KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 29

65 YAŞ ÜSTÜ BİREYLERİN DİJİTAL BECERİLERİNİN ÇEŞİTLİ DEĞİŞKENLER AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ

INVESTIGATION OF 65+ INDIVIDUALS' DIGITAL SKILLS IN TERMS OF VARIOUS VARIABLES

Ayşin Gaye Üstün(SİNOP ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-9564-0761
Sayfa
440–458
Yayın Tarihi
2025-04-30
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Araştırmada, problem çözme beceri puanlarının eğitim durumlarına göre farklılık gösterdiği; bilgi okur-yazarlığı, iletişim, güvenlik ve problem çözme puanlarının sosyal medya kullanımıyla; bilgi okur-yazarlığı puanlarının ise internette olumsuz deneyimlerle anlamlı bir ilişki gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Yaşlılık, bireylerin fiziksel, bilişsel ve sosyal yeteneklerinde değişimlerin yaşandığı bir dönem olup, bu değişimler dijital teknolojilerle etkileşimlerini etkilemektedir. 65 yaş ve üzeri bireylerin dijital becerileri, teknolojinin günlük yaşamdaki rolünü anlamaları ve etkin kullanımları açısından önemlidir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu çalışmada, Sinop Üçüncü Yaş Üniversitesi’ne kayıtlı 142 bireyin dijital becerilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Araştırmada, problem çözme beceri puanlarının eğitim durumlarına göre farklılık gösterdiği; bilgi okur-yazarlığı, iletişim, güvenlik ve problem çözme puanlarının sosyal medya kullanımıyla; bilgi okur-yazarlığı puanlarının ise internette olumsuz deneyimlerle anlamlı bir ilişki gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:142 birey
⚙️Değişkenler:Dijital Okuryazarlık · Dijital Beceri · 65 Yaş ve Üstü

Özet

Yaşlılık, bireylerin fiziksel, bilişsel ve sosyal yeteneklerinde değişimlerin yaşandığı bir dönem olup, bu değişimler dijital teknolojilerle etkileşimlerini etkilemektedir. 65 yaş ve üzeri bireylerin dijital becerileri, teknolojinin günlük yaşamdaki rolünü anlamaları ve etkin kullanımları açısından önemlidir. Bu çalışmada, Sinop Üçüncü Yaş Üniversitesi’ne kayıtlı 142 bireyin dijital becerilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Karma yöntemle tasarlanan araştırmada nicel veriler “Dijital Yetkinlik Envanteri” ile, nitel veriler ise yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelerle toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde betimsel analiz, Mann-Whitney U ve Kruskal-Wallis H testleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada, problem çözme beceri puanlarının eğitim durumlarına göre farklılık gösterdiği; bilgi okur-yazarlığı, iletişim, güvenlik ve problem çözme puanlarının sosyal medya kullanımıyla; bilgi okur-yazarlığı puanlarının ise internette olumsuz deneyimlerle anlamlı bir ilişki gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, dijital beceri puanları ile bireylerin gelecekte internet üzerinden günlük işlerin yürütüleceğine olan inançları arasında anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur. Nitel bulgular, bireylerin dijital cihazları sosyal medya, haberleşme, bankacılık, alışveriş, haber okuma ve bilgi arama gibi amaçlarla kullandığını göstermektedir. Teknik sorunlar ve güvenlik endişeleri, kullanım sürecindeki temel zorluklardır. 65 yaş üstü bireylerin dijital teknolojileri kullanmadaki motivasyon kaynakları ise merak ve kolaylık sağlamadır. Bireylerin gelecekte dijital cihazları bağımsız kullanma ve yeni teknolojilere uyum sağlama beklentisi yüksektir. Bu doğrultuda, dijital okuryazarlık eğitimleri yaşlı bireylerin özelliklerine uygun şekilde tasarlanmalı ve yaşlılara yönelik teknolojiler erişilebilirlik ve sadeliğe odaklanmalıdır.

