While online engagement has emerged as a critical factor in promoting healthy aging, many older adults still face barriers to engaging online. Social support may help address these challenges, yet limited research has examined how structural and functional dimensions of social support relate to older adults’ breadth of online activities. We examined whether structural social support (network size, density, and strength) is associated with breadth of online activities through functional social support and whether socioeconomic status moderates these associations. In 2021, a baseline survey and 6-month follow-up were conducted with 275 South Korean adults aged 65+ years (M = 69.35, SD = 4.46). Network size and strength had a positive indirect association with the breadth of online activities via functional social support, whereas density did not. Income positively moderated the association between network size and functional social support. These findings inform digital inclusion strategies for older adults by underscoring how structural and functional social support are linked to broader online engagement.
BorgattiSPMehraABrassDJ, et al. (2009) Network analysis in the social sciences. Science323(5916): 892–895.
2.
BurtRS (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3.
BurtRS (2015) Reinforced structural holes. Social Networks43: 149–161.
4.
CainCLWallaceSPPonceNA (2018) Helpfulness, trust, and safety of neighborhoods: social capital, household income, and self-reported health of older adults. The Gerontologist58(1): 4–14.
5.
ChanKSKasperJDBrandtJ, et al. (2012) Measurement equivalence in ADL and IADL difficulty across international surveys of aging: findings from the HRS, SHARE, and ELSA. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences67(1): 121–132.
6.
ChuRJC (2010) How family support and Internet self-efficacy influence the effects of e-learning among higher aged adults: Analyses of gender and age differences. Computers & Education55(1): 255–264.
7.
ChungKSKHossainL (2010) Towards a social network model for understanding information and communication technology use for general practitioners in rural Australia. Computers in Human Behavior26(4): 562–571.
8.
CohenS (2004) Social relationships and health. The American Psychologist59(8): 676–684.
9.
CohenSSymeSL (1985) Issues in the study and application of social support. Social Support and Health3: 3–22.
10.
CohenSWillsTA (1985) Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin98(2): 310–357.
11.
CourtoisCVerdegemP (2016) With a little help from my friends: an analysis of the role of social support in digital inequalities. New Media & Society18(8): 1508–1527.
12.
Darin- MattssonAForsSKåreholtI (2017) Different indicators of socioeconomic status and their relative importance as determinants of health in old age. International Journal for Equity in Health16(1): 173.
13.
DrenteaPMoren-CrossJL (2005) Social capital and social support on the web: the case of an internet mother site. Sociology of Health & Illness27(7): 920–943.
14.
Dunkel-SchetterCFolkmanSLazarusRS (1987) Correlates of social support receipt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology53(1): 71–80.
15.
EndersCKBandalosDL (2001) The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling8(3): 430–457.
16.
FangZLiuYPengB (2024) Empowering older adults: bridging the digital divide in online health information seeking. Humanities Social Science Communication11: 1748.
17.
FrancisJKadylakTMakkiTW, et al. (2018) Catalyst to connection: when technical difficulties lead to social support for older adults. American Behavioral Scientist62(9): 1167–1185.
18.
FriemelTN (2016) The digital divide has grown old: determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society18(2): 313–331.
19.
GottliebBHBergenAE (2010) Social support concepts and measures. Journal of Psychosomatic Research69(5): 511–520.
20.
GranovetterMS (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology78(6): 1360–1380. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2776392
21.
GrayPMMurphyMHGallagherAM, et al. (2016) Motives and barriers to physical activity among older adults of different socioeconomic status. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity24(3): 419–429.
22.
HajekAKretzlerBGyasiRM, et al. (2023) Community centers for older adults and psychosocial factors: evidence from the German Ageing Survey. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry38(3): e5901.
23.
HayesAF (2005) Statistical Methods for Communication Science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
HelsperEJ (2012) A corresponding fields model for the links between social and digital exclusion. Communication Theory22(4): 403–426.
25.
HelsperEJVan DeursenAJ (2017) Do the rich get digitally richer? Quantity and quality of support for digital engagement. Information, Communication & Society20(5): 700–714.
26.
HoferMHargittaiE (2021) Online social engagement, depression, and anxiety among older adults. New Media & Society26(1): 113–130.
