Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Published: 2022-06-30

Factors influencing the intention to use assistive technologies by older adults

Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
assistive technologies gerontechnology technology acceptance model robot older adults


Society is ageing at an unprecedented pace worldwide creating implications for the health and social care. Gerontechnology has been recognized as a solution that increases and supports the independency and well-being of older adults at home. This article aims to identify the most critical success factors effecting the adoption of an assistive gerontechnology by older adults in Poland. The object of the authors' interest was Rudy robot, an AI-enabled mobile solution helping users remain physically healthy, mentally sharp, and socially connected. The data was collected among Polish citizens using the CATI technique between November and December 2020. The number of returned questionnaires amounted to 824. The authors used Generalized Least Squares (GLS) of Structural Equation Modelling (GLS-SEM) to verify the hypotheses. The obtained results confirmed statistically significant relationships between the variables of perceived usefulness of Rudy robot and attitude reflecting the willingness to use this technology, as well as between perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of robot. However, relationship between perceived ease of use and inclination to use this technology in the future was not statistically significant. The conducted research confirmed that the functionality of the analysed Rudy robot for older-adult care positively influences their intension to use it in the future for their own needs or family members. The obtained results confirmed usefulness of robots as assistive technology helping older adults.


Metrics Loading ...


  1. Arthanat, S., Wilcox, J., & Macuch, M. (2019). Profiles and Predictors of Smart Home Technology Adoption by Older Adults. OTJR. Occupation, Participation, and Health, 39(4), 247–256. DOI:
  2. American Association of Retired Persons. (2014). What makes a community livable? AARP PPI. Retrieved from [20.04.2021].
  3. Barlow J (2006). Building an evidence base for successful telecare implementation – updated report of the Evidence Working Group of the Telecare Policy Collaborative chaired by James Barlow.
  4. Bechtold, U., Capari, L., & Gudowsky, N. (2017). Futures of ageing and technology – comparing different actors’ prospective views. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4, 157-176. http:/// DOI:
  5. Bechtold, U., & Sotoudeh, M. (2013). Assistive technologies: Their development from a technology assessment perspective. Gerontology, 11, 521-533. DOI:
  6. Beer, J. M. Prakash, A. Mitzner, T.L., & Rogers, W.A. (2011). Understanding Robot Acceptance Technical Report HFA-TR-1103 Atlanta, GA: Georgia Institute of Technology School of Psychology Human Factors and Aging Laboratory, Retrieved from, [21.04.2021].
  7. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. DOI:
  8. Bentler, P.M., & Chou, C.P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modelling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 78-117. http:// DOI:
  9. Bollen, K. A. (1986). Sample Size and Bentler and Bonett’s Nonnormed Fit Index. Psychometrika, 51, 375–377. DOI:
  10. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. DOI:
  11. Broekens, J., Heerink, M. & Rosendal, H. (2009). Assistive social robots in elderly care: A review. Gerontechnology, 8, 94–103. DOI:
  12. Brooke, J., & Jackson D. (2020). Older people and COVID‐19: Isolation, risk and ageism, Journal of clinical nursing, 29(13-14), 2044-2046. DOI:
  13. Browne, M. W., MacCallum, R.C., Kim, Ch-T., Andersen, B. L., & Glaser, R. (2002). When fit indices and residuals are incompatible. Psychological methods, 7(4), 403-421. DOI:
  14. Caine, K.E., Fisk, A.D., & Rogers, W.A. (2006). Benefits and privacy concerns of a home equipped with a visual sensing system: a perspective from older adults. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 50(2), 180–184. http:// DOI:
  15. Cajita, M. I., Hodgson, N.A., Budhathoki, C., & Han, H. R. (2017). Intention to Use mHealth in Older Adults with Heart Failure. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 32(6), E1–E7. DOI:
  16. Cajita, M. I., Hodgson, N. A., Lam, K. W., Yoo, S., & Han, H. R. (2018). Facilitators of and Barriers to mHealth Adoption in Older Adults With Heart Failure. Computers, informatics, nursing: CIN, 36(8), 376–382. http:// DOI:
  17. Carstensen, L.L. (1995). Evidence for a life-span theory of socioemotional selectivity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4(5), 151-156. DOI:
  18. Chen, K., & Chan, A.H.S. (2014a). Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics, 57(5), 635–652. 00140139.2014.89585519 DOI:
  19. Chen, K., & Chan A.H.S. (2014b). Predictors of gerontechnology acceptance by older Hong Kong Chinese. Technovation, 34(2), 126-135. DOI:
  20. Chen, M., Lu, T., Chen, K., & Liu, C.E. (2011). A TAM-based study on senior citizens digital learning and user behavioral intention toward use of broadband network technology services provided via television. African Journal of Business Management, 5. 7099–7110. http://
  21. Chu, L., Chen, H-W, Cheng, P-Y., Ho, P., Weng, I.-T., Yang, P-L., Chien, S-E., Tu, Y-C., Yang, C-C, Wang, T-M., Fung, H. H. & Yeh, S-L. (2019). Identifying Features that Enhance Older Adults’ Acceptance of Robots: A Mixed Methods Study. Gerontology, 65, 441-450. http:// DOI:
  22. Cohen, C., Kampel, T., & Verloo, H. (2016). Acceptability of an intelligent wireless sensor system for the rapid detection of health issues: findings among home-dwelling older adults and their informal caregivers. Patient preference and adherence, 10, 1687–1695. DOI:
  23. Conci, M., Pianesi, F., & Zancanaro, M. (2009) Useful, Social and Enjoyable: Mobile Phone Adoption by Older People. In: Gross T. et al. (eds) Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5726. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI:
  24. Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology Acceptance model for empirically testing new and-user information systems: theory and results. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.
