The Benefits of Digital Technology Use and Social Connectedness on Quality of Life: Are They Independent or Interactive?

Background and Purpose: While digital technology use is often linked to improved quality of life (QoL) among older adults, research findings remain mixed. These inconsistencies raise questions about how digital engagement functions across social contexts and for whom it is most beneficial. This study examines the independent and interactive effects of digital technology use and social connectedness on QoL among older Korean immigrants in subsidized senior housing. This population often faces linguistic, financial, and social barriers and may rely on digital tools not only for practical use but also to connect with family and the broader community. We hypothesized that both digital technology use and social connectedness would have direct positive effects on QoL, and that digital use would be especially beneficial for socially isolated individuals by offering alternative pathways to connection, information, and autonomy.

Methods: Data came from surveys of 318 older Korean American residents living in subsidized senior housing in Los Angeles (Mean age = 79.5, SD = 6.66). Digital technology use was assessed with five items rating ease of using a computer, smartphone, tablet, internet, and social media on a 4-point Likert scale (0 = cannot use at all, 3 = very easily use). Social connectedness was indexed using the Lubben Social Network Scale (α = .89). QoL was measured with a single item asking participants to rate their overall quality of life on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating better QoL. Multivariate regression models tested the independent and interactive effects of digital technology use and social connectedness on QoL, adjusting for age, gender, marital status, education, years in the U.S., chronic disease, and functional disability. When the interaction was significant, subgroup analyses were conducted to compare the effect of digital technology use on QoL between groups with high and low levels of social connectedness.

Results: The average QoL score was 6.77 (SD = 1.76). Digital technology use and social connectedness averaged 4.97 (SD = 3.77) and 15.2 (SD = 6.19), respectively. In the regression model of QoL, both digital technology use and social connectedness (b = .06, SE = .03, p < .05; b = .06, SE = .01, p < .001) had significant direct effects, and their interaction (b = .01, SE = .01, p < .05) also reached significance. However, contrary to the hypothesis, subgroup analyses showed the positive effect of digital technology use on QoL was only present (b = .07, SE = .03, p < .05) among those with a high level of social connectedness.

Conclusion and Implications: Findings suggest that the benefit of digital technology use is more pronounced in the context of social connectedness. Given that digital technology use does not fully compensate for social isolation, it alone does not enhance QoL among socially isolated older adults in subsidized senior housing. Interventions in subsidized housing should go beyond device access or training to foster social engagement. Programs that encourage connection, such as resident-led groups or intergenerational activities, are recommended to address both digital and social exclusion.