pith. sign in

arxiv: 2505.18326 · v2 · submitted 2025-05-23 · 💻 cs.CY · cs.HC

Interdependent Navigation and Pragmatic Disengagement: How Older Korean Immigrants Selectively Engage with Digital Technologies

Jeongone Seo , Tawfiq Ammari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 12:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CY cs.HC
keywords older Korean immigrantsdigital non-usepragmatic disengagementinterdependent navigationdata refusalCSCWaging and technologyfamily obligation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Older Korean immigrants actively disengage from some digital tools to preserve dignity and family obligations.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that non-use of digital technologies among older Korean immigrants is frequently an active, culturally grounded choice rather than a simple lack of skills. Participants practice pragmatic disengagement by avoiding emotionally taxing or linguistically difficult technologies and interdependent navigation by sharing digital tasks within family networks. A sympathetic reader would care because this reframing moves design focus from individual training to supporting relational and dignity-preserving practices for aging immigrant communities.

Core claim

Through a community-based study with 22 older Korean immigrants in the greater New York area, the authors identify pragmatic disengagement and interdependent navigation as active strategies. These practices show that non-use often functions as a culturally grounded form of data refusal shaped by values of dignity and family obligation rather than skill deficits alone.

What carries the argument

Pragmatic disengagement and interdependent navigation as active, culturally shaped strategies for selective technology engagement.

If this is right

  • Theories of non-use in CSCW should expand beyond accessibility to include cultural values of dignity and obligation.
  • Digital tools for aging immigrants should incorporate relational infrastructure that supports family collaboration.
  • Non-use can be reinterpreted as positive data refusal rather than a deficit to be fixed.
  • Community-based methods reveal these strategies more effectively than individual assessments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same patterns of selective disengagement may appear in other immigrant groups with strong family obligation norms.
  • Supporting interdependent navigation could help maintain social connections while respecting choices to avoid certain technologies.
  • Design that ignores these cultural strategies risks creating technologies that feel intrusive or burdensome to users.

Load-bearing premise

The observed patterns among these 22 New York-area participants represent deliberate cultural strategies that extend beyond this specific group.

What would settle it

A follow-up study with older Korean immigrants showing that non-use is driven mainly by skill deficits or access barriers rather than selective cultural choices would falsify the central interpretation.

read the original abstract

Older immigrant adults face unique barriers to digital participation, often framed as skill deficits. Through a community-based study with 22 older Korean immigrants in the greater New York area, we reframe these behaviors as active strategies. We identify pragmatic disengagement, where users selectively reject emotionally taxing or linguistically risky technologies, and interdependent navigation, where digital literacy operates as a distributed, relational resource rather than an individual skill. These practices reveal that non-use is often a culturally grounded form of "data refusal" shaped by values of dignity and family obligation. We contribute to CSCW by expanding theories of non-use beyond accessibility, offering design recommendations for "relational infrastructure" that supports dignity-preserving, collaborative engagement for aging immigrant populations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports findings from a community-based qualitative study with 22 older Korean immigrants in the greater New York area. It reframes observed patterns of selective technology non-use as active strategies rather than deficits: 'pragmatic disengagement' (rejecting emotionally taxing or linguistically risky tools) and 'interdependent navigation' (treating digital literacy as a distributed, relational resource across family networks). The central claim is that non-use is often a culturally grounded form of 'data refusal' shaped by values of dignity and family obligation. The work contributes to CSCW by expanding non-use theory beyond accessibility and offers design recommendations for 'relational infrastructure' that supports dignity-preserving collaborative engagement.

