Journal of Consumer Research Inc. - Jean-Eric PELET - Free

Journal of Consumer Research Inc.The Elderly Consumer and Adoption of TechnologiesAuthor(s): Mary C. Gilly and Valarie A. ZeithamlSource: The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Dec., 1985), pp. 353-357Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/254379 .Accessed: 23/02/2011 14:18Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. .Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.The University of Chicago Press and Journal of Consumer Research Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Consumer Research.http://www.jstor.org

IR-~ 0 ~~~~~~~~~~Research In Brief"The Elderly Consumer andAdoption of TechnologiesMARY C. GILLYVALARIE A. ZEITHAML*The study investigated adoption of several key consumer-related technologies bythe elderly. Specifically, the adoption of scanner-equipped grocery stores, electronicfunds transfer, automated teller machines, and custom telephone calling serviceswas compared in an elderly and a nonelderly sample of consumers. Results indicatedthat lower percentages of the elderly group were in the trial and adoption stagesfor most of the innovations. However, elderly consumers were more likely to adoptelectronic funds transfer. The elderly also used sources of information to differentdegrees than did the nonelderly to learn about innovations.nterest in the elderly has burgeoned in the last tenyears because this demographic segment-definedas adults aged 65 and older-has expanded in size andspending power. Demographers report a sharp increasein the number of older Americans and in the proportionof the U.S. population that falls into this age category(Lumpkin and Greenberg 1982; Phillips and Sternthal1977; U.S. Department of Commerce 1980). Althoughincome and expenditures are lower per capita in thissegment, aggregate spending power is impressive(Bernhardt 1981; Goldstein 1968).Sociologists, psychologists, and marketers have documentedthe elderly's resistance to change. Studies haverevealed that the elderly resist relocation and changesin work situations (Kasteler, Gay, and Carruth 1968;Pollman and Johnson 1974). Compared to youngerpeople, the elderly tend to be more cautious and to seekgreater certitude before they act (Botwinick 1973). Asconsumers, older adults have been shown to be amongthe last to adopt a product, service, or idea innovation(Robertson 1971; Uhl, Andrus, and Poulson 1970).Kerschner and Chelsvig (1981) found age to be related*Mary C. Gilly is Assistant Professor of Administration at theUniversity of California, Irvine, CA 92717. Valarie A. Zeithaml isAssociate Professor of Marketing at Texas A & M University, CollegeStation, TX 77843.353to attitudes toward and adoption of technology: theolder the consumer, the more negative the view towardtechnology and the lower the use of various technologies.In two other studies, elderly consumers were shownto be more resistant than younger consumers to theitem price removal associated with scanner technology(Harris and Mills 1971; Pommer, Berkowitz, and Walton1980).The purpose of this study was to investigate the elderly'sadoption of several key technologies. Specifically,young and elderly consumers' acceptance andadoption of scanner-equipped grocery stores, electronicfunds transfer, automated teller machines, and customtelephone calling services were compared.The adoption of innovations is considered to representa process rather than an instantaneous event. Forexample, Rogers (1983) offered a five-stage model consistingof:1. Knowledge. The individual becomes aware of the innovation'sexistence and gains understanding of itsfunction.2. Persuasion. The individual develops a favorable orunfavorable attitude toward the innovation based onthe information acquired.3. Decision. The individual engages in activities (suchas trial) that lead to a decision to adopt or reject theinnovation.? JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH * Vol. 12 * December 1985

354 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH4. Implementation. The individual puts the innovationto use.5. Confirmation. The individual seeks reinforcement ofthe innovation decision already made.In previous research, the elderly have been found tobe less aware of retailing innovations than the nonelderlypopulation (Bearden and Mason 1979), less likelyto use different sources of information (Phillips andSternthal 1977), less likely to try and to adopt new technologies(Kerschner and Chelsvig 1981), and generallymore satisfied in the marketplace than younger consumers(cf., Ash, Gardiner, and Quelch 1983; Beardenand Mason 1979). It has been- predicted that elderlyconsumers depend on mass media and