AGES 2.0:
Activating and Guiding the Engagement of Seniors through Social Media
1
Background
• The number and quality of social relationships has important
consequences for individual health and well-being.
• People with broader social networks, and who are active across multiple
social groups:
- Adjust to change better (Iyer et al., 2009)
- Are more resilient (Jones & Jetten, 2011; Cohen et al., 1997)
- Live longer (Holt-Lunstad, et al., 2010)
• Supporting individuals to create and maintain social connections is an
important focus for public health (Cacioppo & Hawkley, 2003)
2
Background
Controlling for your blood
chemistry, age, gender,
whether or not you jog, and
for all other risk factors, your
chance of dying over the
course of the next year are cut
in half by joining one group,
and cut to a quarter by joining
two groups...
If you smoke and belong to no
groups, it’s a toss-up
statistically whether you
should stop smoking or start
joining
Robert Putnam
3
Background
• Aging can coincide with:
- Reduced physical mobility
- Difficulties of
communication
- Increased social isolation
• Negative effects of actual
and felt social isolation on
physical, cognitive and
mental health amplify with
age
4
Background
5
Background
- Early studies (McConatha et al., 1994,
1995) show
positive effects of
training older adults in care to use
online computing facilities
- More recent work
(Slegers et al, 2008;
White et al., 2002) suggests
fewer
benefits of computer and internet
training for older adults in the
community.
6
Background
- Increasing Facebook activity
reduces loneliness (Deters & Mehl,
2012)
- Reported Facebook use at one
time predicts reduced subsequent
subjective well-being and life
satisfaction (Kross et al., 2013)
- “Real friends” more beneficial for
SWB than “Facebook friends”
(Helliwell & Huang, 2013).
7
AGES 2.0:
1. Investigating the effects of social media training on older adults on:
- Social participation
- Cognitive functioning
- Mental health and well-being
2. Comparing effects across older adults in care and those residing in
the community
3. Comparing effects across national contexts of UK and Italy
8
30E
30E
30E
60D
120
30C
60R
30E
30C
1.
2.
3.
4.
Recruitment
Baseline
Training
Follow-up
Experimental design
30E
30E
30C
30E
30E
30E
30E
30C
Training
• Guided one-on-one training in basic computer use and key social media
applications:
• Email
• Forget-me-not book
• Facebook
• Skype
• Training initially intensive (Month 1), then stepped down (Month 2),
followed by remote monitoring (Month 3)
• Although all applications were introduced, training was flexible to match
participants needs/ interests/ capacity
Key Measures
• Health and well-being:
• Addenbrookes Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R)
• CES Depression (short)
• Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (short)
• General Health questionnaire
• Competence & Autonomy
• Satisfaction with life
• Social connections:
• UCLA loneliness Scale (short)
• Social network diversity & satisfaction
• Attitudes about computers
• Use and perceived utility
UK Data Collection Update
• 125 potential participants recruited into study
• Overall target met
• 92 participants assessed, assigned to condition, and retained:
• 48 experimental, 44 control
• 39 residential, 53 domiciliary (22 private, 31 extra care)
• 57 participants completed Time 2 assessments to date.
12
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1
Satisfaction
with life
Competence
Autonomy
Identity
ACE-R
MMSE
CES-D
GHQ
Loneliness
-.19
-.03
.53
.31
-.44
-.48
-.28
-.44
Network
diversity
.19
.25
.15
.15
.17
.17
.05
.14
Network
satisfaction
.19
-.07
-.03
.00
.27
.16
.00
.29
n = 92
No Time 1 differences between experimental and control groups
13
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1
Satisfaction
with life
Competence
Autonomy
Identity
ACE-R
MMSE
CES-D
GHQ
Loneliness
-.19
-.03
.53
.31
-.44
-.48
-.28
-.44
Network
diversity
.19
.25
.15
.15
.17
.17
.05
.14
Network
satisfaction
.19
-.07
-.03
.00
.27
.16
.00
.29
n = 92
No Time 1 differences between experimental and control groups
14
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1
Satisfaction
with life
Competence
Autonomy
Identity
ACE-R
MMSE
CES-D
GHQ
Loneliness
-.19
-.03
.53
.31
-.44
-.48
-.28
-.44
Network
diversity
.19
.25
.15
.15
.17
.17
.05
.14
Network
satisfaction
.19
-.07
-.03
.00
.27
.16
.00
.29
n = 92
No Time 1 differences between experimental and control groups
15
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1
Satisfaction
with life
Competence
Autonomy
Identity
ACE-R
MMSE
CES-D
GHQ
Loneliness
-.19
-.03
.53
.31
-.44
-.48
-.28
-.44
Network
diversity
.19
.25
.15
.15
.17
.17
.05
.14
Network
satisfaction
.19
-.07
-.03
.00
.27
.16
.00
.29
n = 92
No Time 1 differences between experimental and control groups
16
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1 - 2
Time 1
Time 2
Loneliness
Cognition
(ACE-R)
Mental Health
(CES-D & GHQ)
Network
Diversity
Self
(Autonomy &
Competence)
Network
Satisfaction
Life
Satisfaction
17
UK Preliminary findings: Time 1 - 2
Time 1
Time 2
Cognition
(ACE-R)
Loneliness
Mental Health
(CES-D & GHQ)
Network
Diversity
Self
(Autonomy &
Competence)
Life
Satisfaction
Network
Satisfaction
18
UK Preliminary findings
• Time 1 findings reveal sensible and expected relationships between
indicators of social isolation (subjective and objective) and impaired
cognitive and mental health.
• Cross time effects confirm causal relationships between indicators of
social isolation (esp. loneliness and network diversity) and cognitive and
mental health outcomes:
?
Training
Cognitive
health
Social
Engagement
Mental
health
Computer
Use
19
UK Remaining questions
• What are the social consequences of training?
• Are there direct or indirect effects of training on cognitive and
mental health?
• Are different subsets of the population responding differently
to the training?
• Is the pattern similar across UK and Italian data?
20
“Keeping
up to date with friends and family is just one of
the benefits I am experiencing thanks to my newly
acquired skills, for which I am very grateful”
21
Questions and comments?
Contact me:
t.morton@exeter.ac.uk
22