Significance. If the interpretations are substantiated, the paper offers a useful contribution to CSCW and HCI by shifting attention from individual skill/access barriers to relational and culturally specific dimensions of technology engagement among aging immigrant populations. The community-based framing and explicit linkage to dignity and obligation provide a productive counterpoint to deficit models, with potential to inform more context-sensitive design. The identification of interdependent navigation as a distributed resource is a clear conceptual strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: The study is described as community-based with 22 participants, yet no details are supplied on recruitment procedures, interview protocol development, transcription/coding process, or steps taken to validate interpretations (e.g., member checking, negative-case analysis, or explicit comparison against barrier-focused coding). These omissions directly affect the load-bearing claim that observed non-use reflects active, culturally grounded strategies rather than primarily skill or access issues.
  2. [Findings/Discussion] Findings/Discussion: The assertion that non-use is 'often' a culturally grounded 'data refusal' shaped by Korean values of dignity and family obligation rests on the analytic distinction drawn from this localized sample. Without reported disconfirmation of alternative explanations or discussion of how the sample's representativeness was assessed, the extension beyond the New York-area group and the 'often' qualifier remain under-supported.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The two core practices (pragmatic disengagement and interdependent navigation) are introduced in a single sentence; separating them more explicitly would improve the preview of the theoretical contribution.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive comments, which highlight important areas for strengthening the methodological transparency and scope of claims in our manuscript. We address each major comment below and outline specific revisions to the next version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: The study is described as community-based with 22 participants, yet no details are supplied on recruitment procedures, interview protocol development, transcription/coding process, or steps taken to validate interpretations (e.g., member checking, negative-case analysis, or explicit comparison against barrier-focused coding). These omissions directly affect the load-bearing claim that observed non-use reflects active, culturally grounded strategies rather than primarily skill or access issues.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current methods section is concise and omits several procedural details. In the revised manuscript, we will expand the Methods section to describe: recruitment via partnerships with Korean community centers and churches in the greater New York area using purposive and snowball sampling; collaborative development of the semi-structured interview protocol with input from community advisors to ensure cultural sensitivity; transcription by bilingual research assistants followed by iterative thematic coding in NVivo using a combination of inductive and deductive approaches; and validation steps including member checking with a subset of participants, negative-case analysis to test alternative interpretations, and explicit comparison of codes against a barrier-focused framework to substantiate the distinction between skill deficits and active disengagement strategies. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Findings/Discussion] Findings/Discussion: The assertion that non-use is 'often' a culturally grounded 'data refusal' shaped by Korean values of dignity and family obligation rests on the analytic distinction drawn from this localized sample. Without reported disconfirmation of alternative explanations or discussion of how the sample's representativeness was assessed, the extension beyond the New York-area group and the 'often' qualifier remain under-supported.

    Authors: We agree that our claims are derived from a localized sample of 22 participants and do not assert statistical representativeness for the broader population of older Korean immigrants. The qualifier 'often' is intended to reflect recurring patterns within this community-based study rather than a universal claim. In revision, we will: (1) explicitly state the geographic and demographic scope of the sample and add a dedicated limitations subsection discussing generalizability; (2) provide additional data excerpts and analytic notes showing how alternative explanations (e.g., primary skill or access barriers) were considered and disconfirmed through cases where participants demonstrated technical capability yet opted for disengagement due to dignity or relational concerns; and (3) soften language around extension beyond the sample while retaining the conceptual contribution. As a qualitative study, we cannot provide quantitative assessment of representativeness, but we can strengthen the transparency of our interpretive process. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in qualitative interpretive analysis

full rationale

This paper reports findings from a community-based qualitative study involving interviews with 22 older Korean immigrants. Its central claims reframe observed non-use behaviors as culturally grounded active strategies (pragmatic disengagement and interdependent navigation) drawn from participant accounts and values of dignity and family obligation. No quantitative modeling, fitted parameters, equations, predictions, or derivation chains are present. No self-citations serve as load-bearing premises for any result, and no steps reduce claims to inputs by construction or rename known results circularly. The analysis is self-contained within the interpretive framework applied to the collected data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central interpretive claims rest on the assumption that small-sample qualitative data can be read as evidence of active strategy rather than deficit, with no additional validation steps described.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Participant accounts and observations reliably indicate active strategic choices rather than skill deficits or exclusion.
    The paper's core reframing depends on this interpretive move.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5650 in / 1078 out tokens · 50297 ms · 2026-05-19T12:45:00.309457+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

125 extracted references · 125 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Tsai, and Frank Bentley

    Tawfiq Ammari, Jofish Kaye, Janice Y. Tsai, and Frank Bentley. 2019. Music, Search, and IoT: How People (Really) Use Voice Assistants.ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.26, 3, Article 17 (apr 2019), 28 pages. doi:10.1145/3311956

    work page doi:10.1145/3311956 2019

  2. [2]

    Toni C Antonucci, Kristine J Ajrouch, and Jasmine A Manalel. 2017. Social relations and technology: Continuity, context, and change.Innovation in aging1, 3 (2017), igx029