Abstract

Aging is a period in which individuals experience changes in their physical, cognitive, and social abilities, and these changes affect their interactions with digital technologies. The digital competencies of individuals aged 65 and over are important in terms of their understanding of the role of technology in daily life and their effective use. This study aimed to determine the digital competencies of 142 individuals enrolled in Sinop 3rd Age University. In the mixed-method study, quantitative data were collected with the “Digital Competency Inventory” and qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Descriptive analysis, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis H tests were used to analyze the data. In the study, it was found that problem-solving competency scores differed according to educational status; information literacy, communication, security, and problem-solving scores showed a significant relationship with social media use; and information literacy scores showed a significant relationship with negative experiences on the internet. In addition, a significant difference was found between digital competence scores and individuals' beliefs that daily tasks will be carried out over the internet in the future. Qualitative findings show that individuals use digital devices for purposes such as social media, communication, banking, shopping, reading news, and searching for information. Technical problems and security concerns are the main challenges in the usage process. The motivation sources of individuals over 65 years of age for using digital technologies are curiosity and convenience. Individuals have high expectations of using digital devices independently and adapting to new technologies in the future. Accordingly, digital literacy training should be designed by the characteristics of older individuals, and technologies for older adults should focus on accessibility and simplicity.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Üstün, A. G. (2025). 65 YAŞ ÜSTÜ BİREYLERİN DİJİTAL BECERİLERİNİN ÇEŞİTLİ DEĞİŞKENLER AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 440–458. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1621054

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (77)

