Relationships between the Desire to Age in Place and Attitudes toward Residential Technology

References

• Antonucci, T., & Akiyama, H. (1991). Social relationships and aging well. Generations, 75(1), 39-44.
   Google Scholar
• Bayer, A., & Harper, L. (2000). Fixing to stay: A national survey on housing and home modification issues. Washington, DC: AARP. Retrieved December, 2002, from http://research.aarp.org/il/home_mod_html
   Google Scholar
• Center for Aging Services Technologies. (2005). Boomers willing to pay for technology that allows parents, selves more independent living. Retrieved April, 2006, from www.agingtech.org/documents/071105FocusGroupRelease.doc
   Google Scholar
• Chappell, N. (1988). Technology and aging. In V. W. Marshall & B. D. McPherson (Eds.), Aging: Canadian perspectives (pp. 83-96). Ontario, Canada: Broadview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cream, A. N., & Teaford, M. H. (1999). Maintaining independence through home modifications: A focus on the telephone. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics, 76(3/4), 117-134.
   Google Scholar
• Cutler, N. E., & Gregg, D. W. (1991). The human “wealth span” and financial well-being in older age. Generations, 75(1), 45-48.
   Google Scholar
• Folts, W. E., & Muir, К. В. (2002). Housing for older adults: New lessons from the past. Research on Aging, 24(1), 10-28.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, S. (2004). Older Americans and the Internet. Retrieved April, 2004, from www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Seniors_Online_2004.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fozard, J., Rietsema, J., Bouma, H., & Graafmans, J. (2000). Gerontechnology: Creating enabling environments for the challenges and opportunities of aging. Educational Gerontology, 26(A), 331-344.
   Google Scholar
• Gitlin, L. N., Miller, K. S., & Boyce, A. (1999). Bathroom modifications for frail elderly renters: Outcomes of a community-based program. Technology and Disability, 10, 141-149.
   Google Scholar
• Golant, S. M. (1992). Housing America’s elderly: Many possibilities/few choices. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Herzog, A. R., & House, J. S. (1991). Productive activities and aging well. Generations, 75 (1), 49-54.
   Google Scholar
• Lawton, M. P. (1989a). Behavior-relevant ecological factors. In K. W. Schaie & C. Schooler (Eds.), Social structure and aging: Psychological processes (pp. 57-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Lawton, M. P. (1989b). Environmental proactivity and affect in older people. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of aging (pp. 135-163). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lawton, M. P., & Nahemow, L. (1973). Ecology and the aging process. In C. Eisdorfer & M. P. Lawton (Eds.), The psychology of adult development and aging (pp. 619-674). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, L., & Park, D. (2003). Technology and the promise of independent living for adults: A cognitive perspective. In N. Charness & K. Schaie (Eds.), Impact of technology on successful aging (pp. 262-289). New York: Springer Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Mollenkopf, H., & Fozard, J. (2003). Technology and the good life: Challenges for current and future generations of aging people. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 23, 250-279.
   Google Scholar
• Morini, A., & Biocca, L. (2001). Technology to maintain people at home: Italian experiences. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology and Aging, Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Mutschler, P. H. (1992). Where elders live. Generations, 16(1), 7-14.
   Google Scholar
• Pynoos, J. (1992). Strategies for home modification and repair. Generations, 16(2), 21-25.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of innovations. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rubinstein, R. L. (1989). The home environments of older people: A description of the psychosocial processes linking person to place. Journal of Gerontology, 44(2), S45-53.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunication and Information Administration. (2000, October). Falling through the net: Defining the digital divide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. (2002, November). Effect of income on appliances in U.S. households. Retrieved June, 2003, from www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/appliances/appliances.html
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, A., & Vitalari, N. (1985). Households and technology: The case of home computers - Some conceptual and theoretical issues. In M. L. Roberts & L. H. Wortzel (Eds.), Marketing to the changing households: Management and research perspectives (pp. 187-203). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, A., & Vitalari, N. (1992). Emerging distributed work arrangement: An integration of computer-based supplemental work at home. Management Science, 35(12), 1687-1706.
   Google Scholar
• Vitalari, N., Venkatesh, A., & Gronhaug, K. (1985). Computing in the home: Shifts in the time allocation patterns of households. Communications of the ACM, 25(5), 512-522.
   Google Scholar
• Wagnild, G. (2001). Growing old at home. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 14(1/2), 71-84.
   Google Scholar
• Wahl, H., & Mollenkopf, H. (2003). Impact of everyday technology in the home environment on older adults’ quality of life. In N. Charness & K. Schaie (Eds.), Impact of technology on successful aging (pp. 215-241). New York: Springer Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Wylde, M. A. (1995). How to size up the current and future markets: Technologies and the older adult. Generations, 19(1), 41-46.
   Google Scholar
• Wylde, M. A. (1998). Consumer knowledge of home modifications. Technology and Disability, 8, 51-68.
   Google Scholar