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    2005.Internet Society: The Internet in Everyday Life

    Maria Bakardjieva. 2005.Internet Society: The Internet in Everyday Life. SAGE Publications

    work page 2005

  4. [4]

    Ellen Balka and Ina Wagner. 2006. Making things work: dimensions of configurability as appropriation work. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work. 229–238

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    Liora Bar-Tur. 2021. Fostering well-being in the elderly: Translating theories on positive aging to practical approaches. Frontiers in Medicine8 (2021), 517226

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Biega, Benjamin Fish, Jundefineddrzej Niklas, and Luke Stark

    Solon Barocas, Asia J. Biega, Benjamin Fish, Jundefineddrzej Niklas, and Luke Stark. 2020. When not to design, build, or deploy. InProceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency(Barcelona, Spain)(FAT* ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 695. doi:10.1145/3351095.3375691 , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . ...

    work page doi:10.1145/3351095.3375691 2020

  7. [7]

    Baumer, Phil Adams, Vera D

    Eric P.S. Baumer, Phil Adams, Vera D. Khovanskaya, Tony C. Liao, Madeline E. Smith, Victoria Schwanda Sosik, and Kaiton Williams. 2013. Limiting, leaving, and (re)lapsing: an exploration of facebook non-use practices and experiences. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Paris, France)(CHI ’13). Association for Compu...

    work page doi:10.1145/2470654.2466446 2013

  8. [8]

    Baumer, Morgan G

    Eric P.S. Baumer, Morgan G. Ames, Jed R. Brubaker, Jenna Burrell, and Paul Dourish. 2014. Refusing, limiting, departing: why we should study technology non-use. InCHI ’14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Toronto, Ontario, Canada)(CHI EA ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 65–68. doi:10.1145/2559206.2559224

    work page doi:10.1145/2559206.2559224 2014

  9. [9]

    Caroline Bell, Cara Fausset, Sarah Farmer, Julie Nguyen, Linda Harley, and W Bradley Fain. 2013. Examining social media use among older adults. InProceedings of the 24th ACM conference on hypertext and social media. 158–163

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    1997.Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change

    Wiebe E Bijker. 1997.Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. MIT press

    work page 1997

  11. [11]

    Michael T Bixter, Kenneth A Blocker, Tracy L Mitzner, Akanksha Prakash, and Wendy A Rogers. 2019. Understanding the use and non-use of social communication technologies by older adults: A qualitative test and extension of the UTAUT model.Gerontechnology: international journal on the fundamental aspects of technology to serve the ageing society18, 2 (2019), 70

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Florian Brachten, Tobias Kissmer, and Stefan Stieglitz. 2021. The acceptance of chatbots in an enterprise context – A survey study.International Journal of Information Management60 (2021), 102375. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102375

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102375 2021

  13. [13]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?Qualitative Research in Psychology18, 3 (July 2021), 328–352. doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

    work page doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 2021

  14. [14]

    Tell It Like It Really Is

    Robin Brewer and Anne Marie Piper. 2016. "Tell It Like It Really Is": A Case of Online Content Creation and Sharing Among Older Adult Bloggers. InProceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(San Jose, California, USA)(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5529–5542. doi:10.1145/2858036.2858379

    work page doi:10.1145/2858036.2858379 2016

  15. [15]

    Brewer, Sarita Schoenebeck, Kerry Lee, and Haripriya Suryadevara

    Robin N. Brewer, Sarita Schoenebeck, Kerry Lee, and Haripriya Suryadevara. 2021. Challenging Passive Social Media Use: Older Adults as Caregivers Online.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.5, CSCW1, Article 123 (April 2021), 20 pages. doi:10.1145/3449197

    work page doi:10.1145/3449197 2021

  16. [16]

    Janette Brual, Cherry Chu, Jiming Fang, Cathleen Fleury, Vess Stamenova, Onil Bhattacharyya, and Mina Tadrous

    work page

  17. [17]

    Virtual care use among older immigrant adults in Ontario, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A repeated cross-sectional analysis.PLOS Digital Health2, 8 (2023), e0000092

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Zana Buçinca, Maja Barbara Malaya, and Krzysztof Z. Gajos. 2021. To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-making.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.5, CSCW1, Article 188 (April 2021), 21 pages. doi:10.1145/3449287