family more thanon friends or neighbors as information sources, and onprint media sources more than on broadcast media(Phillips and Sternthal 1977). Therefore, this study predictedthat the preceding differences between the elderlyand nonelderly consumers' adoption processes wouldalso appear for consumer related technologies.METHODA questionnaire and cover letter were mailed to twogroups of respondents. The first sample-approximately2,500 respondents-was selected randomly from amailing list of automobile registrations of people 18-64 years of age in Texas and California. The secondsample-also about 2,500 respondents-was selectedrandomly from automobile registrations of people inTexas and California aged 65-and-over.' The overallresponse rate was 21.8 percent. Response rate from thefirst sample was 24.6 percent and from the second sample,19 percent. About 56 percent of the respondentswere under 65; 44 percent were 65 and older. A profileof the sample is shown in Exhibit 1.Each section of the questionnaire began with a descriptionof one of the technologies-scanner-equippedgrocery stores, automated bank teller machines (ATMs),electronic funds transfer (EFT), and custom telephonecalling services (CTCS)-and was followed by questionsabout that technology. Respondents were asked questionscorresponding to all levels of Rodgers's five-stagemodel (see the Table).RESULTSChi-square analysis was used to compare elderly andnonelderly respondents on their knowledge, sources ofinformation, implementation, and satisfaction with thefour technological innovations. The Table and Exhibit2 show the results of the analyses performed on all variables.'Studies of the elderly vary in the age cutoff used to define theelderly segment. While several researchers define elderly as 55-andover(e.g., Ash et al. 1982), most consider the elderly to be persons65-and-over (see Lumpkin and Greenburg 1982, p. 76).EXHIBIT 1PROFILE OF RESPONDENTSaDemographiccharacteristic Nonelderlyb Elderly'Marital statusSingle 14.5 4.4Married 71.6 65.7Widowed 4.1 22.9Divorced 9.8 6.9IncomeUnder $10,000 8.6 24.2$10,000-$19,999 15.7 32.5$20,000-$29,999 23.1 18.3$30,000-$39,999 19.5 11.8$40,000-$49,999 12.8 7.2$50,000+ 20.4 6.1DwellingHouse 81.2 67.8Apt/condo 14.5 20.4Retirement home 0.0 2.1Duplex 0.8 0.4Mobile home 3.4 9.3Education16 years 20.5 14.2* Numbers are given in percentages.bn= 613.Cn = 474.Only the custom telephone calling services showed asignificant association between age and awareness ofthe innovation. Almost 88 percent of those respondentsunder 65 had heard about CTCS, whereas only 73 percentof the 65-and-over group had heard about the innovation.For the other three technological innovations,age was not significantly associated with knowledge.The data suggest that the elderly have levels ofawareness for most of these technologies that are comparableto those of younger consumers, a finding thatruns counter to what existing literature would predict.One explanation is that the technologies studied hereare of greater interest to the elderly than are those inthe Bearden and Mason (1979) study (i.e., open codedating, nutritional labelling, and unit pricing). Anotherexplanation is that these four technologies receivedconsiderable media coverage because of their novelty.According to Phillips and Sternthal (1977), the elderlyengage in high mass media exposure to compensate fortheir reduction in interpersonal contacts. Therefore, theelderly may have been more aware of these technologiesthan others who receive less extensive media coverage.The latter explanation is consistent with this study'sfinding that the elderly relied more on mass media forinformation, whereas the nonelderly relied more onfriends and work associates.In the case of all four innovations, age was significantlyassociated with source of information. As shown

ELDERLY'S ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGIES 355TABLEDESCRIPTION OF MEASURES, PERCENTAGES OF ELDERLY AND NONELDERLY IN STAGES OF ADOPTION, AND CHI-SQUARERESULTS FOR ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN AGE AND STAGE OF ADOPTIONaKnowledge (Awareness)Operationalization Elderly Nonelderly XPercent answering "yes"Before reading this questionnaire, had you heard of-Scanner equipment? 96.6 98.5 3.5-ATMs? 97.2 98.7 2.3-EFT? 93.0 90.5 1.9-CTCS? 73.3 87.9 36.1 bDecisionHave you ever-shopped in a scanner-equipped grocery store? 86.5 92.2 8.63c-shopped in a grocery store especially to try scanners? 3.1 3.3

