AI in the Everyday Life of Older Adults: Panacea or Pandora's Box?

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

From conversational agents, such as Siri and Alexa, to the use of sensors in smart home, robots in hospitals and automatic cars, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is becoming ubiquitous in society. The increasing omnipresence of AI is welcomed by techno-optimists who consider it a social good ([1]) that will solve a range of societal problems; techno-pessimists predict that the adoption of AI will produce damaging and irreparable changes to human relations. One thing is certain: paying attention to the politics and ethics of AI, at this particular moment, is crucial [2] as it becomes a part of contemporary societies.

Citizens are touched by AI in their everyday life, and while the role of AI for citizens has garnered attention in scientific studies, there is a lack of critical research into how older people perceive the role of AI in their everyday life. Are AI interventions, such as personalized digital information in the form of fall alert device in smart homes, positioned as a solution to the hazards that may come with aging? Are the consequences of AI, such as filter bubbles [3, 4], data ageism [5, 6]; surveillance [7, 8] understood as a threat or a necessary side effect of technological change? Are older people aware of the myriad ways in which AI is increasingly integrated into the way they live? Do older people perceive AI as an “enabling constraint” [9], both enhancing and restricting their agency? Is AI not even part of the discussion, and if so, what is the level of awareness of AI among older people? Is responsible AI innovation to fulfil older people needs possible [10]), and if so, then how? Is AI a Panacea, a Pandora’s Box or simply irrelevant from the perspective of age and ageing?

To address such questions, this topic primarily focuses on the intersections between older people and AI in everyday life, within the context of discourses and practices of AI professionals and experts from the field. Its purpose is to stimulate research into these areas and to generate insights into how older people make sense of these new technologies that are so ubiquitous in the commercial and public realm.

The present call-for-papers requests original research papers, as well as review articles, conceptual papers and methodological notes related to the practices and perceptions of AI in the everyday life of older people. The topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Critical analyses of the integration of AI in the everyday life of older people;
• Older people’s AI use: single or cross country studies;
• Ethical aspects of AI development, and use by and for older people;
• Age-related biases in AI systems;
• The integration of AI in the access of reliable services (banking, e-administration, health, leisure and news information, among others), and its effects;
• Processes and protocols to stimulate  positive integration of AI in the everyday life of older people;
• Ways to combat damaging aspects of AI in the everyday life of older people;
• Ways to increase the critical awareness about AI among older people.

References

1. Foffano, F.; Scantamburlo, T., Cortés, A. Investing in AI for social good: an analysis of European national strategies. AI & Society 2022, 1-22.
2. Hauer, T. Importance and limitations of AI ethics in contemporary society. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 2022,1-8.
3. Pariser, E. The Filter Bubble: what the internet is hiding from you. Penquin Books, 2011.
4. Roosenschoon, H.; Loos, E. Maatschappelijke impact van gepersonaliseerde informatievoorziening: feit of fictie? [Societal impact of personalized information delivery: Fact or fiction?Mens & Maatschappij, 95(2) 2020, 133-150.
5. Fernández-Ardèvol, M.; Grenier, L. Exploring data ageism: What good data can (’t) tell us about the digital practices of older people? New Media & Society 2020 4614448221127261.
6. Chu, C. H.; Nyrup, R.; Leslie, K.; Shi, J.; Bianchi, A.; Lyn, A.; Grenier, A. Digital ageism: Challenges and opportunities in artificial intelligence for older adults. The Gerontologist, 62(7) 2022, 947-955.
7. Berridge, C.; Grigorovich, A. Algorithmic harms and digital ageism in the use of surveillance technologies in nursing homes. Frontiers in Sociology, 7, 2022. 10.3389/fsoc.2022.957246
8. Berridge, C.; Halpern, J.; Levy, K. Cameras on beds: The ethics of surveillance in nursing home rooms. AJOB Empirical Bioethics, 10(1), 2019, 55-62.
9. Giddens, A. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Polity Press, 1984.
10. Lukkien, D.R.; Nap, H.H.; Buimer, H.P.; Peine, A.; Boon, W.P.; Ket, J.C.; ... Moors, E.H. Toward Responsible Artificial Intelligence in Long-Term Care: A Scoping Review on Practical Approaches. The Gerontologist 2021. 10.1093/geront/gnab180

The deadline to submit the abstract is 01.06.2023, and the deadline for the manuscript is 10.07.2023.

Dr. Eugène Loos
Dr. Loredana Ivan
Prof. Dr. Kim Sawchuk
Dr. Mireia Fernández-Ardèvol
Topic Editors

Keywords

Participating Journals

Journal Name	Impact Factor	CiteScore	Launched Year	First Decision (median)	APC
Algorithms algorithms	2.3	3.7	2008	15 Days	CHF 1600
Behavioral Sciences behavsci	2.6	3.0	2011	21.5 Days	CHF 2200
Societies societies	2.1	2.3	2011	32.6 Days	CHF 1400
Technologies technologies	3.6	5.5	2013	19.7 Days	CHF 1600

MDPI Topics is cooperating with Preprints.org and has built a direct connection between MDPI journals and Preprints.org. Authors are encouraged to enjoy the benefits by posting a preprint at Preprints.org prior to publication:

1. Immediately share your ideas ahead of publication and establish your research priority;
2. Protect your idea from being stolen with this time-stamped preprint article;
3. Enhance the exposure and impact of your research;
4. Receive feedback from your peers in advance;
5. Have it indexed in Web of Science (Preprint Citation Index), Google Scholar, Crossref, SHARE, PrePubMed, Scilit and Europe PMC.

Published Papers (1 paper)