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1145/3449287 2021

  19. [19]

    Taina Bucher. 2019. The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. InThe social power of algorithms. Routledge, 30–44

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Marloes Bults, Catharina Margaretha van Leersum, Theodorus Johannes Josef Olthuis, Egbert Siebrand, Zohrah Malik, Lili Liu, Antonio Miguel-Cruz, Jan Seerp Jukema, and Marjolein Elisabeth Maria den Ouden. 2024. Acceptance of a digital assistant (Anne4Care) for older adult immigrants living with dementia: qualitative descriptive study.JMIR aging7 (2024), e50219

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Inha Cha and Richmond Y. Wong. 2025. Understanding Socio-technical Factors Configuring AI Non-Use in UX Work Practices. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 1110, 17 pages. doi:10.1145/3706598.3713140

    work page doi:10.1145/3706598.3713140 2025

  22. [22]

    and Yang, Qiang and Xie, Xing , title =

    Yupeng Chang, Xu Wang, Jindong Wang, Yuan Wu, Linyi Yang, Kaijie Zhu, Hao Chen, Xiaoyuan Yi, Cunxiang Wang, Yidong Wang, Wei Ye, Yue Zhang, Yi Chang, Philip S. Yu, Qiang Yang, and Xing Xie. 2024. A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models.ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.15, 3, Article 39 (March 2024), 45 pages. doi:10.1145/3641289

    work page doi:10.1145/3641289 2024

  23. [23]

    Yu-Hsin Chang, Andri Dayarana K Silalahi, and Kuan-Yin Lee. 2024. From uncertainty to tenacity: Investigating user strategies and continuance intentions in AI-powered ChatGPT with uncertainty reduction theory.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction(2024), 1–19

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Xin Chen, Susanne Frennert, and Britt Östlund. 2022. The use of information and communication technology among older immigrants in need of home care: a systematic literature review.Ageing International47, 2 (2022), 238–264

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Leah Chong, Guanglu Zhang, Kosa Goucher-Lambert, Kenneth Kotovsky, and Jonathan Cagan. 2022. Human confidence in artificial intelligence and in themselves: The evolution and impact of confidence on adoption of AI advice.Computers in Human Behavior127 (2022), 107018

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    William J Chopik. 2016. The benefits of social technology use among older adults are mediated by reduced loneliness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking19, 9 (2016), 551–556

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    Kelley Cotter. 2019. Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram.New media & society21, 4 (2019), 895–913. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: April 2026. Interdependent Navigation and Pragmatic Disengagement: How Older Korean Immigrants Selectively Engage with Digital Technologies 29

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    Alexandra S Creighton, Tanya E Davison, and David W Kissane. 2016. The prevalence of anxiety among older adults in nursing homes and other residential aged care facilities: a systematic review.International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry31, 6 (2016), 555–566

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    Cspuerh (Chen Sheng Hao). 2024. 10 Famous Pu Erh Tea Ceremonies Around the World. https://cspuerh.com/blogs/tea- 101/10-famous-pu-erh-tea-ceremonies-around-the-world Online; accessed 15-September-2025

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    Sara J Czaja, Walter R Boot, Neil Charness, Wendy A Rogers, and Joseph Sharit. 2018. Improving social support for older adults through technology: Findings from the PRISM randomized controlled trial.The Gerontologist58, 3 (2018), 467–477

    work page 2018

  31. [31]

    Jiamin Dai and Joanna McGrenere. 2025. Envisioning Financial Technology Support for Older Adults Through Cognitive and Life Transitions. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 291, 24 pages. doi:10.1145/3706598.3713427

    work page doi:10.1145/3706598.3713427 2025

  32. [32]

    Melissa Densmore. 2012. Claim mobile: when to fail a technology. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Austin, Texas, USA)(CHI ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1833–1842. doi:10.1145/2207676.2208319

    work page doi:10.1145/2207676.2208319 2012

  33. [33]

    Smit Desai and Michael Twidale. 2023. Metaphors in Voice User Interfaces: A Slippery Fish.ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.(jul 2023). doi:10.1145/3609326 Just Accepted

    work page doi:10.1145/3609326 2023

  34. [34]

