ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
"Though helpful, still hesitant": a TAM-based qualitative study on older adults' ambivalent acceptance and model extensions in AI fitness coaches.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychological and social factors influencing AI painting tool adoption among young-old adults in the context of creative aging.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the deepening integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and health promotion strategies, digital health applications have continued to expand. AI fitness coaches have emerged as promising tools to support physical activity among older adults. Although models such as the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and the Senior Technology Acceptance Model have extended the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by introducing external factors across technological, psychological, and socio-emotional domains, further research is needed to contextualize these variables within AI-based environments. Prior studies have focused mainly on general digital or assistive technologies, with limited attention to emotionally and cognitively complex human-AI interactions such as AI fitness coaching. Therefore, this study adopts TAM as the core theoretical framework, as its concise structure suits exploratory interviews while preserving participants' lived experience richness. Methods: Participants were recruited through public announcements at sports and neighborhood activity centers in Northern Taiwan, with support from community leaders. This qualitative study used TAM as a foundational framework and conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 older adult participants. The interview protocol explored their interactions with AI fitness coaches, emphasizing perceived usefulness, ease of use, emotional responses, and contextual influences. Verbatim transcripts were thematically analyzed using both deductive codes from TAM and inductive codes to capture emerging themes. Two researchers independently coded the data and reached consensus to ensure analytic rigor. Results: Perceived usefulness and ease of use were shaped not only by system design but also by aging-related factors such as physical limitations, life history, and autonomy. While participants expressed cognitive approval of AI fitness coaches, emotional resistance revealed ambivalent acceptance. Findings highlight that emotional, social, and cultural factors-often overlooked in TAM-play a significant role in shaping older adults' technology engagement. Conclusion: This study expands TAM by emphasizing that technology acceptance is a dynamic, context-sensitive process shaped by emotional and cultural influences. It underscores the need to adapt external variables to specific settings and encourages designing AI fitness technologies that foster emotional resonance and cultural relevance. The concept of "ambivalent acceptance" offers new insight into how aging individuals engage with technology, contributing to both theoretical development and inclusive design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.