From 65 to 103, Older Adults Experience Virtual Reality Differently Depending on Their Age: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Study in Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Facilities.

There is growing interest in applications of virtual reality (VR) to improve the lives of older adults, but the limited research on older adults and VR largely treats older adults as a monolith, ignoring the substantial differences across 65 to 100+ year olds that may affect their experience of VR. There are also few existing studies examining the experiences and challenges facing those who facilitate VR for older adults (e.g., caregiving staff). We address these limitations through two studies. In study 1, we explore variation within older adults' experiences with VR through a field study of VR use among a large (N = 245) and age-diverse (Mage = 83.6 years, SDage = 7.9, range = 65-103 years) sample of nursing home and assisted living facility residents across 10 U.S. states. Age was negatively associated with the extent to which older adults enjoyed VR experiences. However, the negative relationship between age and older adults' attitudes toward VR was significantly less negative than the relationship between age and their attitudes toward other technologies (cell phones and voice assistants). In study 2, we surveyed caregiving staff (N = 39) who facilitated the VR experiences for older adult residents and found that the caregiving staff generally enjoyed the activity relative to other activities and felt it to be beneficial to their relationship with residents.

Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2020 US election.

Research using large-scale data on individuals' internet use has provided vital information about the scope and nature of exposure to misinformation online. However, most prior work relies on data collected during the 2016 US election. Here we examine exposure to untrustworthy websites during the 2020 US election, using over 7.5 million website visits from 1,151 American adults. We find that 26.2% (95% confidence interval 22.5% to 29.8%) of Americans were exposed to untrustworthy websites in 2020, down from 44.3% (95% confidence interval 40.8% to 47.7%) in 2016. Older adults and conservatives continued to be the most exposed in 2020 as in 2016, albeit at lower rates. The role of online platforms in exposing people to untrustworthy websites changed, with Facebook playing a smaller role in 2020 than in 2016. Our findings do not minimize misinformation as a key social problem, but instead highlight important changes in its consumption, suggesting directions for future research and practice.

A digital media literacy intervention for older adults improves resilience to fake news.

Older adults are especially susceptible to fake news online, possibly because they are less digitally literate compared to younger individuals. Interventions for older adults have emerged to improve digital literacy, although there has been little evaluation of their effectiveness in improving older adults' resilience to fake news. We report the results of a digital literacy intervention for older adults administered during the 2020 U.S. election. The intervention was a 1-hour, self-directed series of interactive modules designed to teach concepts and skills for identifying misinformation online. Consistent with our pre-registered hypothesis, older adults (Mage = 67) in the treatment condition (N = 143) significantly improved their likelihood of accurately discerning fake from true news from 64% pre-intervention to 85% post-intervention. In contrast, older adults in the control condition (N = 238) did not significantly improve (from 55% to 57%). The treated older adults were also more likely to employ strategies for identifying misinformation online compared to pre-intervention and the control group.

Age-Related Differences in Experiences With Social Distancing at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Computational and Content Analytic Investigation of Natural Language From a Social Media Survey.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 poses different levels of threat to people of different ages, health communication regarding prevention measures such as social distancing and isolation may be strengthened by understanding the unique experiences of various age groups. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine how people of different ages (1) experienced the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) their respective rates and reasons for compliance or noncompliance with social distancing and isolation health guidance. METHODS: We fielded a survey on social media early in the pandemic to examine the emotional impact of COVID-19 and individuals' rates and reasons for noncompliance with public health guidance, using computational and content analytic methods of linguistic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 17,287 participants were surveyed. The majority (n=13,183, 76.3%) were from the United States. Younger (18-31 years), middle-aged (32-44 years and 45-64 years), and older (≥65 years) individuals significantly varied in how they described the impact of COVID-19 on their lives, including their emotional experience, self-focused attention, and topical concerns. Younger individuals were more emotionally negative and self-focused, while middle-aged people were other-focused and concerned with family. The oldest and most at-risk group was most concerned with health-related terms but were lower in anxiety (use of fewer anxiety-related terms) and higher in the use of emotionally positive terms than the other less at-risk age groups. While all groups discussed topics such as acquiring essential supplies, they differentially experienced the impact of school closures and limited social interactions. We also found relatively high rates of noncompliance with COVID-19 prevention measures, such as social distancing and self-isolation, with younger people being more likely to be noncompliant than older people (P<.001). Among the 43.1% (n=7456) of respondents who did not fully comply with health orders, people differed substantially in the reasons they gave for noncompliance. The most common reason for noncompliance was not being able to afford to miss work (n=4273, 57.3%). While work obligations proved challenging for participants across ages, younger people struggled more to find adequate space to self-isolate and manage their mental and physical health; middle-aged people had more concerns regarding childcare; and older people perceived themselves as being able to take sufficient precautions. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of natural language can provide insight into rapidly developing public health challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic, uncovering individual differences in emotional experiences and health-related behaviors. In this case, our analyses revealed significant differences between different age groups in feelings about and responses to public health orders aimed to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. To improve public compliance with health orders as the pandemic continues, health communication strategies could be made more effective by being tailored to these age-related differences.

Experience with Social Distancing Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Implications for Public Health Messaging.

Our goal is to inform ongoing public health policy on the design and communication of COVID-19 social distancing measures to maximize compliance. We assessed the US publics early experience with the COVID-19 crisis during the period when shelter-in-place orders were widely implemented to understand non-compliance with those orders, sentiment about the crisis, and to compare across age categories associated with different levels of risk. We posted our survey on Twitter, Facebook, and NextDoor on March 14th to March 23rd that included 21 questions including demographics, impact on daily life, actions taken, and difficulties faced. We analyzed the free-text responses to the impact question using LIWC, a computational natural language processing tool, and performed a thematic content analysis of the reasons people gave for non-compliance with social distancing orders. Stanford Universitys IRB approved the study. In 9 days, we collected a total of 20,734 responses. 6,573 individuals provided a response (≥30 words) to the question, Tell us how the coronavirus crisis is impacting your life. Our data (Figure 1) show that younger people (18-31) are more emotionally negative, self-centered, and less concerned with family, while middle-aged people are group-oriented (32-44) and focused on family (32-64) (all p values < .05 corrected for multiple comparisons). Unsurprisingly, the oldest and most at-risk group (65+) are more focused on biological terms (e.g., health-related topics), but were surprisingly low in anxiety and high in emotionally positive terms relative to those at lower risk. We also content-analyzed 7,355 responses (kappas > .75) to the question, What are the reasons you are not self-isolating more? Of these participants, 39.8% reported not being compliant, with the youngest group (18-31) having the lowest compliance rate (52.4%) compared to the other age groups (all > 60%; all p values < .01). Table 1 describes the seven primary themes for non-compliance. Non-essential work requirements, concerns about mental and physical health, and the belief that other precautions were sufficient were the most common reasons, although other rationales included wanting to continue everyday activities and beliefs that society is over-reacting. Childcare was an important concern for a subset of respondents. Overall, our findings suggest that public health messages should focus on young people and 1) address their negative affect, 2) refocus their self-orientation by emphasizing the importance of individual behavior to group-level health outcomes, and 3) target the specific rationales that different people have regarding the pandemic to maximize compliance with social distancing.