356 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCHSOURCESEXHIBIT 2OF INFORMATION FOR TECHNOLOGICALINNOVATIONSPercent of respondentsusing sourceSource of information Nonelderly ElderlyScanner-equipped grocery storesShopping in store 46.24 52.47Family member 1.88 2.80Television 14.89 10.97Newspaper 18.18 24.73Friend or neighbor 8.15 4.73Technical journals 2.19 0.65Magazines 4.55 2.15Other 3.92 1.51Automated teller machinesBank 35.05 42.70Family member 4.18 5.45Television 19.61 16.99Newspaper 22.83 26.36Friend or neighbor 11.90 4.36Other 6.43 4.14Electronic funds transferBank 25.46 35.81Family member 4.86 5.18Television 15.91 10.36Newspaper 22.95 25.00Friend or neighbor 11.73 7.21Social Security Administration 3.52 13.06Employer 10.22 2.25Other 5.36 1.13Custom telephone calling servicesTelephone company 22.61 31.29Family member 10.66 15.79Television 12.87 14.04Newspaper 9.19 16.96Friend or neighbor 35.85 18.71Employer 6.99 2.05Other 1.84 1.17by the frequencies in Exhibit 2, the 65-and-over grouptended to use information sources to different degreesthan those respondents under 65. Compared to thenonelderly, the elderly were more likely to hear aboutthe innovation through experience (e.g., by shoppingin a scanner-equipped store) or directly from the company(ATMs, EFT, and CTCS). In all innovations exceptCTCS, the elderly used television less than thenonelderly as a source of information about the innovation.In all innovations except EFT, the elderly useda newspaper as a source to a greater extent than thenonelderly. As predicted by Phillips and Sternthal(1977), in all four cases smaller percentages of the elderlythan the nonelderly heard about the innovationfrom friends or neighbors.It was expected that the elderly group of respondentswould use mass media and family more frequently thanfriends and neighbors as sources of information aboutinnovations. With three of the innovations (all butCTCS), mass media was the most frequently used sourceof information other than direct experience. However,friends and neighbors outranked family members as themost frequently used sources in three of the four innovations.Mass media appears to be a very importantsource of information, as predicted, but family membersseem to be less important than friends and neighbors.Elderly respondents used newspaper to a greater extentthan they used television as a source of information.With all four innovations, the percentages of elderlyrespondents who read about the innovation in thenewspaper were higher than the percentages who heardabout the innovation on television. The finding that theelderly relied on newspapers to a greater extent thantelevision supports research on age differences in learning.With newspaper, the information presentation isself-paced, thus reducing the chance of learning deficienciesassociated with externally paced presentation(Phillips and Sternthal 1977).Interesting results emerged from the examination oftrial and adoption patterns of the elderly and nonelderlysamples. Significant associations were found betweenage and trial (decision stage of the process) in all chisquareanalyses except one (Have you ever shopped ina grocery store especially to try scanners?). Differentpatterns of trial emerged with the four innovations.With scanners, ATMs, and CTCS, smaller percentagesof the elderly than the nonelderly had used the innovationon a limited basis. On the other hand, a largerpercentage of elderly consumers than nonelderly consumershad used EFT. Significant associations were alsofound between age and adoption (implementation stage)for all innovations except scanners. Once again, lowerpercentages of the elderly respondents had adoptedATMs and CTCS, but higher percentages of the elderlyhad adopted EFT than had younger respondents.In the trial and adoption of grocery scanners, the absenceof significant differences between the two groupsmay be due to their lack of mobility and consequentinability to change stores ("The Older American" 198 1)even if they dislike the technology. Unlike the othertechnologies studied, the elderly may have little choicein the adoption of scanners.The finding that the elderly tried and adopted ATMsand CTCS less than the nonelderly supports previousresearch (Bearden and Mason 1979; Kerschner andChelsvig 198 1; Robertson 197 1). Contrary to predictions,however, the elderly in this study had tried andadopted EFT to a significantly greater extent than theiryounger counterparts. An explanation for this findingis that EFT offers a relative advantage to the elderlyover conventional deposits, while ATMs and CTCS arenot perceived by the elderly to be superior to existingalternatives. This explanation is supported by the reasonsgiven by the elderly for adoption and nonadoptionof the innovations: elderly respondents often said theythought EFT was "safer" and "more convenient,"whereas ATMs were "too impersonal" and "not as safe"and CTCS were "not needed."

