Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2023-12
From 65 to 103,Older Adults Experience Virtual Reality Differently Depending on Their Age: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Study in Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Facilities
There is growing interest in applications of virtual reality (VR) to improve the lives of older adults, but the limited research on older adults and VR largely treats older adults as a monolith, ignoring the substantial differences across 65 to 100+ year olds that may affect their experience of VR. There are also few existing studies examining the experiences and challenges facing those who facilitate VR for older adults (e.g., caregiving staff). We address these limitations through two studies. In study 1, we explore variation within older adults' experiences with VR through a field study of VR use among a large (N = 245) and age-diverse (Mage = 83.6 years, SDage = 7.9, range = 65–103 years) sample of nursing home and assisted living facility residents across 10 U.S. states. Age was negatively associated with the extent to which older adults enjoyed VR experiences. However, the negative relationship between age and older adults' attitudes toward VR was significantly less negative than the relationship between age and their attitudes toward other technologies (cell phones and voice assistants). In study 2, we surveyed caregiving staff (N = 39) who facilitated the VR experiences for older adult residents and found that the caregiving staff generally enjoyed the activity relative to other activities and felt it to be beneficial to their relationship with residents.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SeifertA, SchlomannA. The use of virtual and augmented reality by older adults: Potentials and challenges. Front Virtual Real, 2021; 2:639718.
2.
TuenaC, PedroliE, TrimarchiPD, et al.Usability issues of clinical and research applications of virtual reality in older people: A systematic review. Front Hum Neurosci, 2020; 14:93.
3.
BarsasellaD, MalwadeS, ChangCC, et al.Opinions Regarding Virtual Reality among Older People in Taiwan; 2023 [cited August 2, 2023]. pp. 165–171. Available from: https://www.scitepress.org/Link.aspx?doi=10.5220/0009425801650171 [Last accessed: November6, 2023].
4.
AfifiT, CollinsN, RandK, et al.Using virtual reality to improve the quality of life of older adults with cognitive impairments and their family members who live at a distance. Health Commun, 2022; 38(9):1904–1915.
5.
LinCX, LeeC, LallyD, et al.Impact of Virtual Reality (VR) Experience on Older Adults' Well-Being. In: Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population Applications in Health, Assistance, and Entertainment. (ZhouJ, SalvendyG. eds.) Springer International Publishing: Cham; 2018. pp. 89–100. [Lecture Notes in Computer Science].
6.
BakerS, WaycottJ, RobertsonE, et al.Evaluating the use of interactive virtual reality technology with older adults living in residential aged care. Inf Process Manage, 20201; 57(3):102105.
7.
ManDWK, ChungJCC, LeeGYY. Evaluation of a virtual reality-based memory training programme for Hong Kong Chinese older adults with questionable dementia: A pilot study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2012; 27(5):513–520.
8.
DuqueG, BoersmaD, Loza-DiazG, et al.Effects of balance training using a virtual-reality system in older fallers. Clin Interv Aging, 2013; 8:257–263.
9.
CampeloAM, HashimJA, WeisbergA, et al.Virtual Rehabilitation in the Elderly: Benefits, Issues, and Considerations. In: 2017International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR), Montreal, QC, Canada; 2017; pp. 1–2.
10.
OrtetCP, VelosoAI, Vale CostaL. Cycling through 360° virtual reality tourism for senior citizens: Empirical analysis of an assistive technology. Sensors (Basel), 2022; 22(16):6169.
11.
Campo-PrietoP, CancelaJM, Rodríguez-FuentesG. Immersive virtual reality as physical therapy in older adults: Present or future (systematic review). Virtual Reality, 2021; 25(3):801–817.
12.
BrownJA.An exploration of virtual reality use and application among older adult populations. Gerontol Geriatr Med, 2019; 5:2333721419885287.
13.
LeeLN, KimMJ, HwangWJ. Potential of augmented reality and virtual reality technologies to promote wellbeing in older adults. Appl Sci, 2019; 9(17):3556.
14.
