The aging population in China has made the digital divide among the elderly an eye-catching issue for society and academia. This study aims to address how to enhance the digital capabilities of seniors, narrow the intergenerational digital divide, and improve the elderly's adaptation to digital life. With a keen eye on digital feedback, this study explores the mediating effect model of digital feedback on the digital capabilities of the elderly. The empirical results derived from the survey of the rural elderly in China (N = 458) show that: 1.digital feedback, digital access, smartphone usage behavior, and digital capabilities are positively correlated with each other; 2. digital access and smartphone usage behavior play a chain-mediated role between digital feedback and digital capabilities; 3. The digital feedback, digital access, smartphone usage behavior, and digital capabilities of empty nesters in rural areas are lower than those of non-empty nesters. This study makes theoretical contributions to understanding how digital feedback affects the digital capabilities of the elderly.
AgostoDEAbbasJ (2017) “Don’t be dumb—that’ s the rule I try to live by”: A closer look at older teens’ online privacy and safety attitudes. New Media & Society19(3): 347–365.
2.
AnQHouQ (2021) Internet literacy of rural left-behind children: A controlled empirical study. Modern Communication (Journal of Communication University of China)43(08): 161–168.
3.
BaileyANgwenyamaO (2010) Bridging the generation gap in ICT use: Interrogating identity, technology and interactions in community telecenters. Information Technology for Development16(1): 62–82.
4.
BawdenD (2008) Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies and Practices30(2008): 17–32.
5.
BonfadelliH (2002) The internet and knowledge gaps: A theoretical and empirical investigation. European Journal of Communication (London)17(1): 65–84.
6.
CorreaT (2014) Bottom-Up technology transmission within families: Exploring how youths influence their Parents’ digital Media use with dyadic data: Bottom-up technology transmission within families. Journal of Communication64(1): 103–124.
7.
CottenSRFordGFordS, et al. (2012) Internet use and depression among older adults. Computers in Human Behavior28(2): 496–499.
8.
CzajaSJCharnessNFiskAD, et al. (2006) Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Aging21(2): 333–352.
9.
DuttonWHReisdorfBC (2019) Cultural divides and digital inequalities: Attitudes shaping internet and social media divides. Information, Communication & Society22(1): 18–38.
10.
FrancisJKadylakTMakkiTW, et al. (2018) Catalyst to connection: When technical difficulties lead to social support for older adults. The American Behavioral Scientist (Beverly Hills)62(9): 1167–1185.
11.
FriemelTN (2016) The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society18(2): 313–331.
12.
GilleardCHiggsP (2008) Internet use and the digital divide in the English longitudinal study of ageing. European Journal of Ageing5(3): 233–239.
13.
GodoySGálvezM (2011) The corresponding digital divide: Barriers and facilitators of the use of ICTs in middle and lower-middle class parents in Chile. Revista CTS18(6): 199–219.
14.
HargittaiEDobranskyK (2017) Old dogs, new clicks: Digital inequality in skills and uses among older adults. Canadian Journal of Communication42(2): 195–212.
15.
HargittaiEPiperAMMorrisMR (2019) From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society18(4): 881–890.
16.
HarveyD (2004) The “new” imperialism: accumulation by dispossession. Socialist Register40: 3–5.
17.
HarwoodJ (2000) Communication media use in the grandparent-grandchild relationship. Journal of Communication50(4): 56–78.
18.
HelsperE (2021) The digital disconnect: The social causes and consequences of digital inequalities. In: The Digital Disconnect. London, UK: SAGE Publishing, 1–232.
19.
HelsperEJReisdorfBC (2017) The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great Britain and Sweden: Changing reasons for digital exclusion. New Media & Society19(8): 1253–1270.
20.
Herrera-BadillaANavarrete-ReyesAPAmievaH, et al. (2015) Loneliness is associated with frailty in community-dwelling elderly adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS)63(3): 607–609.
21.
HoffmannCPLutzC (2021) Digital divides in political participation: The mediating role of social Media self-efficacy and privacy concerns. Policy and Internet13(1): 6–29.
22.
HunsakerAHargittaiE (2018) A review of internet use among older adults. New Media & Society20(10): 3937–3954.
23.
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: 237802311988786–.
24.
JiangQLHaoXMLinCJ (2019) Psychological traits and behaviors regarding smartphone use from media dependency perspective: A comparative study of college students in China and Singapore. Journalism Resarch3: 101–115.
25.
KambleSRanaNPGuptaS, et al. (2023) An effectuation and causation perspective on the role of design thinking practices and digital capabilities in platform-based ventures. Technological Forecasting and Social Change193: 122646.
26.
KokAWilliamsKYanH (2012) Seniors skyping: A professional, academic, and community collaboration. The Journal of Community Informatics8(1): 24–25.
27.
KwongANLYanECW (2023) The role of quality of face-to-face intergenerational contact in reducing ageism: The perspectives of young people. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships21(1): 136–151.
28.
LeeLChenD-TLiJ-Y, et al. (2015) Understanding new media literacy: The development of a measuring instrument. Computers and Education85: 84–93.
29.
LinTTCLiLBautistaJR (2017) Examining how communication and knowledge relate to Singaporean Youths’ perceived risk of haze and intentions to take preventive behaviors. Health Communication32(6): 749–758.
30.