27.
HolbertRLStephensonMT (2008) Commentary on the uses and misuses of structural equation modeling in communication research. In: HayesAFSlaterMDSnyderLB (eds) The SAGE Sourcebook of Advanced Data Analysis Methods for Communication Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 185–218.
28.
HolmstromAJBurlesonBR (2011) An initial test of a cognitive-emotional theory of esteem support messages. Communication Research38: 326–355.
29.
HunsakerAHargittaiE (2018) A review of internet use among older adults. New Media & Society20(10): 3937–3954.
30.
HunsakerANguyenMHFuchsJ, et al. (2019) “He explained it to me and I also did it myself”: how older adults get support with their technology uses. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World5: 1–13.
31.
IhmJLeeCJ (2021) Toward more effective public health interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: suggesting audience segmentation based on social and media resources. Health Communication36(1): 98–108.
32.
IhmJLeeCJ (2023) Communication networks and individual resilience for individual well-being during a time of crisis. Health Communication38(14): 3178–3192.
33.
KimKLeeCJHornikRC (2020) Exploring the effect of health app use on fruit and vegetable consumption. Journal of Health Communication25(4): 283–290.
34.
KlineRB (2011) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
35.
KlineRB (2012) Assumptions in structural equation modeling. In:HoyleRH (ed.) Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 111–125.
36.
KuoppamäkiSHänninenRTaipaleS (2022) Enhancing older adults’ digital inclusion through social support: a qualitative interview study. In: TsatsouP (ed.) Vulnerable People and Digital Inclusion. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 211–230.
37.
LaiGLinNLeungSY (1998) Network resources, contact resources, and status attainment. Social Networks20: 159–178.
38.
LamSSMJivrajSScholesS (2020) Exploring the relationship between internet use and mental health among older adults in England: longitudinal observational study. Journal of Medical Internet Research22(7): e15683.
39.
LeeSChungJEParkN (2018) Network environments and well-being: an examination of personal network structure, social capital, and perceived social support. Health Communication33(1): 22–31.
40.
LeiXMatovicDLeungWY, et al. (2024) The relationship between social media use and psychosocial outcomes in older adults: a systematic review. International Psychogeriatrics36(9): 714–746.
41.
LeukelJSchehlBSugumaranV (2023) Digital inequality among older adults: explaining differences in the breadth of Internet use. Information, Communication & Society26(1): 139–154.
42.
LiHWangC (2021) The relationships among structural social support, functional social support, and loneliness in older adults: analysis of regional differences based on a multigroup structural equation model. Frontiers in Psychology12: 732173.
43.
LiWZhangXGaoH, et al. (2024) Heterogeneous effects of socio-economic status on social engagement level among Chinese older adults: evidence from CHARLS 2020. Frontiers in Public Health12: 1479359.
LittleTD (2013) Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
46.
MaXLiuYZhangP, et al. (2023) Understanding online health information seeking behavior of older adults: a social cognitive perspective. Frontiers in Public Health11: 1147789.
MarsdenPV (1990) Network data and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology16(1): 435–463.
49.
MarsdenPV (2003) Interviewer effects in measuring network size using a single name generator. Social Networks25(1): 1–16.
50.
MarsdenPVCampbellKE (1984) Measuring tie strength. Social Forces63(2): 482–501.
51.
MengJChungMCoxJ (2016) Linking network structure to support messages: effects of brokerage and closure on received social support. Journal of Communication66(6): 982–1006.
52.
MerluzziJBurtRS (2013) How many names are enough? Identifying network effects with the least set of listed contacts. Social Networks35(3): 331–337.
MoneyAHallAHarrisD, et al. (2024) Barriers to and facilitators of older people’s engagement with web-based services: qualitative study of adults aged >75 years. Journal of Medical Internet Research Aging7: e46522.
55.
MuthénLKMuthénBO (2010) Mplus User's Guide: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
56.
NguyenMHHargittaiE (2023) Digital inequality in disconnection practices: voluntary nonuse during COVID-19. Journal of Communication73(5): 494–510.
57.
