Recognising Diversity in Older Adults' Cybersecurity Needs
Pages 437 - 445
Abstract
Older adults continue to be targeted by cybersecurity attacks: a trend which shows no signs of slowing, and one that has become even more problematic given that many older adults adopted new digital technologies during the Covid-19 lockdowns. Yet there remains a scarcity of solutions designed to help older adults protect themselves online. In part, this is due to a lack of understanding of the specific needs of older adults, who are the fastest growing, and arguably most technologically diverse population on the internet. This study draws upon recent qualitative research to identify key dimensions which are likely to influence older adult cybersecurity behaviour and subsequent vulnerability. We show how these dimensions can be used, for example, to develop a wide range of personas that help illustrate the range of abilities and attitudes in the older adult population. The dimensions outlined here can be used to help researchers, designers, and developers better understand the diverse needs of older adult users when developing digital or security solutions for this population.
References
[1]
Age-UK 2015. Over half of people aged 65 + targeted by fraudsters. Age UK. April 2015 (2015), 2015–2017.
[2]
Asmar, A. 2020. Social support for digital inclusion: Towards a typology of social support patterns. Social Inclusion. 8, 2 (2020), 138–150.
[3]
Bada, M. Cyber Security Awareness Campaigns: Why do they fail to change behaviour?
[4]
Birkland, J.L.H. 2019. Gerontechnology: understanding older adult information and communication technology use. Emerald Publishing Limited.
[5]
Blanco, T. 2017. Deconstructing the Tower of Babel: a design method to improve empathy and teamwork competences of informatics students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 27, 2 (2017), 307–328.
[6]
Briggs, P. 2012. Invisible design: Exploring insights and ideas through ambiguous film scenarios. Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference, DIS ’12. June (2012), 534–543.
[7]
Chiappetta, M. 2017. The Technostress: definition, symptoms and risk prevention. Senses Sci. 4, 1 (2017), 358–361.
[8]
Chiu, C.J. and Liu, C.W. 2017. Understanding Older Adult's Technology Adoption and Withdrawal for Elderly Care and Education: Mixed Method Analysis from National Survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 19, 11 (2017), e374.
[9]
Chiu, C.J. and Liu, C.W. 2017. Understanding older adult's technology adoption and withdrawal for elderly care and education: Mixed method analysis from national survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 19, 11 (2017), 1–11.
[10]
Cooper, A. 1999. The Inmates are Running the Asylum. 17–17.
[11]
Cosco, T.D. 2021. Covid-19, social isolation, and mental health among older adults:a digital catch-22. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 23, 5 (2021), 22–24.
[12]
Coventry, L. 2014. Using behavioural insights to improve the public ’ s use of cyber security best practices improve the public ’ s use of cyber. Project Report. Government Office for Science. (2014), 1–20.
[13]
Damodaran, L. and Sandhu, J. 2016. The role of a social context for ICT learning and support in reducing digital inequalities for older ICT users. International Journal of Learning Technology. 11, 2 (2016), 1–20.
[14]
D'Arcy, J. 2014. Understanding Employee Responses to Stressful Information Security Requirements: A Coping Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems. 31, 2 (2014), 285–318.
[15]
Demographics of Internet and Home Broadband Usage in the United States: 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/?menuItem=9a15d0d3-3bff-4e9e-a329-6e328bc7bcce. Accessed: 2021-09-08.
[16]
Derynda, B. 2020. Technology Adoption Among Seniors During COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts Mental Health and Feelings of Companionship. Innovation in Aging. 4, Supplement_1 (Dec. 2020), 965–965.
[17]
van Deursen, A.J.A.M. and van Dijk, J.A.G.M. 2019. The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media and Society. 21, 2 (2019), 354–375.
[18]
Dinev, T. and Hu, Q. 2007. The centrality of awareness in the formation of user behavioral intention toward protective information technologies. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 8, 7 (2007), 386–408.
[19]
Dupree, J.L. 2016. Privacy personas: Clustering users via attitudes and behaviors toward security practices. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. (2016), 5228–5239.
[20]
Friemel, T.N. 2016. The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society. 18, 2 (Feb. 2016), 313–331.
[21]
Frik, A. 2019. Privacy and security threat models and mitigation strategies of older adults. Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2019. (2019), 21–40.
[22]
Haase, K.R. 2021. Older adults’ experiences with using technology for socialization during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cross-sectional survey study. JMIR Aging. 4, 2 (2021).