  1. Akdağ, H., & Şiraz, F. (2021). Dijital vatandaşlığa dönüşüm (Türkiye özelinde): Literatür taraması. TÜRKAV Kamu Yönetimi Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 77-97.
  2. Ali Hafez, S., Mohamed El-Sayed El-sheikh, S., Abd El Fattah Ibrahim, N., & Youssef Gaid, J. (2024). Exploring digital literacy among community-dwelling older adults. Alexandria Scientific Nursing Journal, 26(2), 186-197. https://doi.org/10.21608/asalexu.2024.361332
  3. Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2023). The future of human agency. Pew Research Center.
  4. Atakişi, B., & Orhan, Ş. F. (2020). Orta yaş ve üstü yetişkinlerin günlük yaşamda internet kullanma durumlarının incelenmesi. Yıldız Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.51280/yjer.2020.001
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
  6. Bansal, N., & Choudhary, H. (2024). Growing old in the digital era: A qualitative study of internet use and outcomes among urban Indian older adults. Working with Older People, 28(4), 317-335. https://doi.org/10.1108/WWOP-08-2023-0032
  7. Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2015). Introduction to information science. Facet Publishing.
  8. Bugay, A., & Korkut-Owen, F. (2016). İletişim becerilerinin yordayıcıları: Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin kullanımı, benlik saygısı, dışa dönüklük ve cinsiyet. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(2), 542-554. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.26005
  9. Charness, N., & Boot, W. R. (2009). Aging and information technology use: Potential and barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 253-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01647.x
  10. Chiu, C. J., Tasi, W. C., Yang, W. L., & Guo, J. L. (2019). How to help older adults learn new technology? Results from a multiple case research interviewing the internet technology instructors at the senior learning center. Computers & Education, 129, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.020
  11. Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2013). Internet use among older adults: Association with health needs, psychological capital, and social capital. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(5), e2333. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2333
  12. Chopik, W. J. (2016). The benefits of social technology use among older adults are mediated by reduced loneliness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(9), 551–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0151
  13. Cotten, S., Yost, E., Berkowsky, R., Winstead, V., Anderson, W. (2016). Designing technology training for older adults in continuing care retirement communities. CRC Press.
  14. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
  15. Eshet, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93-106.
  16. European Commission. (2021). Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 2021: The digital skills gap in Europe. Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/
  17. Eurostat. (2020). Ageing Europe. Looking at the lives of older people in the EU. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2785/628105
  18. Flauzino, K. D. L., Pimentel, M., Batistoni, S., Zaine, I., Vieira, L., Rodrigues, K., et al. (2020). Digital literacy for older adults: Perceptions about teaching-learning. Educaçao & Realidade, 4, 45. https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-6236104913
  19. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, M. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). MacGraw-Hill.
  20. Friemel, T. N. (2016). The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society, 18(2), 313-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814538648
  21. Gallistl, V., Rohner, R., Hengl, L., & Kolland, F. (2021). Doing digital exclusion–technology practices of older internet non-users. Journal of Aging Studies, 59, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2021.100973
  22. Gao, Y., Liang, J., & Xu, Z. (2024). Digital social media expression and social adaptability of the older adult driven by artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1424898. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1424898
  23. Gonçalves, V.P., de Almeida Neris, V.P., Seraphini, S., Dias, T.C.M., Pessin, G., Johnson, T., Ueyama, J. (2017). Providing adaptive smartphone interfaces targeted at elderly people: An approach that takes into account diversity among the elderly. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 16(1), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0429-9
  24. González, A., Ramírez, M. P., & Viadel, V. (2012). Attitudes of the elderly toward information and communications technologies. Educational Gerontology, 38(9), 585-594. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2011.595314
  25. Grilli, M. D., McVeigh, K. S., Hakim, Z. M., Wank, A. A., Getz, S. J., Levin, B. E.,. & Wilson, R. C. (2021). Is this phishing? Older age is associated with greater difficulty discriminating between safe and malicious emails. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(9), 1711-1715. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa228
  26. Gruenangerl, M., & Prandner, D. 2024. The contribution of digital technology training to the digital competency gap. A case study from Austria. In: 10th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’24). Valencia, 18-21 June 2024. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd24.2024.17322
  27. Hargittai, E., & Dobransky, K. (2017). Old dogs, new clicks: Digital inequality in skills and uses among older adults. Canadian Journal of Communication, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2017v42n2a3176
  28. Hargittai, E., Piper, A. M., & Morris, M. R. (2019). From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18, 881-890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0617-5