NguyenMHHunsakerAHargittaiE (2020) Older adults’ online social engagement and social capital: the moderating role of internet skills. Information, Communication & Society25(7): 942–958.
58.
NicosiaJAschenbrennerAJAdamsSL, et al. (2022) Bridging the technological divide: stigmas and challenges with technology in digital brain health studies of older adults. Frontiers in Digital Health4: 880055.
PhelanJCLinkBGTehranifarP (2010) Social conditions as fundamental causes of health inequalities: theory, evidence, and policy implications. Journal of Health and Social Behavior51(1_suppl): S28–S40.
61.
RobitzschA (2020) Why ordinal variables can (almost) always be treated as continuous variables: Clarifying assumptions of robust continuous and ordinal factor analysis estimation methods. Frontiers in Education5: 589965.
62.
SchutteNSMalouffJMBobikC, et al. (2001) Emotional intelligence and interpersonal relations. The Journal of Social Psychology141(4): 523–536.
63.
SeamanCSWeberR (2015) Undisclosed flexibility in computing and reporting structural equation models in communication science. Communication Methods and Measures9(4): 208–232.
64.
SeemanTEBerkmanLF (1988) Structural characteristics of social networks and their relationship with social support in the elderly: who provides support. Social Science & Medicine26(7): 737–749.
65.
SelwynN (2004) Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society6(3): 341–362.
66.
SelwynNGorardSFurlongJ (2003) Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing & Society23: 561–582.
67.
SixsmithAHorstBRSimeonovD, et al. (2022) Older people’s use of digital technology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society42(1–2): 19–24.
SmithJM (2012) Toward a better understanding of loneliness in community-dwelling older adults. The Journal of Psychology146(3): 293–311.
70.
SongLLinN (2009) Social Capital and Health Inequality: Evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Health and Social Behavior50(2): 149–163.
71.
StraitsBC (2000) Ego's important discussants or significant people: an experiment in varying the wording of personal network name generators. Social Networks22(2): 123–140.
72.
SzaboAAllenJStephensC, et al. (2019) Longitudinal analysis of the relationship between purposes of internet use and well-being among older adults. The Gerontologist59(1): 58–68.
73.
TaylorSE (2011) Social support: a review. In: H. S.Friedman (ed) The Oxford Handbook of Health Psychology. Oxford University Press, pp. 189–214.
74.
ThoitsPA (1986) Social support as coping assistance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology54: 416–423.
75.
ThoitsPA (2011) Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior52(2): 145–161.
76.
Tirado-MoruetaRRodríguez-MartínAÁlvarez-ArreguiE, et al. (2023) Determination of internet appropriation by older people through technological support services. New Media & Society25(5): 1065–1086.
77.
van DeursenAJHelsperEJ (2015) The third-level digital divide: who benefits most from being online? In: CottonSRobinsonL (eds) Studies in Media and Communications. London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 29–52.
78.
WeissmanJDRussellD (2018) Relationships between living arrangements and health status among older adults in the United States, 2009-2014: findings from the National Health Interview Survey. Journal of Applied Gerontology37(1): 7–25.
79.
WinklebyMAJatulisDEFrankE, et al. (1992) Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income, and occupation contribute to risk factors for cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Public Health82(6): 816–820.
YagilDCohenMBeerJD (2013) Older adults’ coping with the stress involved in the use of everyday technologies. Journal of Applied Gerontology: The Official Journal of the Southern Gerontological Society35: 131–149.
82.
YuRPEllisonNBMcCammonRJ, et al. (2016) Mapping the two levels of digital divide: internet access and social network site adoption among older adults in the USA. Information, Communication & Society19(10): 1445–1464.
83.
ZhangCQChungPKZhangR, et al. (2019) Socioeconomic inequalities in older adults’ health: the roles of neighborhood and individual-level psychosocial and behavioral resources. Frontiers in Public Health7: 318.
84.
ZhangQGuoXVogelD (2022) Addressing elderly loneliness with ICT Use: the role of ICT self-efficacy and health consciousness. Psychology, Health & Medicine27(5): 1063–1071.
85.
ZhuXWooSEPorterC, et al. (2013) Pathways to happiness: from personality to social networks and perceived support. Social Networks35(3): 382–393.
