Preferences for technology versus human assistance and control over technology in the performance of kitchen and personal care tasks in baby boomers and older adults

References

• Schulz R, editor-in-chief. Quality of life technology handbook. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor and Francis Group; 2013
   Google Scholar
• Field M, Jette AM, editors. The future of disability in America. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Schulz R, Tompkins C. Informal caregivers in the United States: prevalence, caregiver characteristics and ability to provide care. In National Research Council, The role of human factors in home health care: Workshop summary. S. Olson, Rapporteur. Committee on the Role of Human Factors in Home Health Care, Committee on Human-Systems Integration. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington (DC): The National Academies Press; 2010:117–43
   Google Scholar
• Talley RC, Crews JE. Framing the public health of caregiving. Am J Public Health 2007;97:224–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersh WR, Hickam DH, Severance SM, et al. Diagnosis, access and outcomes: update of a systematic review of telemedicine services. J Telemed Telecare 2006;12:S2:3–31
   Google Scholar
• Pare G, Jaana M, Sicotte C. Systematic review of home telemonitoring for chronic diseases: the evidence base. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007;14:269–77
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czaja S, Schulz R. Innovations in technology and aging: introduction. Generations 2006;30:6–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helal S, Mounir M, Bessam A, editors. The engineering handbook of smart technology for aging, disability, and independence. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons; 2008
   Google Scholar
• Borsci S, Kurosu M, Mele ML, Federici S. Systemic user experience. In: Federici S, Scherer J, eds. Assistive technology assessment handbook. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor Francis Group; 2012:337–60
   Google Scholar
• Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1989;13:219–39
   Google Scholar
• Or CKL, Karsh BT. A systematic review of patient acceptance of consumer health information technology. J Am Med Assoc 2009;16:550–60
   Google Scholar
• Czaja SJ, Charness N, Fisk AD, et al. Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol Aging 2006;21:333–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heart T, Kalderon E. Older adults: are they ready to adopt health-related ICT? Int J Med Inform 2011 Apr 8 [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• Hensel BK, Demiris G, Courtney KL. Defining obtrusiveness of home telehealth technologies: a conceptual framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006;13:428–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitzner TL, Boron JB, Bailey Fausset C, et al. Older adults talk technology: technology usage and attitudes. Comput Hum Behav 2010;26:1710–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson KE, O’Brien MA, Rogers WA, Charness N. Diffusion of technology: frequency of use for younger and older adults. Ageing Int 2011;36:123–45
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scherer M. Matching person & technology. A series of assessments for evaluating predispositions to and outcomes of technology use in rehabilitation, education, the workplace, & other settings. Webster (NY): The Institute for Matching Person & Technology, Inc.; 1998
   Google Scholar
• Scherer M, Sax CL, Vanbiervliet A, et al. Predictors of assistive technology use: the importance of personal and psychosocial factors. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:1321–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer M, Sax CL. Measures of assistive technology predisposition and use. In: Mpofu E, Oakland T, eds. Rehabilitation and health assessment: applying ICF guidelines. New York (NY): Springer; 2010:229–54
   Google Scholar
• Federici S, Scherer J, eds. Assistive technology assessment handbook. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor Francis Group; 2012
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent E, Stafford R, MacDonald B. Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: review and future directions. Int J Soc Rob 2009;1:319–30
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezer N, Fisk AD, Rogers WA. Attitudinal and intentional acceptance of domestic robots by younger and older adults. In: Stephanidis C, ed. Universal access in human-computer interaction. Part II. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2009:39–48
   Google Scholar
• Kahn Z. Attitudes towards intelligent service robots. Report Number: TRITA-NA-P9821, IPLab-154. Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology; 1998
   Google Scholar
• Dautenhahn K, Woods S, Kaouri C, et al. What is a robot companion – friend, assistant, or butler? Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 2005 Aug 2–6; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 1192–7 p
   Google Scholar
• Ezer N, Fisk AD, Rogers WA. More than a servant: self-reported willingness of younger and older adults to having a robot perform interactive and critical tasks in the home. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53rd Annual Meeting; 2009 Oct 19–23; San Antonio, Texas, USA. 136–40 p
   Google Scholar
• Beach SR, Schulz R, Downs J, et al. Disability, age, and informational privacy attitudes in quality of life technology applications: results from a national web survey. ACM Trans Acces Comput (TACCESS) 2009;2:1–21
   Google Scholar
• Matthews JT, Beach SR, Downs J, et al. Preferences and concerns for quality of life technology among older adults and persons with disabilities; National Survey results. Technol Disabil 2010;22:5–15
   Google Scholar
• Beach S, Schulz R, Downs J, et al. End-user perspectives on privacy and other trade-offs in acceptance of quality of life technologies. Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Quality of Life Technology; 2009 June 30–July 1; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
   Google Scholar
• Beach S, Schulz R, Seelman K, et al. Trade-offs and tipping points in the acceptance of quality of life technologies: results from a survey of manual and power wheelchair users. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Quality of Life Technology; 2010 June 28–29; Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
   Google Scholar
• Weinstein ND. Why it won’t happen to me: perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility. Health Psychol 1984;3:431–57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein ND, Klein WM. Resistance of personal risk perceptions to debiasing interventions. Health Psychol 1995;14:132–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar