The majority of older adults report that they want to age in place, however, communities are often unequipped with the tools necessary to support this process. As a result, older adults can often encounter challenges in maintaining social contact with family, friends, and the community. Communication technologies present opportunities for supporting social connectivity. These technologies include a host of various platforms that are set along a continuum of embodiment. The goal of this paper is to conceptualize communication technology embodiment and to propose a framework that aims to explain the role of technology embodiment in creating meaningful social connections. We aim to provide a framework for future research, interventions, and an application guide of the theoretical foundation of communication technology embodiment while noting crucial considerations on the continuum of embodiment, human connectivity, and social presence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeerJ. M.MitznerT. L.StuckR. E.RogersW. A. (2015). Design Considerations for Technology Interventions to Support Social and Physical Wellness for Older Adults with Disability. https://doi.org/10.5875/ausmt.v5i4.959
2.
BeerJ. M.TakayamaL. (2011). Mobile remote presence systems for older adults: Acceptance, benefits, and concerns. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI ’11, 19. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957665
3.
BernholdQ. S.GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2018). Communicative Predictors of Older Adults’ Successful Aging, Mental Health, and Alcohol Use. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 91415018784715. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415018784715
4.
BevilacquaR.CestaA.CortellessaG.MacchioneA.OrlandiniA.TiberioL. (2014). Telepresence Robot at Home: A Long-Term Case Study (pp. 73–85). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01119-6_8
5.
BroadbentE.JayawardenaC.KerseN.StaffordR.MacdonaldB. (2011, January1). Human-Robot Interaction Research to Improve Quality of Life in Elder Care—An Approach and Issues. AAAI Workshop - Technical Report.
CestaA.CortellessaG.OrlandiniA.TiberioL. (2016). Long-Term Evaluation of a Telepresence Robot for the Elderly: Methodology and Ecological Case Study. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(3), 421–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0337-z
CobbS. C. (2009). Social Presence and Online Learning: A Current View from a Research Perspective. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(3), 241–254.
11.
ConnellyK.LaghariK. U. R.MokhtariM.FalkT. H. (2014). Approaches to Understanding the Impact of Technologies for Aging in Place: A Mini-Review. GERONTOLOGY, 60(3), 282–288. https://doi.org/10.1159/000355644
12.
CrottyB.MostaghimiA. (2014). Confidentiality in the digital age. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 348, g2943. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2943
13.
DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
FaussetC. B.KellyA. J.RogersW. A.FiskA. D. (2011). Challenges to Aging in Place: Understanding Home Maintenance Difficulties. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 25(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2011.571105
FlowersL.HouserA.Noel-MillerC.ShawJ.BhattacharyaJ.SchoemakerL.FaridM. (2017). Medicare Spends More on Socially Isolated Older Adults. AARP Public Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.26419/ppi.00016.001
18.
FowlerC.GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2015). The role of communication in aging well: Introducing the communicative ecology model of successful aging. Communication Monographs, 82(4), 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2015.1024701
19.
GardanJ. (2017). Definition of users’ requirements in the customized product design through a user-centered translation method. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 4, 813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0275-2
20.
GierveldJ. de J. (1998). A review of loneliness: Concept and definitions, determinants and consequences. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, 8(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959259898008090
21.
GunawardenaC. N. (1995). Social Presence Theory and Implications for Interaction and Collaborative Learning in Computer Conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2), 147–166.
22.
GunawardenaC. N.ZittleF. (1997). Social Presence as a Predictor of Satisfaction within a Computer-mediated Conferencing Environment. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649709526970
23.
HaansA.IJsselsteijnW. A. (2012). Embodiment and telepresence: Toward a comprehensive theoretical framework. Interacting with Computers, 24(4), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2012.04.010
HeerinkM.KröseB.EversV.WielingaB. (2008). The influence of social presence on acceptance of a companion robot by older people. Journal of Physical Agents (JoPha), 2(2), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.14198/JoPha.2008.2.2.05
26.
Holt-LunstadJ.SmithT. B.LaytonJ. B. (2010). Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review. PLOS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316
27.
HusserlE.SchuhmannK. (1977). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie: Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie (1995 edition). Springer.
28.
KeshmiriS.SumiokaH.YamazakiR.IshiguroH. (2019). Differential Effect of the Physical Embodiment on the Prefrontal Cortex Activity as Quantified by Its Entropy. Entropy, 21(9), 875.
29.
KimK.BoellingL.HaeslerS.BailensonJ.BruderG.WelchG. F. (2018). Does a Digital Assistant Need a Body? The Influence of Visual Embodiment and Social Behavior on the Perception of Intelligent Virtual Agents in AR. 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2018.00039
KristofferssonA.CoradeschiS.LoutfiA.Severinson-EklundhK. (2011). An Exploratory Study of Health Professionals’ Attitudes about Robotic Telepresence Technology. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 29(4), 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2011.639509
32.