CarrollJ, HopperL, FarrellyAM, et al.A scoping review of augmented/virtual reality health and wellbeing interventions for older adults: Redefining immersive virtual reality. Front Virtual Reality, 2021; 2:655338.
15.
HassandraM, GalanisE, HatzigeorgiadisA, et al.Α virtual reality app for physical and cognitive training of older people with mild cognitive impairment: Mixed methods feasibility study. JMIR Serious Games, 2021; 9(1):e24170.
16.
LiuQ, WangY, TangQ, et al.Do you feel the same as I do? Differences in virtual reality technology experience and acceptance between elderly adults and college students. Front Psychol, 2020; 11:573673.
17.
LiuQ, WangY, YaoMZ, et al.The effects of viewing an uplifting 360-degree video on emotional well-being among elderly adults and college students under immersive virtual reality and smartphone conditions. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2020; 23(3):157–164.
18.
CarstensenLL, GrossJJ, FungHH. The social context of emotional experience. Annu Rev Gerontol Geriatr, 1998; 17:325–352.
19.
JaulE, BarronJ. Age-related diseases and clinical and public health implications for the 85 years old and over population. Front Public Health, 2017; 5:335
20.
LiS, YeH, ChenA, et al.Characteristics of hearing loss in elderly outpatients over 60 years of age: An annual cross-sectional study. Acta Otolaryngol, 2021; 141(8):762–767.
21.
EvansJR, FletcherAE, WormaldRPL, et al.Prevalence of visual impairment in people aged 75 years and older in Britain: results from the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community. Br J Ophthalmol, 2002; 86(7):795–800.
22.
Sanchez-VivesMV, SlaterM. From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2005; 6(4):332–339.
23.
CummingsJJ, BailensonJN. How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology, 2016; 19(2):272–309.
24.
ThachKS, LedermanR, WaycottJ.Guidelines for Developing the VR Program in Residential Aged Care: A Preliminary Study from Staff Members' Perspective. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA’21). Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY; 2021; pp. 1–6.
25.
WaycottJ, KellyRM, BakerS, et al.The Role of Staff in Facilitating Immersive Virtual Reality for Enrichment in Aged Care: An Ethic of Care Perspective. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’22). Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY; 2022; pp. 1–17.
26.
CoccoE, GattiM, de Mendonça LimaCA, CamusV. A comparative study of stress and burnout among staff caregivers in nursing homes and acute geriatric wards. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2003; 18(1):78–85.
27.
KandelmanN, MazarsT, LevyA. Risk factors for burnout among caregivers working in nursing homes. J Clin Nurs, 2018; 27(1–2):e147–e153.
28.
BrimelowRE, DaweB, DissanayakaN. Preliminary research: Virtual reality in residential aged care to reduce apathy and improve mood. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2019; 23(3):165–170.
29.
Haegerstrom-PortnoyG, SchneckM, BrabynJ, et al.Changes in vision function over time in an older population: The SKI study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2002; 43(13):4717.
30.
CassouB, DerriennicF, MonfortC, et al.Chronic neck and shoulder pain, age, and working conditions: Longitudinal results from a large random sample in France. Occup Environ Med, 2002; 59(8):537–544.
31.
HerreraF, BailensonJN. Virtual reality perspective-taking at scale: Effect of avatar representation, choice, and head movement on prosocial behaviors. New Media Soc, 2021; 23(8):2189–2209.
32.
EllisRD, AllaireJC. Modeling computer interest in older adults: The role of age, education, computer knowledge, and computer anxiety. Hum Factors, 1999; 41(3):345–355.
33.
HargittaiE, PiperAM, MorrisMR. From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Univ Access Inf Soc, 2019; 18(4):881–890.
34.
HargittaiE, DobranskyK. Old dogs, new clicks: Digital inequality in skills and uses among older adults. Can J Commun, 2017; 42(2):3176.
35.
AfifiT, CollinsNL, RandK, et al.Testing the feasibility of virtual reality with older adults with cognitive impairments and their family members who live at a distance. Innov Aging, 2021; 5(2):igab014.
36.