ELDERLY'S ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGIES 357Significant associations between age and satisfactionwere found for only six of the 16 attributes concerningthe technologies. With five of these six significant differences,many of which reflected small actual differencesbetween groups, the percentage of the elderly whowere satisfied was higher than the percentage of thenonelderly who reported satisfaction, confirming predictions.The absence of significant differences in satisfactionon the majority of attributes, however, contradictspast research (Ash, Gardiner, and Quelch 1983).Several limitations of the study must be acknowledged.The samples, although random, were limited toa two-state area, thus limiting the generalizability ofthese results. Second, the usual caveats applied to theuse of mail questionnaires must be acknowledged (e.g.,inability to clarify or probe; lack of control over whocompletes the questionnaire). Third, technologies usedin the study were not introduced simultaneously in allareas (e.g., grocery scanners had been available in someareas for several years but in other areas only formonths). This time variance may account for variationsin the adoption process, but probably affected the elderlyand the nonelderly samples equally.CONCLUSIONTechnology is increasingly influential in consumers'interactions with the marketplace. The elderly, a growingconsumer segment, have traditionally been consideredresistant to change. Consumer researchers mustbe concerned with how the elderly accept or resistchange so that marketing technologies are developedthat meet the needs of this segment. Technologies thatoffer superior efficiency and/or effectiveness can thenbe communicated to elderly consumers in ways thatcan speed the adoption process for individuals and thediffusion process within the elderly population as awhole.The results of this study suggest that organizationsinterested in communicating with the elderly about innovationsshould contact them directly (e.g., throughvehicles such as Modern Maturity, a magazine directedto the elderly), rather than rely on publicity or wordof-mouth.While consumers often consult multiplesources of information, print media should be emphasizedin communicating the benefits of the innovationto the elderly market. The acceptance of electronicfunds transfer within the elderly segment demonstratesthat elderly consumers do accept change when the technologymeets their needs and is effectively communicated.[Received April 1984. Revised June 1985.]REFERENCESAsh, Stephen B., Daniel F. Gardiner, and John A. Quelch(1982), "Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction inthe Elderly Market," in New Findings on Consumer Satisfactionand Complaining, eds. Ralph L. Day and H.Keith Hunt, St. Louis, MO: Proceedings of the 5th AnnualConsumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction and ComplaintBehavior Conference, 86-98.Bearden, William 0. and J. Barry Mason (1979), "ElderlyUse of In-Store Information Sources and Dimensions ofProduct Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction," Journal of Retailing,55 (Spring), 79-91.Bernhardt, Kenneth L. (1981), "Consumer Problems andComplaint Actions of Older Americans: A NationalView," Journal of Retailing, 57 (Fall), 107-123.Botwinick, J. (1973), Aging and Behavior, New York:Springer.Goldstein, Sidney (1968), "The Aged Segment of the Market,1950 and 1960," Journal oJfMarketing, 32 (April), 62-68.Harris, Brian F. and Michael K. Mills (1981), "The Acceptanceof Technological Change in Retailing: The Caseof Scanners and Item Price Removal," in The MarketingEnvironment: New Theories and Applications, Series No.47, eds. Kenneth Bernhardt et al., Chicago: AmericanMarketing Association, 66-69.Kasteler, Josephine M., Robert M. Gay, and Max J. Caruth(1968), "Involuntary Relocation of the Elderly," Gerontologist,8 (4), 276-279.Kerschner, Paul A. and Kathleen A. Chelsvig (1981), "TheAged User and Technology," paper presented at theConference on Communications Technology and theElderly: Issues and Forecasts, Cleveland, OH.Lumpkin, James R. and Barnett A. Greenberg (1982), "Apparel-ShoppingPatterns of the Elderly Consumer,"Journal of Retailing, 58 (Winter), 68-89."The Older American," (1981), Progressive Grocer, (May),71-72.Phillips, Lynn W. and Brian Sternthal (1977), "Age Differencesin Information Processing: A Perspective on theAged Consumer," Journal of Marketing Research, 14(November), 444-457.Pollman, A. William and Alton C. Johnson (1974), "Resistanceto Change, Early Retirement and Managerial Decisions,"Industrial Gerontology, 1 (1), 33-41.Pommer, Michael D., Eric N. Berkowitz, and John R. Walton(1980), "UPC Scanning: An Assessment of Shopper Responseto Technological Changes," Journal ofRetailing,56 (Summer), 25-44.Robertson, Thomas S. (1971), Innovative Behavior andCommunication, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Rogers, Everett M. (1983), Diffusion of Innovations, NewYork: The Free Press.Uhl, K., R. Andrus, and L. Poulson (1970), "How Are LaggardsDifferent? An Empirical Inquiry," Journal of MarketingResearch, 7 (February), 51-54.U.S. Department of Commerce (1980), Statistical Abstractof the U.S., 101st ed., Washington, D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.