The implementation of evidence-based physical activity (PA) programs for older adults is limited in part due to the administration-related personnel costs. The rapid growth of the off-the-shelf smart speakers, conversational agents (CAs), demonstrates the potential of scalable delivery of PA programs to older adults at home. We implemented a PA virtual coach based on an evidence-based PA program on a Google Home device, and conducted a user study to examine how older adults interact with the virtual coach. Results suggested that all older adults were able to complete the PA program with guidance from the virtual coach, and showed high acceptance and intentions to use CAs in the future. Analyses on conversation turn-taking further suggested that all older adults (including 80% novice CAs users) experienced minimum difficulty talking with the PA virtual coach. Relationships among age, technology acceptance, conversation patterns and the perceived sociability of CAs are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AshworthN. L.ChadK. E.HarrisonE. L.ReederB. A.MarshallS. C. (2005). Home versus center based physical activity programs in older adults. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1, CD004017. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004017.pub2
2.
BaltesP. B. (1997). On the incomplete architecture of human ontogeny: Selection, optimization, and compensation as foundation of developmental theory. American Psychologist, 52(4), 366–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.366
3.
BethancourtH. J.RosenbergD. E.BeattyT.ArterburnD. E. (2014). Barriers to and facilitators of physical activity program use among older adults. Clinical Medicine & Research, 12(1–2), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.3121/cmr.2013.1171
4.
BumanM. P.YasovaL. D.GiacobbiP. R. (2010). Descriptive and narrative reports of barriers and motivators to physical activity in sedentary older adults. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(3), 223–230.
5.
ChinJ.LiY.BurnsC. M. (2018, April). User Perspectives of Conversational Agents across Lifespan: Being Assistive, But Not Too Smart. Cognitive Aging Conference 2018. Cognitive Aging Conference, Atlanta, GA.
6.
CobiacL. J.VosT.BarendregtJ. J. (2009). Cost-effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity: A modelling study. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000110. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000110
7.
CompeauD. R.HigginsC. A. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
8.
CressM. E.BuchnerD. M.ProhaskaT.RimmerJ.BrownM.MaceraC.DipietroL.Chodzko-ZajkoW. (2005). Best practices for physical activity programs and behavior counseling in older adult populations. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 13(1), 61–74.
9.
CzajaS. J.CharnessN.FiskA. D.HertzogC.NairS. N.RogersW. A.SharitJ. (2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement (create). Psychology and Aging, 21(2), 333–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333
10.
GattoS. L.TakS. H. (2008). Computer, Internet, and E-mail Use Among Older Adults: Benefits and Barriers. Educational Gerontology, 34(9), 800–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601270802243697
HeerinkM.KröseB.EversV.WielingaB. (2008). The influence of social presence on acceptance of a companion robot by older people. Journal of Physical Agents, 2(2), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.14198/JoPha.2008.2.2.05
13.
HoyM. B. (2018). Alexa, Siri, Cortana, and More: An Introduction to Voice Assistants. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 37(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2018.1404391
14.
KoonL. M.McGlynnS. A.BlockerK. A.RogersW. A. (2019). Perceptions of Digital Assistants From Early Adopters Aged 55+. Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications, 106480461984250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1064804619842501
15.
LauJ.ZimmermanB.SchaubF. (2018). Alexa, Are You Listening?: Privacy Perceptions, Concerns and Privacy-seeking Behaviors with Smart Speakers. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2(CSCW), 102:1–102:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274371
16.
LaverK.GeorgeS.RatcliffeJ.CrottyM. (2012). Measuring technology self efficacy: Reliability and construct validity of a modified computer self efficacy scale in a clinical rehabilitation setting. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(3), 220–227. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.593682
17.
LeeK. M.NassC. (2003). Designing Social Presence of Social Actors in Human Computer Interaction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642662
18.
LiS.-C.LindenbergerU.HommelB.AscherslebenG.PrinzW.BaltesP. B. (2004). Transformations in the Couplings Among Intellectual Abilities and Constituent Cognitive Processes Across the Life Span. Psychological Science, 15(3), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503003.x
19.
MuramatsuN.YinL.BerbaumM. L.MarquezD. X.JurivichD. A.ZanoniJ. P.Cruz MadridK. Y.WaltonS. M. (2018). Promoting Seniors’ Health With Home Care Aides: A Pilot. The Gerontologist, 58(4), 779–788. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx101
20.
ParkC.-H.Chodzko-ZajkoW. (2014). Feasibility of integrating the “Healthy moves for aging well” program into home care aide services for frail older adults. Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation, 10(3), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.12965/jer.140116
21.
PradhanA.MehtaK.FindlaterL. (2018). “Accessibility Came by Accident”: Use of Voice-Controlled Intelligent Personal Assistants by People with Disabilities. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 459:1–459:13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174033
22.
RikliR. E.JonesC. J. (1999). Functional Fitness Normative Scores for Community-Residing Older Adults, Ages 60-94. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 7(2), 162–181. https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.7.2.162
23.
TabakR. G.KhoongE. C.ChambersD. A.BrownsonR. C.(2012). Bridging research and practice: Models for dissemination and implementation research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2012.05.024
24.
VenkateshV.MorrisM. G.DavisG. B.DavisF. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
25.
WantlandD. J.PortilloC. J.HolzemerW. L.SlaughterR.McGheeE. M. (2004). The effectiveness of Web-based vs. non-Web-based interventions: A meta-analysis of behavioral change outcomes. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(4), e40. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.4.e40
26.
WulfL.GarschallM.HimmelsbachJ.TscheligiM. (2014). Hands free- care free: Elderly people taking advantage of speech-only interaction. Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human- Computer Interaction Fun, Fast, Foundational - NordiCHI ’14, 203–206. https://doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2639251
27.
YanT.WilberK. H.WieckowskiJ.SimmonsW. J. (2009). Results from the Healthy Moves for Aging Well program: Changes of the health outcomes. Home Health Care Services Quarterly, 28(2–3), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621420903176136