FioccoAJ, MillettG, D'AmicoD, et al.Virtual tourism for older adults living in residential care: A mixed-methods study. PLoS One, 2021; 16(5):e0250761.
37.
AbeeleVV, SchraepenB, HuygelierH, et al.Immersive virtual reality for older adults: Empirically grounded design guidelines. ACM Trans Access Comput, 2021; 14(3):14:1–14:30.
38.
BailensonJ.Experience on Demand: What Virtual Reality Is, How It Works, and What It Can Do. W.W. Norton & Company: NY, New York; 2018.
39.
KakullaB.AARP. 2023 Tech Trends: No End in Sight for Age 50+ Market Growth; 2023 [cited March 24, 2023]. Available from: https://www.aarp.org/research/topics/technology/info-2023/2023-technology-trends-older-adults.html [Last accessed: November6, 2023].
40.
TylerM, De George-WalkerL, SimicV. Motivation matters: Older adults and information communication technologies. Stud Educ Adults, 2020; 52(2):175–194.
41.
OrsoV, NascimbenG, GullàF, et al.Introducing Wearables in the Kitchen: An Assessment of User Acceptance in Younger and Older Adults. In: Universal Access in Human–Computer Interaction Human and Technological Environments. (AntonaM, StephanidisC. eds.) Springer International Publishing: Cham; 2017; pp. 579–592. [Lecture Notes in Computer Science].
42.
CornwellB, LaumannEO, SchummLP. The social connectedness of older adults: A national profile. Am Sociol Rev, 2008; 73(2):185–203.
43.
CloggCC, PetkovaE, HaritouA. Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. Am J Sociol, 1995; 100(5):1261–1293.
44.
ZarnochSJ.Testing Hypotheses for Differences Between Linear Regression Lines. U.S. Department of Agriculture; 2009 [cited March 28, 2023]. Available from: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/33218 [Last accessed: November6, 2023].
45.
AbdelaatyL, SteeleLG. Explaining attitudes toward refugees and immigrants in Europe. Polit Stud (Oxf), 2022; 70(1):110–130.
46.
HenkensB, VerleyeK, LarivièreB. The smarter, the better?! Customer well-being, engagement, and perceptions in smart service systems. Int J Res Mark, 2021; 38(2):425–447.
47.
SelzamS, RitchieSJ, PingaultJB, et al.Comparing within- and between-family polygenic score prediction. Am J Hum Genet, 2019; 105(2):351–363.
48.
WoodsB, O'PhilbinL, FarrellEM, et al.Reminiscence therapy for dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018; 2018(3):CD001120.
49.
HuygelierH, SchraepenB, van EeR, et al.Acceptance of immersive head-mounted virtual reality in older adults. Sci Rep, 2019; 9(1):4519.
50.
van BoekelLC, PeekST, LuijkxKG. Diversity in older adults' use of the internet: Identifying subgroups through latent class analysis. J Med Internet Res, 2017; 19(5):e6853.
51.
van WalravenC, HartRG. Leave ‘em alone—Why continuous variables should be analyzed as such. Neuroepidemiology, 2008; 30(3):138–139.
52.
CarstensenLL, ShavitYZ, BarnesJT. Age advantages in emotional experience persist even under threat from the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol Sci, 2020; 31(11):1374–1385.
53.
PasupathiM, CarstensenLL. Age and emotional experience during mutual reminiscing. Psychol Aging, 2003; 18(3):430–442.
54.
ScheibeS, MataR, CarstensenLL. Age differences in affective forecasting and experienced emotion surrounding the 2008 US presidential election. Cogn Emot, 2011; 25(6):1029–1044.
55.
ShavitYZ, ChiK, CarstensenLL. Age and time horizons are associated with preferences for helping colleagues. Work Aging Retire, 2023; 9(3):280–290.
56.
Steen-BakerAA, NgS, PayneBR, et al.The effects of context on processing words during sentence reading among adults varying in age and literacy skill. Psychol Aging, 2017; 32(5):460–472.
57.
WieckC, KunzmannU, ScheibeS. Empathy at work: The role of age and emotional job demands. Psychol Aging, 2021; 36(1):36–48.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