  29. Heart, T., & Kalderon, E. (2013). Older adults: Are they ready to adopt health-related ICT? International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(11), 209-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.03.002
  30. Hertzog, C., Pearman, A., Lustig, E., & Hughes, M. (2021). Fostering self-management of everyday memory in older adults: A new intervention approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 560056. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.560056
  31. Huang, G., Jia, W., & Yu, W. (2024). Media literacy interventions improve resilience to misinformation: A meta-analytic investigation of overall effect and moderating factors. Communication Research, 00936502241288103. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502241288103
  32. Iancu, I., Iancu, B. (2017). Elderly in the digital era. Theoretical Perspectives on Assistive Technologies, 5(60), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies5030060
  33. Illeris, K., & Ryan, C. (2020). Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists. in their own words. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 60(1), 138-143.
  34. İmançer, E.D. (2020). Tazelenme üniversitesi ege kampüsündeki 60 yaş ve üzeri bireylerde obezite varlığı, beden ağırlığı algısı ve ilişkili etmenler [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi.
  35. İştar-Işıklı, E. (2024). Dijitalleşme sürecinde yaşlı bireylerin karşılaştığı zorluklar ve çözüm önerileri. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 23(92). https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1537052
  36. Kalınkara, V., & Sarı, İ. (2018). Yaşlıların bilgi teknolojileri kullanımı ve yaşam doyumu: Potansiyel ve engeller, ergonomik yaklaşım. Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, 6 (ÖS: Ergonomi2017), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.21923/jesd.367367
  37. Lei, X., Matovic, D., Leung, W. Y., Viju, A., & Wuthrich, V. M. (2024). The relationship between social media use and psychosocial outcomes in older adults: A systematic review. International Psychogeriatrics, 36 (9), 714-746. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610223004519
  38. Leist, A. K. (2013). Social media use of older adults: A mini-review. Gerontology, 59(4), 378–384. https://doi.org/10.1159/000346818
  39. Lenehan, M. E., Summers, M. J., Saunders, N. L., Summers, J. J., & Vickers, J. C. (2015). Relationship between education and age‐related cognitive decline: A review of recent research. Psychogeriatrics, 15(2), 154-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12083
  40. Llorente-Barroso, C., Kolotouchkina, O., & Mañas-Viniegra, L. (2021). The enabling role of ICT to mitigate the negative effects of emotional and social loneliness of the elderly during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(8), 3923. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18083923
  41. Lövdén, M., Fratiglioni, L., Glymour, M. M., Lindenberger, U., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2020). Education and cognitive functioning across the life span. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 21(1), 6-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100620920576
  42. McGrew, S., & Kohnen, A. M. (2024). Tackling misinformation through online information literacy: Structural and contextual considerations. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 56(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2023.2280385
  43. Miller, L. M. S., Callegari, R. A., Abah, T., & Fann, H. (2024). Digital literacy training for low-ıncome older adults through undergraduate community-engaged learning: Single-group pretest-posttest study. JMIR Aging, 7, e51675. https://doi.org/10.2196/51675
  44. Morrison, B. A., Nicholson, J., Coventry, L., & Briggs, P. (2023, September). Recognising diversity in older adults' cybersecurity needs. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social Good (pp. 437-445).
  45. Nakahara, K., & Yokoi, K. (2024). Role of meaningful social participation and technology use in mitigating loneliness and cognitive decline among older adults. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 78(6). https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2024.050794
  46. Nimrod, G. (2017). Older audiences in the digital media environment. Information, Communication & Society, 20(2), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1164740
  47. Özbek, Ç., Ulubey, Ö., Adnan, M., & Kapucu, N. K. (2022). Yaşlılara yönelik dijital yetkinlik envanterinin geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 57, 98-122.
  48. Özer, İ. B. (2024). Yaşlı dostu dijital ekosistem oluşturmak. Senectus, 2(1), 115-118. https://doi.org/10.26650/senectus.2024.2.1.0027
  49. Pacheco, E. (2024). Older adults’ safety and security online: A post-pandemic exploration of attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Digital Media & Interaction, 7(17), 107-126. https://doi.org/10.34624/jdmi.v7i17.37825
  50. Pangrazio, L., & Sefton-Green, J. (2020). The social utility of ‘data literacy’. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(2), 208-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1707223
  51. Pihlainen, K., Korjonen-Kuusipuro, K., & K ̈arn ̈a, E. (2021). Perceived benefits from non formal digital training sessions in later life: Views of older adult learners, peer tutors and teachers. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 40(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2021.1919768
  52. Quan-Haase, A., Williams, C., Kicevski, M., Elueze, I., & Wellman, B. (2018). Dividing the grey divide: Deconstructing myths about older adults’ online activities, skills, and attitudes. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(9), 1207-1228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218777572