[23]
Helsper, E.J. and Reisdorf, B.C. 2017. The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great Britain and Sweden: Changing reasons for digital exclusion. New Media and Society. 19, 8 (2017), 1253–1270.
[24]
James, B.D. 2014. Correlates of Susceptibility to Scams in Older Adults Without Dementia. Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect. 26, 2 (Mar. 2014), 107–122.
[25]
Karaoglu, G. 2021. Changing Technologies, Changing Lives: Older Adults ’ Perspectives on the Benefits of Using New Technologies. 15, (2021), 3887–3907.
[26]
Kim, E. 2019. From innocent irene to parental patrick: Framing user characteristics and personas to design for cybersecurity. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED. 2019-Augus, AUGUST (2019), 1773–1782.
[27]
King 1998. Template analysis. Qualitative methods and analysis in organizational research: A practical guide. Sage Publications Ltd. 118–134.
[28]
Kropczynski, J. 2021. Towards Building Community Collective Efficacy for Managing Digital Privacy and Security within Older Adult Communities. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction. 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1–27.
[29]
LaRose, R. 2008. Promoting personal responsibility for internet safety. Communications of the ACM. 51, 3 (2008), 71–76.
[30]
Lazarus, R.S. and DeLongis, A. 1983. Psychological stress and coping in aging. American Psychologist. 38, 3 (1983), 245–254.
[31]
Lebek, B. 2014. Information security awareness and behavior: A theory-based literature review. Management Research Review. 37, 12 (2014), 1049–1092.
[32]
Lee, M. 2020. Developing personas & use cases with user survey data: A study on the millennials’ media usage. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 54, June 2019 (2020), 102051.
[33]
Lee, N.M. 2018. Fake news, phishing, and fraud: a call for research on digital media literacy education beyond the classroom. Communication Education. 67, 4 (2018), 460–466.
[34]
LexisNexis 2021. Fraud - The Facts.
[35]
Maddux, J.E. and Rogers, R.W. 1983. Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 19, 5 (1983), 469–479.
[36]
Mariano, J. 2022. Too old for technology? Stereotype threat and technology use by older adults. Behaviour & Information Technology. 41, 7 (May 2022), 1503–1514.
[37]
Mariano, J. 2021. Too old for technology? Stereotype threat and technology use by older adults. Behaviour and Information Technology. (2021).
[38]
Marques, S. 2020. Determinants of ageism against older adults: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 17, 7 (2020).
[39]
Marston, H.R. 2019. Older Adults’ Perceptions of ICT: Main Findings from the Technology In Later Life (TILL) Study. Healthcare. 7, 3 (Jul. 2019), 86.
[40]
McCormac, A. 2017. Individual differences and Information Security Awareness. Computers in Human Behavior. 69, (2017), 151–156.
[41]
McNeill, A. 2017. Functional privacy concerns of older adults about pervasive health-monitoring systems. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. Part F1285, (2017), 96–102.
[42]
Mendel, T. and Toch, E. 2019. My mom was getting this popup: Understanding motivations and processes in helping older relatives with mobile security and privacy. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies. 3, 4 (2019).
[43]
Mentis, H.M. 2019. Upside and downside risk in online security for older adults with mild cognitive impairment. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. (2019), 1–13.
[44]
Miaskiewicz, T. and Kozar, K.A. 2011. Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes? Design Studies. 32, 5 (2011), 417–430.
[45]
Morrison, B. 2021. How do Older Adults feel about engaging with Cyber-Security? Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 3, 5 (2021), 1033–1049.
[46]
Morrison, B.A. 2020. Technological Change in the Retirement Transition and the Implications for Cybersecurity Vulnerability in Older Adults. Frontiers in Psychology. 11, April (2020), 1–13.
[47]
Munanga, A. 2019. A New and Growing Problem for Older Adults. (2019), 2017–2020.
[48]
Murthy, S. 2021. Individually Vulnerable, Collectively Safe: The Security and Privacy Practices of Households with Older Adults. 5, April (2021), 1–24.
[49]
Nicholson, J. 2019. “If It's Important It Will Be A Headline”: Cybersecurity Information Seeking in Older Adults. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. (2019).
[50]
Nicholson, J. 2021. Training and Embedding Cybersecurity Guardians in Older Communities. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. (2021), 1–15.
[51]
Office for National Statistics 2019. Exploring the UK s digital divide.pdf. March (2019).
[52]
Parsons, K. 2014. Determining employee awareness using the Human Aspects of Information Security Questionnaire (HAIS-Q). Computers and Security. 42, (2014), 165–176.
