THE OLDER ADULTS AND SENSE OF SMARTPHONE: ONE STEP TOWARDS TECHNOPHOBIA

Tarmizi Thalib

Abstract


The development of technology, especially smartphones, is increasing rapidly. This was responded to differently by various characteristics of the community, especially the older adults. With human limitations in the use of technology capable of producing technophobia. This study will explain what seniors include technophobia sufferers with these limitations and what characteristics and factors can surround them. This study uses qualitative research methods with a phenomenological approach. The subjects of this study were those who did not use a smartphone. Data analysis by determining what limits and who is investigated, data collection and phenomenological analysis of data. The results of this study concluded that the subject cannot be said to be a sufferer of technophobia. Characteristics that appear elderly in this study is the unwillingness to think of smartphones, incapable of thought, avoiding the use and discussion of the smartphone and the absence of intensive learning efforts. Affective dimensions that appear to be a differentiator in technophobia, namely the absence of envy and the attitude of accepting oneself (surrender). This characteristic leads the subject to the loss of the sense of smartphone. Factors that arise from the loss of sense of smartphone are sensing factors, cognitive abilities, family education and the complexity of smartphone tools.

Keywords: Older Adults, Sense of Smartphone, Technophobia

Full Text:

PDF

References


Dumanig, F.R. (2014). Social Capital and Politeness Strategies in Fostering Ethnic Relations in Malaysia and Philippines. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun. 2 (3): 23-38.

Horowitz, D.L. (2000). Ethnic Groups in Conflict, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kaylene, P., & Rosone, T. (2016). Multicultural Perspective On The Motivation of Students in Teaching Physical Education. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 4(1), 115-126.

Nata, Abuddin (2001). Pemikiran Para Tokoh Pendidikan Islam: Seri Kajian Filsafat Pendidikan Islam. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Acocella, JR. and Calhoun, J.F 1995. Psikologi tentang Penyesuaian dan Hubungan Kemanusiaan (Alih Bahasa, Satmoko, RS). Semarang: IKIP Press.

Amorim, C. (2005). Beyond Algorithmic Thinking: An Old New Challenge for Science Education, 13.

Argo, Karyono, & Kristiana. (2014). Kebermaknaan HIdup Mantan Punkers: Studi Kualitatif Fenomenologis, 9.

Arikunto, S. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Badar, M. A. (2013). Hubungan Dukungan Keluarga dengan Tingkat Kecemasan pada Pasien Fraktur di Ruang Rawat Inap Lontara II RSUP DR. Wahidin Sudirohusodo Makassar, 2, 12.

Bathelt, H. (2001). Regional competence and economic recovery: divergent growth paths in Boston’s high technology economy. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 13(4), 287–314.

Berkowitz, L. (2003). Emotional behavior: Mengenali perilaku dan tindakan kekerasan di lingkungan sekitar kita dan cara penanggulangannya. Buku Kesatu. Ahli Bahasa: Hartini Woro Susianti. Jakarta: PPM

Dhawan, S., & Sharma, V. K. (2015). Technophobic Attitude among the Students of Senior Secondary Level. Jan, Vol. 2, No. 16: 2790-2796.

Gülseçen, S., & Kubat, A. (t.t.). Teaching ICT to Teacher Candidates Using PBL: A Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation, 12.

Ha, J.-G., Page, T., & Thorsteinsson, G. (2011). A Study on Technophobia and Mobile Device Design. International Journal of Contents, 7(2), 17–25.

Hatta, K. (2015). Peran Orang Tua dalam Proses Pemulihan Trauma Anak, 18.

Judson, E. (2006). How Teachers Integrate Technology and Their Beliefs About Learning: Is There a Connection?, 18.

Karwowski, W. (2005). Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics, Vol. 48, No. 5: 436 – 463.

Korukonda, A. R., & Finn, S. (2003). An investigation of framing and scaling as confounding variables in information outcomes: The case of technophobia. Information Sciences, 155(1–2), 79–88.

Malta, S. (2009). Qualitative Interviewing of Older Adults: Offline Versus Online Methods. Era Conference.

Minderop, Albertine. 2010. Psikologi Sastra. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Muhadjir, Noeng. (2000). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Yogyakarta: Reka Serasin.

Oluwalola, F. K. (2015). Effect of Emotion on Distance e-Learning — The Fear of Technology. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 5(11), 966–970.

Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 73–101.

Poerwandari, E. K. (2011). Pendekatan Kualitatif untuk Penelitian Perilaku Manusia. Depok: LPSP3.

Rosen, L. D., & Maguire, P. (1990). Myths and realities of computerphobia: A meta-analysis. Anxiety Research, 3(3), 175–191.

Sanders, Patricia. 1982. Phenomenology: A new way of viewing organizational research. Academy Management Review 1982, Vol 7 no.3.

Sievert, M., Albritton, R.L., Roper, P., & Clayton, N. (1998). Investigating Computer anxiety in an academic Library. Information Technology and Libraries, Vol. 7, Iss. 3: 243.

Scull, C. . (1999). Computer anxiety at a graduate computer center: computer factors, support, and situational pressures. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(2), 213–226.

Suharyat, Y. (2009). Hubungan antara Sikap, Minat, dan Perilaku Manusia, 19.

Zimmermann, C. (2004). Denial of impending death: a discourse analysis of the palliative care literature. Social Science & Medicine, 59(8), 1769–1780.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.