). Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 83(4), 235-248. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004
  5. G. Woolhead, M. Calnan, P. Dieppe & W. Tadd. (2004). Dignity in older age: what do older people in the United Kingdom think? Age and ageing, 33(2), 165-170. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afh045
  6. S. Y. Kim, K. J. Moon & C. O. Oh. (2015). Searching for policy orientation by the analysis of factors affecting aging in place in the aging community. Journal of Regional Studies, 23(2), 137-164.
  7. Nordic Centre for Welfare and Social Issues(NCWSI). (2010). Focus on Welfare Technology.
  8. G. C. Yoo et al. (2014). A Study on the system building for successful application of welfare technology to welfare system (896827214X). Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs.
  9. S. J. Czaja, N. Charness, A. D. Fisk & W. Rogers. (2002). Welcome to Gerontechnology 2002: Creative use of technology for better aging. Gerontechnology, 2(1), 1-2. DOI: 10.4017/gt.2002.
  10. F. Cardinaux, D. Bhowmik, C. Abhayaratne & M. S. Hawley. (2011). Video Based Technology for Ambient Assisted Living: A review of the literature. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments, 3, 253-269. DOI: 10.3233/AIS-2011-0110
  11. S. Yusif, J. Soar & A. Hafeez-Baig. (2016). Older people, assistive technologies, and the barriers to adoption: A systematic review. International journal of medical informatics, 94, 112-116. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004
  12. F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi & P. R. Warshaw. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
  13. Chen, K., & Chan, A. (2013). Use or non-use of gerontechnology - A qualitative study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(10), 4645-4666. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph10104645
  14. M. P. Zanna & J. K. Rempel. (1998). Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In D.Bar-Tal & A. W.Kruglanski(Eds.) The Social Psychology of Knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  15. E. Karahanna, D. W. Straub & N. L. Chervany. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS quarterly, 23(2), 183-213. DOI: 10.2307/249751
  16. B. Hofmann. (2013). Ethical challenges with welfare technology: a review of the literature. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(2), 389-406. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-011-9348-1
  17. D. E. Nease & J. M. Malouin. (2003). Depression screening: a practical strategy. Journal of Family Practice, 52(2), 118-126.
  18. R. C. Loureiro, W. S. Harwin, K. Nagai & M. Johnson. (2011). Advances in upper limb stroke rehabilitation: a technology push. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 49(10), 1103. DOI: 10.1007/s11517-011-0797-0
  19. Hjalpmedelsinstitutet. (2012). Welfare technology for older people -Examples from Sweden. Swedich Institute of Assistive Technology(SIAT).
  20. R. A. Clark, S. C. Inglis, F. A. McAlister, J. G. F. Cleland & S. Stewart. (2007). Telemonitoring or structured telephone support programmes for patients with chronic heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 334(7600), 942. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39156.536968.55
  21. R. Gaikwad & J. Warren. (2009). The role of home-based information and communications technology interventions in chronic disease management: a systematic literature review. Health Informatics Journal, 15(2), 122-146. DOI: 10.1177/1460458209102973
  22. G. Pare, M. Jaana & C. Sicotte. (2007). Systematic review of home telemonitoring for chronic diseases: The evidence base. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 14, 269-277. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.m2270
  23. S. An, D. Park & K. Kim. (2017). The use of health and social services among rural older adults - focusing on older adults with functional disabilities. Naju: Korea Rural Economic Institute.
  24. J. F. Calvert, J. Kaye, M. Leahy, K. Hexem & N. Carlson. (2009). Technology use by rural and urban oldest old. Technology and Health Care, 17(1), 1-11.
  25. K. Renaud & J. Van Biljon. (2008. October). Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: a qualitative study. In the Proceedings of the 2008 annual research conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT research in developing countries: riding the wave of technology. (pp.210-219). New York: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/1456659.1456684
  26. N. Charness & W. R. Boot. (2009). Aging and information technology use: Potential and barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 253-258. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01647.x
  27. C. K. Lai, J. C. Chung, N. K. Leung, J. C. Wong & D. P. Mak. (2010). A survey of older Hong Kong people's perceptions of telecommunication technologies and telecare devices. Journal of telemedicine and telecare, 16(8), 441-446. DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2010.090905
  28. N. L. Chappell & Z. Zimmer. (1999). Receptivity to new technology among older adults. Disability and rehabilitation, 21(5-6), 222-230. DOI: 10.1080/096382899297648
  29. Y. H. Lee, E. J. Ji & O. Yun. (2019). Health concern, health information orientation, e-health literacy and health behavior in aged women : focused on 60-70s. Journal of Convergence for Information Technology, 9(4), 39-47. DOI: 10.22156/CS4SMB.2019.9.4.039
  30. Y. Raban & M. Brynin. (2006). Older people and new technologies. Computers, phones, and the Internet: Domesticating information technology, New York; Oxford University.
  31. S. J. Czaja et al. (2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and aging, 21(2), 333-352. DOI: 10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333
  32. J. Cohen-Mansfield, M. A. Creedon, T. B. Malone, M. J. Kirkpatrick III, L. A. Dutra & R. P. Herman. (2005). Electronic memory aids for community-dwelling elderly persons: Attitudes, preferences, and potential utilization. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 24(1), 3-20. DOI: 10.1177/0733464804271277
  33. S. Park et al. (2017). Current Trends Analysis of Welfare Technology in Korea for Older Adults and People with Disabilities. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 8(10), 295-304. DOI: 10.15207/JKCS.2017.8.10.295
  34. C. Steggell, K. Hooker, S. Bowman, S. Choun & S. Kim. (2010). The role of technology for healthy aging among Korean and Hispanic women in the United States: a pilot study. Gerontechnology, 9(4), 433-449. DOI: 10.4017/gt.2010.
  35. J. van Hoof, H. Kort, P. Rutten & M. Duijnstee. (2011). Ageing-in-place with the use of ambient intelligence technology: Perspectives of older users. International journal of medical informatics, 80(5), 310-331. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.02.010
  36. G. Demiris, B. K. Hensel, M. Skubic & M. Rantz. (2008). Senior residents' perceived need of and preferences for "smart home" sensor technologies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 24(1), 120-124. DOI: 10.1017/s0266462307080154
  37. H. Nho, Y. Kim & S. Hong. (2015). A Study on Technostress of Information Communication Technology User. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 6(4), 41-46. DOI: 10.15207/JKCS.2015.6.4.041
  38. E. J. Porter & L. H. Ganong. (2002). Considering the use of a personal emergency response system: an experience of frail, older women. Care Management Journals, 3(4), 192-198. DOI: 10.1891/cmaj.