[53]
Petrie, H. 2023. Talking ‘bout my Generation … or not?: The Digital Technology Life Experiences of Older People. Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg Germany, Apr. 2023), 1–9.
[54]
Pruitt, J. and Grudin, J. 2003. Personas: Practice and Theory. Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences - DUX ’03 (New York, New York, USA, 2003), 1.
[55]
Radovanović, D. 2020. Digital literacy key performance indicators for sustainable development. Social Inclusion. 8, 2 (2020), 151–167.
[56]
Reisdorf, B. and Rhinesmith, C. 2020. Digital inclusion as a core component of social inclusion. Social Inclusion. 8, 2 (2020), 132–137.
[57]
Robinson, L. 2015. Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information Communication and Society. 18, 5 (2015), 569–582.
[58]
Sannd, P. and Cook, D.M. 2018. Older Adults and the Authenticity of Emails: Grammar, Syntax, and Compositional Indicators of Social Engineering in Ransomware and Phishing Attacks. 14th International Conference on Information Processing: Internet of Things, ICInPro 2018 - Proceedings. (2018).
[59]
Schreurs, K. 2017. Problematizing the Digital Literacy Paradox in the Context of Older Adults’ ICT Use: Aging, Media Discourse, and Self-Determination. Canadian Journal of Communication. 42, 2 (2017), 359–377.
[60]
Schulz, R. 2015. Advancing the aging and technology agenda in gerontology. Gerontologist. 55, 5 (2015), 724–734.
[61]
Seifert, A. 2020. The Digital Exclusion of Older Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Gerontological Social Work. 00, 00 (2020), 1–3.
[62]
Shao, J. 2019. Why are older adults victims of fraud? Current knowledge and prospects regarding older adults’ vulnerability to fraud. Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect. 31, 3 (2019), 225–243.
[63]
Staheli, D. 2014. Visualization evaluation for cyber security. (2014), 49–56.
[64]
Stephens, C. 2015. Volunteering as reciprocity: Beneficial and harmful effects of social policies to encourage contribution in older age. Journal of Aging Studies. 33, (2015), 22–27.
[65]
Stoll, J. 2008. Adapting personas for use in security visualization design. Mathematics and Visualization. (2008), 39–52.
[66]
Strawser, B.J. and Joy, D.J. 2015. Cyber Security and User Responsibility: Surprising Normative Differences. Procedia Manufacturing. 3, Ahfe (2015), 1101–1108.
[67]
Todd D. Nelson 2005. Ageism: Prejudice against our feared future self. Journal of Social Issues. 61, 2 (2005), 207–221.
[68]
Tsai, H.S. 2016. Understanding online safety behaviors: A protection motivation theory perspective. Computers & Security. 59, (Jun. 2016), 138–150.
[69]
User Personas for Privacy and Security: 2015. .
[70]
Van Bavel, R. 2019. Using protection motivation theory in the design of nudges to improve online security behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 123, (Mar. 2019), 29–39.
[71]
Vines, J. 2015. An Age-Old Problem: Examining the Discourses of Ageing in HCI and Strategies for Future Research. Tochi. 22, 1 (2015), 1–27.
[72]
Vuorikari, R. 2016. DigComp 2.0 - The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens.
Recommendations
Recruiting Older Adults in the Wild: Reflections on Challenges and Lessons Learned from Research Experience
PervasiveHealth '18: Proceedings of the 12th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for HealthcareIt is important to understand the older adults prior to the design process. The understanding can better facilitate design conversations between the researchers and the older adults. In this paper, we discussed our experiences of building a relationship ...
Older Adults and Free/Open Source Software: A Diary Study of First-Time Contributors
OpenSym '14: Proceedings of The International Symposium on Open CollaborationThe global population is aging rapidly, and older adults are becoming increasingly technically savvy. This paper explores ways to engage these individuals to contribute to free/open source software (FOSS) projects. We conducted a pilot diary study to ...
Functional privacy concerns of older adults about pervasive health-monitoring systems
PETRA '17: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive EnvironmentsTechnologies designed to support ageing can be deemed to be ageist in that they often exhibit a benevolent paternalism that tries to 'protect' older people. Often this involves gathering extensive data to monitor physical and cognitive decline at the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
September 2023
560 pages
ISBN:9798400701160
DOI:10.1145/3582515
Copyright © 2023 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 06 September 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
Conference
GoodIT '23
Sponsor:
GoodIT '23: ACM International Conference on Information Technology for Social Good
September 6 - 8, 2023
Lisbon, Portugal
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 858Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)772
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)85
Reflects downloads up to 14 Oct 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatGet Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in