KruzanK. P.WonA. S. (2019). Embodied well-being through two media technologies: Virtual reality and social media. New Media & Society, 21(8), 1734–1749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819829873
LeeK. M.JungY.KimJ.KimS. R. (2006). Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people’s loneliness in human–robot interaction. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 64(10), 962–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.002
35.
LiangY.WaltherJ. B. (2015). Computer Mediated Communication. In
WrightJ. D. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 504–509). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.95090-6
36.
LilesK. R.StuckR. E.KacmarA. A.BeerJ. M. (2015a). Understanding Retirement Community Employees’ Perceived Benefits and Concerns of Smart Presence Technology. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59(1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591016
37.
LilesK. R.StuckR. E.KacmarA. A.BeerJ. M. (2015b). Exploring Use Cases of Smart Presence for Retirement Communities.
In ZhouJ.SalvendyG. (Eds.), Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Design for Everyday Life (pp. 446–455). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20913-5_41
38.
LuftS. (2015). Phenomenology and Embodiment: Husserl and the Constitution of Subjectivity. Review of Metaphysics, 69(2), 415– 418.
39.
LunaD. (2009). The Remote Body: The Phenomenology of Telepresence and Re-Embodiment. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, Vol 5, Iss 2, Pp 208-226 (2009), 2, 208. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.200911234471
PeekS. T. M.WoutersE. J. M.LuijkxK. G.VrijhoefH. J. M. (2016). What it Takes to Successfully Implement Technology for Aging in Place: Focus Groups With Stakeholders. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(5), e98. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5253
42.
RichardsonJ. C.SwanK. (2019). Examining Social Presence in Online Courses in Relation to Students' Perceived Learning and Satisfaction. Online Learning, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864
43.
RivaG.DavideF.IjsselsteijnW. A.WaterworthE. L.WaterworthJ. A. (2003). Being There: Concepts, effects and measurement of user presence in [35] synthetic environments.
44.
RobinsonH.MacdonaldB.BroadbentE. (2014). The Role of Healthcare Robots for Older People at Home: A Review. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6, 575–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0242-2
45.
SatarianoW. A.ScharlachA. E.LindemanD. (2014). Aging, place, and technology: Toward improving access and wellness in older populations. Journal of Aging and Health, 26(8), 1373–1389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264314543470
46.
SmarrC. A.MitznerT. L.BeerJ. M.PrakashA.ChenT. L.KempC. C.RogersW. A. (2014). Domestic Robots for Older Adults: Attitudes, Preferences, and Potential. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6(2), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0220-0
47.
StreeckJ. (2015). Embodiment in Human Communication. Annual Review of Anthropology, 44(1), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev- anthro-102214-014045
48.
TaipaleJ. (2014). Phenomenology and Embodiment: Husserl and the Constitution of Subjectivity. Northwestern University Press.
49.
TakayamaL. (2015). Telepresence and Apparent Agency in Human–Robot Interaction. In The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology (pp. 160–175). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118426456.ch7
50.
TanakaK.NakanishiH.IshiguroH. (2015). Physical Embodiment Can Produce Robot Operator’s Pseudo Presence. Frontiers in ICT, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2015.00008
51.
ThayerC.AndersonG. O. (2018). Loneliness and Social Connections: A National Survey of Adults 45 and Older. AARP Research. https://doi.org/10.26419/res.00246.001
52.
TingT. C. (1999). Privacy and confidentiality in healthcare delivery information system. Proceedings 12th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (Cat. No.99CB36365), 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/CBMS.1999.781239
53.
TitchkoskyT. (2007). Reading and writing disability differently: The textured life of embodiment. University of Toronto Press.
54.
TschacherW.BergomiC. (2011). The implications of embodiment: Cognition and communication.
55.
TsuiK.McCannE.McHughA.MedvedevM.YancoH.KontakD.DruryJ. (2014). Towards designing telepresence robot navigation for people with disabilities. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics, 7, 307–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJICC-10-2013-0044
56.
VarelaF. J.ThompsonE.RoschE. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. The MIT Press.
57.
VespaJ.LewisJ. M.KreiderR. M. (2012). America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2012. 34.
58.
WangD.SubagdjaB.KangY.TanA.-H.ZhangD. (2014). Towards intelligent caring agents for Aging-In-Place: Issues and challenges. 2014 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Human- like Intelligence (CIHLI), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIHLI.2014.7013393
59.
WangJ.CarrollD.PeckM.MyneniS.GongY. (2016). Mobile and Wearable Technology Needs for Aging in Place: Perspectives from Older Adults and Their Caregivers and Providers. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 225, 486–490.