  53. Quinn, K. (2018). Cognitive effects of social media use: A case of older adults. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 2056305118787203. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118787203
  54. Reneland-Forsman, L. (2018). ‘Borrowed access’–the struggle of older persons for digital participation. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 37(3), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2018.1473516
  55. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B.,. & Tenopir, C. (2008, July). The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. In Aslib Proceedings, 60 (4), 290-310. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530810887953
  56. Samita, M., & Kauts, A. (2022). Facebook as a supporting tool for enhancing social interaction skills in a physics teaching subject. Vidyodaya Journal of Science, 25(02), 129-137. https://doi.org/10.31357/vjs.v25i02.6180
  57. Schroeder, T., Dodds, L., Georgiou, A., Gewald, H., & Siette, J. (2023). Older adults and new technology: Mapping review of the factors associated with older adults’ intention to adopt digital technologies. JMIR Aging, 6(1), e44564. https://doi.org/10.2196/44564
  58. Seifert, A., Cotten, S., & Xie, B. (2021). A double burden of exclusion? Digital and social exclusion of older adults in times of COVID-19. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(3), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa098
  59. Shang, Y., Wu, Z., Du, X., Jiang, Y., Ma, B., & Chi, M. (2022). The psychology of the internet fraud victimization of older adults: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 912242. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.912242
  60. Sheahan, J., Hjorth, L., Figueiredo, B., Martin, D. M., Reid, M., Aleti, T., & Buschgens, M. (2022). Co-creating ICT risk strategies with older Australians: A workshop model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010052
  61. Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods, 1(1), 2-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906293042
  62. Terakye, G., Güner, P. (1997). Kriz potansiyeli taşıyan bir dönem: Yaşlılık. Kriz Dergisi, 5 (2), 95- 101.
  63. Terlemez, M., Ulutak, İ., Demiray, E., Candemir, Ö., & Öztürk, S. (2024). Aktif yaşlanma ve tazelenme üniversiteleri: Anadolu Üniversitesi örneği. Social Science Development Journal, 9(48), 24-47. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14464263
  64. Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2019). Cognitive aging and dementia: A life-span perspective. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 1(1), 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-085204
  65. van Boekel, L., Peek, S., Luijkx, K. (2017). Diversity in older adults? Use of the internet: Identifying subgroups through latent class analysis. Med. Internet. Res. 19(5). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6853
  66. van Deursen, A. J., & Helsper, E. J. (2015). The third-level digital divide: Who benefits most from being online? Communication and Information Technologies Annual, 10(2), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010002
  67. van Dijk, J. (2017). Afterword: The state of digital divide theory. In M. Ragnedda, & G. Muscher (Eds.), Theorizing digital divides (pp. 199–206). Routledge.
  68. Volkmann, T., Miller, I., & Jochems, N. (2020). Addressing fear and lack of knowledge of older adults regarding social network sites. In J. Zhou & G. Salvendy (Eds.), Human aspects of IT for the aged population. Technology and society: 6th International Conference, ITAP 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd HCI International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part III (pp. 114–130). Springer International Publishing.
  69. Vroman, K.G., Arthanat, S., Lysack, C. (2015). Who over 65 is online? Older adults’ dispositions toward information communication technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.018
  70. Wang, H., Yang, M. S., & Choi, Y. K. (2021). Barriers that contribute to the digital divide among older community dwelling adults in later life. Innovation in Aging, 5(1), 869.
  71. World Health Organization (2015): World report on ageing and health. http://www.who.int/ageing/events/world-report-2015-launch/en/
  72. Xie, B., Charness, N., Fingerman, K., Kaye, J., Kim, M. T., & Khurshid, A. (2021). When going digital becomes a necessity: Ensuring older adults’ needs for information, services, and social inclusion during COVID-19. In Older Adults and COVID-19, 181-191. Routledge.
  73. Xu, L., Lam, Y. Y., Ng, D. T. K., Peng, P., Suen, W. L., Lee, C. S. Y., & Chu, S. K. W. (2024). Digital literacy education for older adults: A scoping review. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 691-696. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1081
  74. Zahodne, L. B., Glymour, M. M., Sparks, C., Bontempo, D., Dixon, R. A., MacDonald, S. W., & Manly, J. J. (2011). Education does not slow cognitive decline with aging: 12-year evidence from the Victoria longitudinal study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17(6), 1039-1046. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617711001044
  75. Grilli, M. D., McVeigh, K. S., Hakim, Z. M., Wank, A. A., Getz, S. J., Levin, B. E.,. & Wilson, R. C. (2021). Is this phishing? Older age is associated with greater difficulty discriminating between safe and malicious emails. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(9), 1711-1715. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa228
  76. Illeris, K., & Ryan, C. (2020). Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists. in their own words. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 60(1), 138-143.
  77. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B.,. & Tenopir, C. (2008, July). The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. In Aslib Proceedings, 60 (4), 290-310. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530810887953