  25. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quartely, 13(3), 319–340. DOI:
  26. Ellis, R.D., & Allaire, J.C. (1999). Modeling computer interest in older adults: the role of age, education, computer knowledge, and computer anxiety. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 41(3), 345–355. DOI:
  27. Ezer, N., Fisk, A. & Rogers, W. (2009). Attitudinal and intentional acceptance of domestic robots by younger and older adults. In C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments. Berlin: Springer. DOI:
  28. European Commission (2021). The 2021 Ageing Report. Underlying Assumptions & Projection Methodologies, Retrieved from http:// › economy-finance › ip142_en [24.06.2021].
  29. European Parliament Technology Assessment (2019). Technologies in care for older people. Retrieved from, [25.05.2021].
  30. Eurostat (2020), Ageing Europe - statistics on population developments, Retrieved from [26.06.2021].
  31. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. DOI:
  32. Graafmans, J., Taipale, V., & Charness, N. (eds.) (1998). Gerontechnology. A sustainable investment in the future. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  33. Grenade, L., & Boldy, D. (2008). Social isolation and loneliness among older people: issues and future challenges in community and residential settings. Australian Health Review, 32, 468-478. DOI:
  34. Ha, J., & Park, H.K. (2020). Factors Affecting the Acceptability of Technology in Health Care Among Older Korean Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Cross-Sectional Study Adopting the Senior Technology Acceptance Model. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 2(15), 1873–1881. DOI:
  35. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2013). Multivariate Data Analysis. Technometrics, 49, 103-104. DOI:
  36. Halicka, K. (2019). Gerontechnology—The assessment of one selected technology improving the quality of life of older adults. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 11, 43–51. DOI:
  37. Halicka K., & Kacprzak D. (2021), Linear ordering of selected gerontechnologies using selected MCGDM methods, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 27 (4), 921–947, DOI:
  38. Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation. Sociological Inquiry, 80, 92–113. DOI:
  39. Haufe, M., Peek, S. T. M., & Luijkx, K. G. (2019). Matching gerontechnologies to independent-living seniors’ individual needs: Development of the GTM tool. BMC Health Services Research, 19, 26 DOI:
  40. Hebesberger, D., Koertner, T., Gisinger, C., & Pripfl J. (2017). A long-term autonomous robot at a care hospital: A mixed methods study on social acceptance and experiences of staff and older adults, International Journal of Social Robotics, 9(3), 417–429. DOI:
  41. Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010). Assessing Acceptance of Assistive Social Agent Technology by Older Adults: The Almere Model. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2, 361–375. DOI:
  42. Hensel, B. K., Demiris, G., & Courtney, K. L. (2006). Defining obtrusiveness in home telehealth technologies: a conceptual framework. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 13(4), 428–431. DOI:
  43. Hoque, R., & Sorwar, G. (2017). Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 101, 75–84. DOI:
  44. Hu, Li‐tze, & Bentler, P. M (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. DOI:
  45. Iacobucci, D. (2020). Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 90-98. DOI:
  46. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1979). Advances in Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Models. Cambridge: Abt Books, MA.