    Hancock, Megan French, and Sunny Liu

    Michael Ann DeVito, Jeremy Birnholtz, Jeffery T. Hancock, Megan French, and Sunny Liu. 2018. How People Form Folk Theories of Social Media Feeds and What it Means for How We Study Self-Presentation. InProceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Montreal QC, Canada)(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, N...

    work page doi:10.1145/3173574.3173694 2018

  35. [35]

    Algorithms ruin everything

    Michael A DeVito, Darren Gergle, and Jeremy Birnholtz. 2017. " Algorithms ruin everything" # RIPTwitter, Folk Theories, and Resistance to Algorithmic Change in Social Media. InProceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 3163–3174

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    Ed Diener. 2009. Introduction–Measuring well-being: Collected theory and review works.Assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener(2009), 1–6

    work page 2009

  37. [37]

    2015.Adversarial design

    Carl DiSalvo. 2015.Adversarial design. Mit Press

    work page 2015

  38. [38]

    Paul Dourish, Christopher Lawrence, Tuck Wah Leong, and Greg Wadley. 2020. On Being Iterated: The Affective Demands of Design Participation. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–11. doi:10.1145/3313831. 3376545

    work page doi:10.1145/3313831 2020

  39. [39]

    Jeff Druce, James Niehaus, Vanessa Moody, David Jensen, and Michael L Littman. 2021. Brittle AI, causal confusion, and bad mental models: challenges and successes in the XAI program.arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.05506(2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Stefania Druga, Thomas Ball, and Amy Ko. 2022. How families design and program games: a qualitative analysis of a 4-week online in-home study. InProceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference(Braga, Portugal)(IDC ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 237–252. doi:10.1145/3501712.3529724

    work page doi:10.1145/3501712.3529724 2022

  41. [41]

    Prince Chiagozie Ekoh, Tochukwu Jonathan Okolie, Fidel Bethel Nnadi, Oluwagbemiga Oyinlola, and Christine A Walsh. 2023. Understanding the impact of digital technology on the well-being of older immigrants and refugees: A scoping review.Digital Health9 (2023), 20552076231194947

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    Epstein, Clara Caldeira, Mayara Costa Figueiredo, Xi Lu, Lucas M

    Daniel A. Epstein, Clara Caldeira, Mayara Costa Figueiredo, Xi Lu, Lucas M. Silva, Lucretia Williams, Jong Ho Lee, Qingyang Li, Simran Ahuja, Qiuer Chen, Payam Dowlatyari, Craig Hilby, Sazeda Sultana, Elizabeth V. Eikey, and Yunan Chen. 2020. Mapping and Taking Stock of the Personal Informatics Literature.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Techn...

    work page doi:10.1145/3432231 2020

  43. [43]

    I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]

    Motahhare Eslami, Aimee Rickman, Kristen Vaccaro, Amirhossein Aleyasen, Andy Vuong, Karrie Karahalios, Kevin Hamilton, and Christian Sandvig. 2015. "I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]": Reasoning about Invisible Algorithms in News Feeds. InProceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Seoul, Rep...

    work page doi:10.1145/2702123.2702556 2015

  44. [44]

    Patricia Garcia, Tonia Sutherland, Marika Cifor, Anita Say Chan, Lauren Klein, Catherine D’Ignazio, and Niloufar Salehi. 2020. No: Critical Refusal as Feminist Data Practice. InCompanion Publication of the 2020 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(Virtual Event, USA)(CSCW ’20 Companion). Association for Computing Machiner...

    work page doi:10.1145/3406865.3419014 2020

  45. [45]

    Susan A Gelman and Cristine H Legare. 2011. Concepts and folk theories.Annual review of anthropology40 (2011), 379–398

    work page 2011

  46. [46]

    Tarleton Gillespie. 2014. The relevance of algorithms.Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society167, 2014 (2014), 167

    work page 2014

  47. [47]

    Nanna Gorm and Irina Shklovski. 2019. Episodic use: Practices of care in self-tracking.New Media & Society21, 11-12 (2019), 2505–2521. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: April 2026. 30 Seo and Ammari

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    Leslie Haddon. 2007. Roger Silverstone’s legacies: domestication.New Media & Society9, 1 (2007), 25–32. doi:10.1177/ 1461444807075201 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807075201

    work page doi:10.1177/1461444807075201 2007

  49. [49]

