It is impossible to have a conversation about caring for older adults (or most anything else for that matter) without pivoting to AI and related tech. It may be especially important when it comes to frail seniors, given the shortage of both paid aides and family caregivers—a situation likely to worsen as more Baby Boomers reach their 80s and draconian anti-immigrant policies curb the supply of available care workers.

Tech innovations are everywhere. My inbox is filled with promotions for an AI-this or a robot-that. But it appears to be easier to build slick gizmos than understand what motivates older adults to accept them.

It is an important question since technology has the potential to allow older adults to live independently at home for longer or improve their quality of life in senior communities. But “potential” does a lot of work here.

Thinking About Choices  

Academics have created various models to help think about how consumers make tech-related choices. But none have been especially satisfying. Now, one of the nation’s most creative thinkers about senior housing, University of Florida professor Stephen Golant, has developed a new framework published in the journal Frontiers of Public Health.

He looks at these decisions through two lenses: the differences in the technology itself and the way older adults think about whether to adopt these tools. Together, they make for what he calls “Digital Environment Solutions.”

His focus is on the ability of older adults to remain in their own homes, often called aging in place. But the framework he creates can be useful for senior living communities as well.

Golant readily acknowledges that, based on what we know now, some questions are not yet answerable. But he seems to be asking the right questions.

Equipment and Destinations

Start with the tech itself. Golant argues it is important to distinguish between digital equipment and digital destinations.

Equipment includes everything from broadband, smartphones, wearables, and Siri-like voice assistants to robotic pets and assistants, and sensors or cameras that detect falls or other worrying events.

Destinations include everything from e-commerce and telehealth portals to tech that enables social connections with family, friends, and faith communities, or even virtual reality. AI increasingly will guide decisions from health care to finance.

These can supplement, or even replace, in-person experiences such as a visit to a doctor, shopping, or having coffee with a friend. This can be especially critical for someone with, say, mobility or cognitive challenges. But combined, in Golant’s words, they have the potential to make homes “safer, less lonely, and more supportive.”

Approaches To Tech

But, he argues, older adults may approach tech in very different ways.

They will balance many factors, including usability, privacy, security, stigma, and access to more traditional, human alternatives. He breaks down older adults into six groups. Those who:

  • Adopt digital supports with relative enthusiasm. Many may have first tested more traditional solutions but found them wanting.
  • Compare digital with traditional options and ultimately choose to continue to primarily engage with the physical world.
  • Select a hybrid model that combines new tech with traditional interactions. Imagine someone who visits the senior center and also shops online. Today, this may be most common.
  • Tolerate their physical or cognitive limitations by lowering their expectations for a good life.
  • Blame themselves for their challenges or believe it is not possible to take steps to improve their quality of life. Some may be overwhelmed by their circumstances, while others may believe their situation is pre-determined and unchangeable.
  • Choose to leave their homes and move to more supportive housing, where they may benefit from technology or more traditional assistance.

Many Factors

In part, these choices are driven by personality. Some people may be more open to new ideas than others. But other factors, such as income, access to tech, education and digital literacy, levels of impairment, and culture matter too.

Golant warns that his model, like others, struggles to keep up with rapid changes in both tech itself and in the willingness of older adults to accept it as their health and functional status or social environment changes. Someone may be tech-forward until loss of function makes it impossible to manage their mobile phone.

Another key factor is the way personal experiences with tech change the way older adults respond. A positive interaction may encourage someone to adopt additional technology. And a bad experience may have the opposite result.

A recent example: An older adult who is a long-time user of Zoom suddenly found the app had gone glitchy. After days of seeking a solution, including with a remarkably unhelpful chatbot, she was ready to give up on Zoom.

Will she find a substitute or entirely abandon tech-enabled social connections? And if she does, how will it affect her well-being?

Inevitably, AI and other technology will become linked to the daily lives of older adults, just as with the rest of us. But before it does, it will be critical for developers, businesses, and consumers themselves to understand what motivates the choices to adopt tech.