  47. Karapanos, E. (2013). User Experience Over Time. Studies in Computational Intelligence, 436, 57-83. Berlin, Heidelber: Springer. DOI:
  48. Ke, C., Lou, V.W.Q., Tan, K.C.K., Wai, M.Y., & Chan, L.L. (2020), Changes in technology acceptance among older people with dementia: the role of social robot engagement. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 141, 104241. DOI:
  49. Khosravi, P., & Ghapanchi, A.H. (2016). Investigating the effectiveness of technologies applied to assist seniors: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 85(1), 17-26. DOI:
  50. Kim, D.J. Ferrin D.L., & Rao, H.R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544-564. DOI:
  51. Kim, E.H., Gellis, Z.D., Bradway, C.K., & Kenaley, B. (2019). Depression care services and telehealth technology use for homebound elderly in the United States. Aging Mental Health, 23, 1164–1173. DOI:
  52. Langer, A., Ronit Feingold-Polaka, R., Mueller, O., Kellmeyer, P., & Levy-Tzedek, S. (2019), Trust in socially assistive robots: Considerations for use in rehabilitation. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 104, 231-239. DOI:
  53. Li, J., Ma, Q., Chan, A.H.S., & Man, S.S. (2019). Health monitoring through wearable technologies for older adults: smart wearables acceptance model. Applied Ergonomics, 75, 162–169. DOI:
  54. Lie, A.L.S. Lindsay, S., & Brittain, K. (2015). Technology and trust: older people's perspectives of a home monitoring system. Ageing and Society, 36(7), 1501-1525. DOI:
  55. Ma, Q., Chan, A.H.S., & Teh, P.-L. (2020). Bridging the Digital Divide for Older Adults via Observational Training: Effects of Model Identity from a Generational Perspective. Sustainability, 12, 4555. DOI:
  56. Ma, Q., Chan A-H. S., & Teh, P-L. (2021). Insights into Older Adults’ Technology Acceptance through Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(11), 1049-1062, DOI:
  57. Maskeliūnas, R., Damaševičius, R., & Segal, S. (2019). A Review of Internet of Things Technologies for Ambient Assisted Living Environments. Future Internet, 11, 259. DOI:
  58. Mertens, A.W., Wille, M., Theis, S., Rasche, P., Finken, L., Schlick, C.M. (2015). Attitudes of Elderly People towards Assistive System: Influence of Amortization Barriers on the Adherence in Technically Assisted Rehabilitation and the Difusion of Health Technologies. In Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne, Australia, 9–14 August 2015, 9, p. 14.
  59. Miskelly, F.G. (2001). Assistive technology in elderly care. Age Ageing, 30(6), 455–458. DOI:
  60. Mitzner, T.L., Savla, J., Boot, W.R., Sharit, J., Charness, N., Czaja, S.J., & Rogers, W.A. (2019). Technology Adoption by Older Adults: Findings from the PRISM Trial. Gerontologist, 59, 34–44. DOI:
  61. Mostaghel, R., & Oghazi, P. (2017). Elderly and technology tools: a fuzzyset qualitative comparative analysis. Quality & Quantity, 51, 1969–1982. DOI:
  62. Naneva, S., Sarda Gou, M., Webb, T.L., & Prescott, T.J. (2020). A Systematic Review of Attitudes, Anxiety, Acceptance, and Trust Towards Social Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12, 1179-1201. DOI:
  63. Niehaves, B., & Plattfaut R. (2014). Internet adoption by the elderly: employing IS technology acceptance theories for understanding the age-related digital divide. European Journal of Information Systems, 23(6), 708–726. DOI:
  64. Niefeld, M.R., & Kasper, J.D. (2005). Access to ambulatory medical and long-term care services among elderly Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries: organizational, financial, and geographic barriers. Medical Care Research and Review, 62, 300-19. DOI:
  65. Olson, K.E., O’Brien, M.A., Rogers, W.A., & Charness, N. (2011). Diffusion of technology: frequency of use for younger and older adults. Ageing International, 36(1), 123–145. DOI:
  66. Pai, J.C., & Tu, F.M. (2011). The acceptance and use of customer relationship management (CRM) systems: An empirical study of distribution service industry in Taiwan. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 579–584. DOI:
  67. Pan, S., & Jordan-Marsh, M. (2010). Internet use intention and adoption among Chinese older adults: From the expanded technology acceptance model perspective, Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1111–1119.