    Elizabeth J Halcomb and Patricia M Davidson. 2006. Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary? Applied nursing research19, 1 (2006), 38–42

    work page 2006

  50. [50]

    Maurita T Harris, Kenneth A Blocker, and Wendy A Rogers. 2022. Older adults and smart technology: facilitators and barriers to use.Frontiers in Computer Science4 (2022), 835927

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Maren M Hawkins, Daniel D Holliday, Lance S Weinhardt, Paul Florsheim, Emmanuel Ngui, and Tala AbuZahra

    work page

  52. [52]

    Barriers and facilitators of health among older adult immigrants in the United States: an integrative review of 20 years of literature.BMC Public Health22, 1 (2022), 755

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    Jinmoo Heo, Sanghee Chun, Sunwoo Lee, Kyung Hee Lee, and Junhyoung Kim. 2015. Internet use and well-being in older adults.Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking18, 5 (2015), 268–272

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    Dillahunt

    Joey Chiao-Yin Hsiao, Sylvia Darling, and Tawanna R. Dillahunt. 2023. How Recent Migrants Develop Trust Through Community Commerce: The Emergence of Sociotechnical Adaptation.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.7, CSCW1, Article 135 (April 2023), 24 pages. doi:10.1145/3579611

    work page doi:10.1145/3579611 2023

  55. [55]

    Princely Ifinedo. 2016. Applying uses and gratifications theory and social influence processes to understand students’ pervasive adoption of social networking sites: Perspectives from the Americas.International Journal of Information Management36, 2 (2016), 192–206. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.11.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.11.007 2016

  56. [56]

    International City/County Management Association. 2020. Bridging the Digital Divide.PM Magazine(Sept. 2020). https://icma.org/articles/pm-magazine/bridging-digital-divide Accessed: 2025-05-13

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    Barbara A Israel, Amy J Schulz, Edith A Parker, and Adam B Becker. 1998. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health.Annual review of public health19, 1 (1998), 173–202

    work page 1998

  58. [58]

    Yuri Jang, Nan Sook Park, David A Chiriboga, Hyunwoo Yoon, Jisook Ko, Juyoung Lee, and Miyong T Kim. 2016. Risk factors for social isolation in older Korean Americans.Journal of Aging and Health28, 1 (2016), 3–18

    work page 2016

  59. [59]

    Amit Kumar Jena, Aman Sinha, and Rohit Agarwal. 2020. C-net: Contextual network for sarcasm detection. In Proceedings of the second workshop on figurative language processing. 61–66

    work page 2020

  60. [60]

    2006.Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide

    Henry Jenkins. 2006.Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. NYU Press

    work page 2006

  61. [61]

    Shagun Jhaver, Yoni Karpfen, and Judd Antin. 2018. Algorithmic Anxiety and Coping Strategies of Airbnb Hosts. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Montreal QC, Canada)(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. doi:10.1145/3173574.3173995

    work page doi:10.1145/3173574.3173995 2018

  62. [62]

    Hyeon Jo. 2022. Continuance intention to use artificial intelligence personal assistant: type, gender, and use experience. Heliyon8, 9 (2022)

    work page 2022

  63. [63]

    Philip N Johnson-Laird. 1989. Mental models. (1989)

    work page 1989

  64. [64]

    If it has an exclamation point, I step away from it, I need facts, not excited feelings

    Karen Joy, Michelle Liang, and Tawfiq Ammari. 2025. "If it has an exclamation point, I step away from it, I need facts, not excited feelings": Technologically Mediated Parental COVID Uncertainty.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.9, 2, Article CSCW111 (May 2025), 38 pages. doi:10.1145/3711009

    work page doi:10.1145/3711009 2025

  65. [65]

    Nadia Karizat, Dan Delmonaco, Motahhare Eslami, and Nazanin Andalibi. 2021. Algorithmic Folk Theories and Identity: How TikTok Users Co-Produce Knowledge of Identity and Engage in Algorithmic Resistance.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.5, CSCW2, Article 305 (Oct. 2021), 44 pages. doi:10.1145/3476046

    work page doi:10.1145/3476046 2021

  66. [66]

    Elihu Katz, Jay G Blumler, and Michael Gurevitch. 1973. Uses and gratifications research.The public opinion quarterly 37, 4 (1973), 509–523

    work page 1973

  67. [67]

