IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i22p12062-d681056.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Internet-Based Medical Service Use and Eudaimonic Well-Being of Urban Older Adults: A Peer Support and Technology Acceptance Model

Author

Listed:
  • Wenjia Li

    (College of Communication and Art Design, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China)

  • Shengwei Shen

    (School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Jidong Yang

    (School of Creativity and Art, Shanghai Tech University, Shanghai 201210, China)

  • Qinghe Tang

    (School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

Abstract

Currently, internet services are developing rapidly, and the relationship between specific types of internet services and the well-being of older adults is still unclear. This study took a total of 353 urban older adults aged 60 years and above as research objects to explore the impact of the use behavior toward internet-based medical services (IBMS) on their well-being through an online questionnaire. This study integrated well-being theory and peer support theory, constructed an extended structural equation model of technology acceptance based on the technology acceptance model (TAM), and analyzed the variable path relationship. The results confirm the proposed model: older adults improved their eudaimonic well-being through using IBMS; perceived usefulness significantly affected the older adults’ attitudes towards IBMS; perceived ease of use significantly affected the use of IBMS through mediation; peer support significantly affected older adults’ attitudes, willingness, actual use, and well-being in the process. This study proposes that facilitating IBMS use for older adults in the development and design of internet technology programs should be considered in order to provide them with benefits. Moreover, paying attention to peer support among older adults plays an important role in the acceptance of new technologies and improving their well-being. The “peer support” of this study expanded and contributed to the research on the impact on older adults’ well-being and the construction of a technology acceptance model. The peer support in this study extended the influence factor of eudaimonic well-being and contributed to the further development of the TAM.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenjia Li & Shengwei Shen & Jidong Yang & Qinghe Tang, 2021. "Internet-Based Medical Service Use and Eudaimonic Well-Being of Urban Older Adults: A Peer Support and Technology Acceptance Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:12062-:d:681056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/12062/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/12062/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miha Dominko & Miroslav Verbič, 2019. "Subjective well-being among the elderly: A bibliometric analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 1187-1207, May.
    2. Ching-Ju Chiu, 2019. "Relationship Between Internet Behaviors and Social Engagement in Middle-Aged and Older Adults in Taiwan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Carol Ryff & Burton Singer, 2008. "Know Thyself and Become What You Are: A Eudaimonic Approach to Psychological Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 13-39, January.
    4. Rubén Trigueros & José M. Pérez-Jiménez & Alejandro García-Mas & José M. Aguilar-Parra & José M. Fernandez-Batanero & Antonio Luque de la Rosa & Ana Manzano-León & Noelia Navarro, 2021. "Adaptation and Validation of the Eudaimonic Well-Being Questionnaire to the Spanish Sport Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-9, March.
    5. Alan Waterman & Seth Schwartz & Regina Conti, 2008. "The Implications of Two Conceptions of Happiness (Hedonic Enjoyment and Eudaimonia) for the Understanding of Intrinsic Motivation," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 41-79, January.
    6. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    7. Woochun Jun, 2020. "A Study on the Current Status and Improvement of the Digital Divide among Older People in Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-13, June.
    8. Peter Anderberg & Lisa Skär & Linda Abrahamsson & Johan Sanmartin Berglund, 2020. "Older People’s Use and Nonuse of the Internet in Sweden," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-11, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jui-Che Tu & Shi Chen Luo & Yi-Lin Lee & Ming-Feng Shih & Shu-Ping Chiu, 2022. "Exploring Usability and Patient Attitude towards a Smart Hospital Service with the Technology Acceptance Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-19, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonella Delle Fave & Ingrid Brdar & Teresa Freire & Dianne Vella-Brodrick & Marié Wissing, 2011. "The Eudaimonic and Hedonic Components of Happiness: Qualitative and Quantitative Findings," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 100(2), pages 185-207, January.
    2. Markus Wettstein & Hans-Werner Wahl & Anna Schlomann, 2022. "The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Trajectories of Well-Being of Middle-Aged and older Adults: A Multidimensional and Multidirectional Perspective," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 3577-3604, October.
    3. Pilar Sanjuán, 2011. "Affect Balance as Mediating Variable Between Effective Psychological Functioning and Satisfaction with Life," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 373-384, June.
    4. Arzu Atan & Hale Ozgit & Fatos Silman, 2021. "Happiness at Work and Motivation for a Sustainable Workforce: Evidence from Female Hotel Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-17, July.
    5. Yew-Kwang Ng, 2011. "Happiness Is Absolute, Universal, Ultimate, Unidimensional, Cardinally Measurable and Interpersonally Comparable: A Basis for the Environmentally Responsible Happy Nation Index," Monash Economics Working Papers 16-11, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    6. Sabrina Intelisano & Julia Krasko & Maike Luhmann, 2020. "Integrating Philosophical and Psychological Accounts of Happiness and Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 161-200, January.
    7. Alex C. Michalos & Kenneth C. Land, 2018. "Replies to Our Commentators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 1057-1078, February.
    8. Morris, Eric A., 2015. "Should we all just stay home? Travel, out-of-home activities, and life satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 519-536.
    9. Veselina P. Vracheva & Robert Moussetis & Ali Abu-Rahma, 2020. "The Mediational Role of Engagement in the Relationship Between Curiosity and Student Development: A Preliminary Study," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1529-1547, April.
    10. Lung Chen & Ying-Mei Tsai & Mei-Yen Chen, 2010. "Psychometric Analysis of the Orientations to Happiness Questionnaire in Taiwanese Undergraduate Students," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 98(2), pages 239-249, September.
    11. Baumeister, Roy F. & Vohs, Kathleen D. & Aaker, Jennifer L. & Garbinsky, Emily N., 2012. "Some Key Differences between a Happy Life and a Meaningful Life," Research Papers 2119, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. Ethan McMahan & David Estes, 2011. "Measuring Lay Conceptions of Well-Being: The Beliefs About Well-Being Scale," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 267-287, April.
    13. Mohsen Joshanloo, 2011. "Investigation of the Contribution of Spirituality and Religiousness to Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being in Iranian Young Adults," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 915-930, December.
    14. Leonid Z. Levit, 2014. "Meaning and Egoism: Are the Notions Compatible?," International Journal of Social Science Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 2(1), pages 102-112, March.
    15. Veronika Huta & Alan Waterman, 2014. "Eudaimonia and Its Distinction from Hedonia: Developing a Classification and Terminology for Understanding Conceptual and Operational Definitions," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1425-1456, December.
    16. Igor Sotgiu, 2019. "Gender Differences and Similarities in Autobiographical Memory for Eudaimonic Happy Events," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 1457-1479, June.
    17. Qingqing Li & Guangcan Xiang & Shiqing Song & Xiting Huang & Hong Chen, 2022. "Examining the Associations of Trait Self-control with Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 667-687, February.
    18. Olga Kosykh & Hanna Roh & Robert Hart, 2023. "Self-Expressiveness in Slow Tourism as a Sustainable Driver: The Trans-Siberian Railway Travel Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    19. Ethan McMahan & David Estes, 2011. "Hedonic Versus Eudaimonic Conceptions of Well-being: Evidence of Differential Associations With Self-reported Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 93-108, August.
    20. Pyke, Sarah & Hartwell, Heather & Blake, Adam & Hemingway, Ann, 2016. "Exploring well-being as a tourism product resource," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 94-105.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:12062-:d:681056. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.