  68. Pal, D., Funilkul, S., Vanijja, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2018). Analyzing the Elderly Users’ Adoption of Smart-Home Services. IEEE Access 6, 51238–51252. DOI:
  69. Pavlou, P.A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 69-103. DOI:
  70. Pan, S., & Jordan-Marsh, M. (2010). Internet use intention and adoption among Chinese older adults: From the expanded technology acceptance model perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (5), 1111–1119. DOI:
  71. Peek, S.M., Wouters, E.M., van Hoof, J., Luijkx, K.G., Boeije, H.R., & Vrijhoef H.M. (2014). Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 83, 235–248. https://doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004 DOI:
  72. Peek, S.T., Luijkx, K.G., Rijnaard, M.D., Nieboer, M.E., van der Voort, C.S., Aarts, S., van Hoof, J., Vrijhoef, H.J., & Wouters, E.J. (2016). Older Adults' Reasons for Using Technology while Aging in Place. Gerontology, 62(2), 226-37. https://doi:10.1159/000430949 DOI:
  73. Peek, S.T.M., Luijkx, K.G., Vrijhoef, Nieboer, H. J.M., Aarts, M. E S., van der Voort, C. S., Rijnaard, M. D. & Wouters E. J. M. (2019). Understanding changes and stability in the long-term use of technologies by seniors who are aging in place: a dynamical framework. BMC Geriatrics, 19, 236. DOI:
  74. Petermans, J., & Piau, A. (2017). Gerontechnology: Don’t miss the train, but which is the right carriage? European Geriatric Medicine, 8, 281-283. DOI:
  75. Petrovčič, A., Peek, S., & Dolničar, V. (2019). Predictors of Seniors' Interest in Assistive Applications on Smartphones: Evidence from a Population-Based Survey in Slovenia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(9), 1623. DOI:
  76. Piau, A. Campo, E. Rumeau, P., Vellas, B., & Nourhashemi, F. (2014). Aging society and gerontechnology: A solution for an independent living?. The Journal of nutrition, health & aging, 18(1), 97-112. DOI:
  77. Pilotto, A., D'Onofrio, G., Benelli, E., Zanesco, A., Cabello, A., Margelí, M.C., Wanche-Politis, S., Seferis, K., Sancarlo, D., & Kilias, D. (2011). Information and communication technology systems to improve quality of life and safety of Alzheimer's disease patients: a multicenter international survey. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 23, 131-41. DOI:
  78. Pressler, K. A., & Ferraro, K.F. (2010). Assistive device use as a dynamic acquisition process in later life. Gerontologist 50(3), 371–381. DOI:
  79. Renaud, K., & Van Biljon, J. (2008). Predicting Technology Acceptance and Adoption by the Elderly: A Qualitative Study. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries: Riding the Wave of Technology, Wilderness, South Africa, 6–8 October 2008, 210–219. DOI:
  80. Quaosar, G.M.A.A., Hoque, M.R., & Bao, Y. (2018). Investigating factors a ecting elderly’s intention to use m-healthservices: An empirical study. Telemedicine and e-Health, 24(4), 309–314. https:// 10.1089/tmj.2017.0111 DOI:
  81. Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, ed 5. New York: Free Press.
  82. Richardson, S.J., Carroll, B.C., Close, J., Gordon, A.L., O’Brien, J., Quinn, T.J., Rochester, L., Sayer, A.A., Shenkin, S.D., van der Velde, N., Woo, J., & Witham, M.D. (2020). Research with older people in a world with COVID-19: identification of current and future priorities, challenges and opportunities, Age and Ageing, 49(6), 901–906, DOI:
  83. Rogers, W.A., Mitzner, T.L., & Sanford J.A. (2014). A research framework to guide design of technologies for successful aging with disabilities. Gerontechnology, 13(2), 272–272. DOI:
  84. Rossi, S., Conti, D., Garramone, F., Santangelo, G., Staffa, M., Varrasi, S., & Di Nuovo, A. (2020). The Role of Personality Factors and Empathy in the Acceptance and Performance of a Social Robot for Psychometric Evaluations. Robotics, 9(2), 39. DOI:
  85. Rossi, S., Staffa, M., Bove, L., Capasso, R., & Ercolano, G. (2017). User’s Personality and Activity Influence on HRI Comfortable Distances. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Robotics, ICSR, Tsukuba, Japan, 22–24 November 2017, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 167–177. DOI:
  86. Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., & Dautenhahn, K. (2015a). Towards Safe and Trustworthy Social Robots: Ethical Challenges and Practical Issues. In A. Tapus, E. André, J. C. Martin, F. Ferland, M. Ammi (Eds.) Social Robotics. ICSR 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9388. Springer, Cham. DOI:
  87. Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., & Dautenhahn, K. (2015b). Would you trust a (faulty) robot? Effects of error, task type and personality on human–robot cooperation and trust. In Proceedings of 10th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human robot interaction. ACM, pp. 141-148. DOI:
  88. Sanders, D., & Scott, P. (2020). Literature review: technological interventions and their impact on quality of life for people living with dementia. BMJ Health Care Informatics, 27, 100064. bmjhci-2019-100064 DOI:
  89. Schumacker, R. E. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
  90. Schwaninger, I., Güldenpfennig, F., Weiss, A., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2021). What Do You Mean by Trust? Establishing Shared Meaning in Interdisciplinary Design for Assistive Technology. International Journal of Social Robotics. DOI:
  91. Sharma, R., Nah, F.F.H., Sharma, K., Katta, T.S.S.S., Pang, N., Yong, A. (2016). Smart Living for Elderly: Design and Human-Computer Interaction Considerations. In Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Healthy and Active Aging. ITAP, 112-122. DOI:
  92. Syed-Abdul, S., Malwade, S., Nursetyo, A.A., Sood, M., Bhatia, M., Barsasella, D., Liu, M.F., Chang, C.C., Srinivasan, K., Raja, R., & Yu-Chuan J.L. (2019). Virual reality among the elderly: A usefulness and acceptance study from Taiwan. BMC Geriatrics, 19(1), 223. DOI:
  93. Talukder, M.S., Sorwar, G., Bao, Y., Ahmed, J.U., & Palash, M.A.S. (2020). Predicting antecedents of wearable healthcare technology acceptance by elderly: A combined SEM-Neural Network approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150. DOI:
  94. Tao, D., Shao, F., Liu, S., Wang, T., & Qu, X. (2016). Predicting Factors of Consumer Acceptance of Health Information Technologies: A Systematic Review. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 60(1), 598–602. DOI:
  95. Thordardottir, B., Malmgren Fange, A., Lethin, C., Rodriguez Gatta, D., & Chiatti, C. (2019). Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: A systematic review. BioMed Research International, 1–18. DOI:
  96. Tsai, L.T.; Portegijs, E., Rantakokko, M., Viljanen, A., Saajanaho, M., Eronen, J., & Rantanen, T. (2015). The association between objectively measured physical activity and life-space mobility among older people. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25(4), 368-e373. DOI:
  97. Tsai, H-Y-S., Rikard, R. V., Cotten S. R. & Shillair, R. (2019). Senior technology exploration, learning, and acceptance (STELA) model: from exploration to use – a longitudinal randomized controlled trial, Educational Gerontology, 45(12), 728-743. DOI:
  98. United Nations (2019), World Population Ageing, New York. Retrieved from, [20.05.2021].
  99. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quartely, 27(3), 425–478. DOI:
  100. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., & Xu X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of informationtechnology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, MIS Quarterly, 36, 157–178. DOI:
  101. Wang, H., Tao, D., Yu, N., & Qu, X. (2020). Understanding consumer acceptance of healthcare wearable devices: An integrated model of UTAUT and TTF. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 139, 104156. DOI:
  102. World Health Organization (2021a). Aging. Retrieved from, [18.05.2021].
  103. World Health Organization (2021b). Dacade of Healthy Aging: baseline report. Summary. Retrieved from, [19.05.2021].
  104. World Health Organization (2021c). Global report on ageism. Geneva. Retrieved from, [19.05.2021].
  105. World Health Organization (2021d). Older people & COVID-19. Retrieved from [22.04.2021].
  106. Wu, Y.H., Wrobel, J., Cornuet, M., Kerhervé, H., Damnée, S., & Rigaud, A.S. (2014). Acceptance of an assistive robot in older adults: A mixed-method study of human-robot interaction over a 1-month period in the living lab setting. Clinical interventions in aging, 9, 801–811. DOI:
  107. Zhou, J., Zhang, B., Tan, R., Tseng, M.-L., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Exploring the Systematic Attributes Influencing Gerontechnology Adoption for Elderly Users Using a Meta-Analysis. Sustainability, 12, 2864. DOI:

How to Cite

Ejdys, J., & Gulc, A. (2022). Factors influencing the intention to use assistive technologies by older adults. Human Technology, 18(1), 6–28.