    Markelle Kelly, Aakriti Kumar, Padhraic Smyth, and Mark Steyvers. 2023. Capturing Humans’ Mental Models of AI: An Item Response Theory Approach. InProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency(Chicago, IL, USA)(FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1723–1734. doi:10.1145/3593013.3594111

    work page doi:10.1145/3593013.3594111 2023

  68. [68]

    It’s in My language

    Bo Young Kim, Qingyan Ma, and Lisa Diamond. 2024. “It’s in My language”: A Case Study on Multilingual mHealth Application for Immigrant Populations With Limited English Proficiency. InExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI EA ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Articl...

    work page doi:10.1145/3613905.3637125 2024

  69. [69]

    Michael W Kramer. 1999. Motivation to reduce uncertainty: A reconceptualization of uncertainty reduction theory. Management communication quarterly13, 2 (1999), 305–316

    work page 1999

  70. [70]

    Sanna Kuoppamäki, Riitta Hänninen, and Sakari Taipale. 2022. Enhancing older adults’ digital inclusion through social support: A qualitative interview study. InVulnerable People and Digital Inclusion: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives. Springer, 211–230

    work page 2022

  71. [71]

    David MJ Lazer, Matthew A Baum, Yochai Benkler, Adam J Berinsky, Kelly M Greenhill, Filippo Menczer, Miriam J Metzger, Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Pennycook, David Rothschild, et al. 2018. The science of fake news.Science359, 6380 (2018), 1094–1096. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: April 2026. Interdependent Navigation and Pragmatic Disengagement: H...

    work page 2018

  72. [72]

    I felt like I was doing grown-up things

    Anh Le, Michelle Ma, Linh Bui, Anna Shi, Linh Pham, Carmen Gonzalez, and Jason C. Yip. 2024. "I felt like I was doing grown-up things": Young Adult Reflections on their Childhood Experiences of Online Searching and Brokering in Immigrant Families.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.8, CSCW1, Article 68 (April 2024), 30 pages. doi:10.1145/3637345

    work page doi:10.1145/3637345 2024

  73. [74]

    Ying Lei, Shuai Ma, and Yuling Sun. 2024. Unpacking ICT-supported Social Connections and Support of Late-life Migration: From the Lens of Social Convoys. InProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 532, 15 pages. doi:10.1145/3613...

    work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3642898 2024

  74. [75]

    Hongxiu Li, Yong Liu, Xiaoyu Xu, Jukka Heikkilä, and Hans Van Der Heijden. 2015. Modeling hedonic is continuance through the uses and gratifications theory: An empirical study in online games.Computers in Human Behavior48 (2015), 261–272

    work page 2015

  75. [76]

    Amna Liaqat, Benett Axtell, and Cosmin Munteanu. 2021. Participatory Design for Intergenerational Culture Exchange in Immigrant Families: How Collaborative Narration and Creation Fosters Democratic Engagement.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.5, CSCW1, Article 98 (April 2021), 40 pages. doi:10.1145/3449172

    work page doi:10.1145/3449172 2021

  76. [77]

    Ann Light and Yoko Akama. 2012. The human touch: participatory practice and the role of facilitation in designing with communities. InProceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers - Volume 1(Roskilde, Denmark)(PDC ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61–70. doi:10.1145/2347635.2347645

    work page doi:10.1145/2347635.2347645 2012

  77. [78]

    Zhihuai Lin and Yu-Leung Ng. 2024. Unraveling Gratifications, Concerns, and Acceptance of Generative Artificial Intelligence.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction(2024), 1–18

    work page 2024

  78. [79]

    Nora McDonald, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Andrea Forte. 2019. Reliability and Inter-rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: Norms and Guidelines for CSCW and HCI Practice.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.3, CSCW, Article 72 (Nov. 2019), 23 pages. doi:10.1145/3359174

    work page doi:10.1145/3359174 2019

  79. [80]

    Carole McGranahan. 2016. Theorizing refusal: An introduction.Cultural Anthropology31, 3 (2016), 319–325

    work page 2016

  80. [81]

    Carole McGranahan. 2018. Refusal as political practice: Citizenship, sovereignty, and Tibetan refugee status.American Ethnologist45, 3 (2018), 367–379

    work page 2018

Showing first 80 references.