LivingstoneSMascheroniGStoilovaM (2023) The outcomes of gaining digital skills for young people’s lives and wellbeing: A systematic evidence review. New Media & Society25(5): 1176–1202.
31.
LogesWEJungJ-Y (2001) Exploring the digital divide: Internet connectedness and age. Communication Research28(4): 536–562.
32.
MaTZhangSZhuS, et al. (2022) The new role of nursing in digital inclusion: Reflections on smartphone use and willingness to increase digital skills among Chinese older adults. Geriatric Nursing (New York)48: 118–126.
33.
MarlerW (2022) “You can connect with like, the world!”: social platforms, survival support, and digital inequalities for people experiencing homelessness. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication27(1): 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab020.
34.
MarlerWHargittaiE (2022) Division of digital labor: Partner support for technology use among older adults. New Media & Society: 1–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211068437.
35.
NgACYPhillipsDRLeeWK (2002) Persistence and challenges to filial piety and informal support of older persons in a modern Chinese society: A case study in tuen Mun, Hong Kong. Journal of Aging Studies16(2): 135–153.
36.
PerrinA (2019) Digital gap between rural and nonrural America persists.
37.
Quan-HaaseAMartinKSchreursK (2016) Interviews with digital seniors: ICT use in the context of everyday life. Information. Communication & Society19(5): 691–707.
38.
RagneddaM (2018) Conceptualizing digital capital. Telematics and Informatics35(8): 2366–2375.
39.
RagneddaMRuiuMLAddeoF (2020) Measuring digital capital: An empirical investigation. New Media & Society22(5): 793–816.
40.
RiceEBarman-AdhikariA (2014) Internet and social Media use as a resource among homeless youth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication19(2): 232–247.
41.
RobinsonLSchulzJKhilnaniA, et al. (2020) Digital inequalities in time of pandemic: COVID-19 exposure risk profiles and new forms of vulnerability. First monday25(10): 1–32.
42.
RuiuMLRagneddaM (2020) Digital capital and online activities: An empirical analysis of the second level of digital divide. First Monday.
43.
SalmanHMWan AhmadWFSulaimanS (2017) Revisiting the usability of smartphone user interface for elderly users’. In: Recent Trends in Information and Communication Technology. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 155–162. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59427-9_17.
44.
SelwynNGorardSFurlongJ, et al. (2003) Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing and Society23(5): 561–582.
45.
SimsTReedAECarrDC (2017) Information and communication technology use is related to higher well-being among the oldest-old. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences72(5): 761–770.
46.
SmithKJVictorC (2019) Typologies of loneliness, living alone and social isolation, and their associations with physical and mental health. Ageing and Society39(8): 1709–1730.
47.
SoomroKAKaleUCurtisR, et al. (2018) Development of an instrument to measure faculty’s information and communication technology access (FICTA). Education and Information Technologies23(1): 253–269.
48.
TamsSGroverVThatcherJ (2014) Modern information technology in an old workforce: Toward a strategic research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems23(4): 284–304.
49.
van DeursenAJvan DijkJA (2019) The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New media & Society21(2): 354–375.
50.
van DeursenAJAMvan DijkJAGM (2015) Toward a multifaceted model of internet access for understanding digital divides: An empirical investigation. The Information Society31(5): 379–391.
51.
van DeursenAJAMvan DijkJAGM (2014a) The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society16(3): 507–526.
52.
van DeursenAJAMvan DijkJAGM (2014b) Digital Skills: Unlocking the Information Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
53.
van DijkJ (2002) A framework for digital divide research’. Electronic Journal of Communication12(1): 2.
54.
van DijkJ (2020) The Digital Divide. Cambridge UK: John Wiley & Sons.
55.
van DijkJAG (1999) The one-dimensional network society of manuel castells. New Media & Society1(1): 127–138.
56.
WeiLChenW (2015) Social media use and subjective well-being of urban new immigrants. International Journal of Journalism37(01): 114–130.
57.
WheelockJ (2003) Personal computers, gender and an institutional model of the household. In: Consuming Technologies. London: Routledge, 101–115.
58.
YangJDuP (2021) Gender, capital endowment and digital exclusion of older people in China. Ageing and Society41(11): 2502–2526.
59.
YuRPMccammonRJEllisonNB, et al. (2016) The relationships that matter: Social network site use and social wellbeing among older adults in the United States of America. Ageing and Society36(9): 1826–1852.
60.
ZhangC (2022) Smartphones and telemedicine for older people in China: Opportunities and challenges. Digital Health8: 205520762211336–20552076221133695.
61.
ZhouXH (1999) Cultural feedback: Cultural transition between parents and their children in a changing society. Research in Applied Psychology4: 29–56.
62.
ZhouXHZhouY (1987) Margaret Mead. Culture and Commitment. China: Hebei People's Publishing House.
63.
ZhouYQ (2014) Digital generation gap and cultural feedback: A quantitative study of the “quiet revolution” in the family. Modern Communication (Journal of Communication University of China)02: 17–123.
64.
ZhouYQ (2015) Academic thinking on digital generation gap and feedback when aging society is challenged by new media. News and Writing2015(12): 53–56.
65.
ZhouYQDingHQ (2020) Research on the status and influencing factors of digital feedback of three generations in Chinese families. International Journal of Journalism42(3): 6–31.
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.
