Introduction
Aging is one of the most significant challenges for developing countries, and its rate is increasing due to reduced fertility and improved health and medical systems. In recent years, with the rising rate of aging, the concept of “successful aging” has gained attention. Successful aging involves actively coping with the inevitable fear of decline associated with aging. This is achieved by maintaining high levels of physical, mental, and social activity and functioning as an active, rather than passive, member of society. This new perspective on aging requires a different paradigm from the existing focus on medical and welfare systems. Moreover, advancements in technology and healthcare services have enabled individuals to experience more successful aging. The usability of technology can enhance independence and improve the quality of life for older adults. This study aimed to examine the mediating role of technology use in the relationship between cognitive flexibility, social participation, and purpose in life in achieving successful aging. 

Methods & Materials
This research employed a descriptive and correlational approach based on structural equation modeling. The statistical population included all older adults living in Tehran who were not residing in nursing homes. A total of 409 elderly individuals who visited neighborhood centers supervised by the municipality in Districts 1, 2, and 5 of Tehran were selected using convenience sampling. The inclusion criteria were: 1) age over 60 years, 2) residence in Tehran, 3) no diagnosis of major cognitive impairment, and (4) not residing in a nursing home. Data were collected using the successful aging scale (SAS), the cognitive flexibility inventory (CFI), the social participation questionnaire, the life purpose questionnaire, and the information technology questionnaire. The SAS, developed by Ryff, consists of 14 items. As it had not been previously used in Iran, its translation was reviewed by two experts specializing in technical texts in English and Psychology. The Cronbach’s alpha for the entire scale was calculated to be 0.85. The CFI is a 20-item scale with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90. Additionally, the social participation questionnaire, with 9 items (α=0.84), the life purpose questionnaire, with 20 items (α=0.92), and the information technology questionnaire, with 25 items (α=0.88), were employed. Considering the limitations associated with the elderly population, questionnaires were completed via one-on-one interviews conducted by trained interviewers. To assess the absence of major cognitive impairments, the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) was administered through interviews prior to the questionnaire administration. Data were analyzed using correlation tests and path analysis through bootstrapping in AMOS software, version 26. 

Results
In this study, 53.5% of participants were men, and 46.5% were women. Among them, 44.7% were aged 60–65, and 3.7% were over 81. To examine the structural equation modeling assumptions, the normality of variables was assessed using univariate normality evaluation. In the hypothesized model, the skewness of observable variables ranged from 0.499 to 1.6, and kurtosis ranged from 0.211 to 1.7. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to analyze the relationships between the variables. The results showed significant correlations at the 0.01 level (α≤0.01) between all study variables. 
Consequently, higher levels of cognitive flexibility, social participation, purpose in life, and use of technology were associated with more successful aging. Before testing the research model, assumptions regarding the normal distribution of variables and sample size adequacy were confirmed. Multicollinearity among independent variables was assessed using variance inflation factors and tolerance criteria, with no significant multicollinearity found. Given the model’s complexity and the number of observed variables, the item parceling method was used, resulting in three parcels for the purpose in life variable. The results indicated that all model indices were within acceptable ranges, showing a good fit to the data (CFI=0.96, GFI=0.93, NFI=0.90, RMSEA=0.075). The findings showed that cognitive flexibility had an indirect and significant relationship with successful aging through the mediating role of technology use (β=0.063, P<0.01). Similarly, social participation (β=0.209) and purpose in life (β=0.049) also had indirect and significant relationships with successful aging via technology use. Therefore, the proposed model demonstrated that cognitive flexibility, social participation, and purpose in life positively and significantly contribute to successful aging indirectly through technology use. The model can be generalized to the broader population. 

Conclusion
The findings of this study indicate that technology use facilitates successful aging. By enhancing cognitive flexibility, social participation, and purpose in life, the use of technology can be increased. Cognitive flexibility boosts confidence in learning new technologies and reduces technophobia—emotional factors that improve digital skills and encourage greater technology adoption. High social participation provides older adults with more resources to learn about and use innovations. Additionally, purpose in life serves as a motivational factor, increasing the willingness of older adults to engage with technology. These results highlight the importance of promoting and designing technology tailored to the needs of older adults for specialists in both gerontology and information technology fields.

Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran (Code: IR.US.REC.1403.005). Before conducting the research, participants completed a written informed consent form that included general information about the study’s objectives, the number of questions, duration, and confidentiality. 

Funding
This article is extracted from a doctoral dissertation of Pantea Mousavi, approved by Shiraz University. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Authors' contributions
Conceptualization, Resources: Pantea Mousavi and, Abdolaziz Aflakseir; Methodology: Pantea Mousavi, Abdolaziz Aflakseir and, Mohamad Ali Goodarzi; Investigation, Writing–Original Draft, Funding Acquisition: Pantea Mousavi; Writing–Review & Editing: All author;  upervision: Abdolaziz Aflakseir, Mohamad Ali Goodarzi and, Mohammad Reza Taghavi.

Conflicts of interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments
 The authors sincerely thank all the professors who assisted them in conducting this research and all the older adults who participated in this study. 


References

1. Riyanto P, Lahinda J, Nugroho AI, Hidayat SH. Effect of elderly senny to elderly fitness. Enfermería Clínica. 2020; 30:67-70. [DOI:10.1016/j.enfcli.2020.06.016]
2. Arakawa T, Otani T, Kobayashi Y, Tanaka M. 2-D forward dynamics simulation of gait adaptation to muscle weakness in elderly gait. Gait & Posture. 2021; 85:71-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.01.011] [PMID]
3. Lee EJ, Park SJ. Immersive experience model of the elderly welfare centers supporting successful aging. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11:504540. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00008] [PMID]
4. Calasanti T. Combating ageism: How successful is successful aging? The Gerontologist. 2016; 56(6):1093-101. [DOI:10.1093/geront/gnv076] [PMID]
5. Katz S, Calasanti T. Critical perspectives on successful aging: Does it “appeal more than it illuminates”? The gerontologist. 2015; 55(1):26-33. [DOI:10.1093/geront/gnu027] [PMID]
6. Bülow MH, Söderqvist T. Successful ageing: A historical overview and critical analysis of a successful concept. Journal of Aging Studies. 2014; 31:139-49. [DOI:10.1016/j.jaging.2014.08.009] [PMID]
7. Cosco TD, Prina AM, Perales J, Stephan BC, Brayne C. Operational definitions of successful aging: A systematic review. International Psychogeriatrics. 2014; 26(3):373-81. [DOI:10.1017/S1041610213002287] [PMID]
8. Rowe JW, Kahn RL. Human aging: Usual and successful. Science. 1987; 237(4811):143-9. [DOI:10.1126/science.3299702] [PMID]
9. Rowe JW, Kahn RL. Successful aging. The Gerontologist. 1997; 37(4):433-40. [DOI:10.1093/geront/37.4.433] [PMID]
10. Stephens C, Flick U. Health and ageing-challenges for health psychology research. London: Sage Publications Sage UK; 2010. [DOI:10.1177/1359105310368178] [PMID]
11. Fernández-Ballesteros R, Sánchez-Izquierdo M, Santacreu M. Active aging and quality of life. Handbook of active ageing and quality of life: From concepts to applications. 2021; 15-42. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-58031-5_2]
12. Fries JF. Aging, natural death, and the compression of morbidity. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2002; 80(3):245-50. [PMID]
13. Kim SH, Park S. A meta-analysis of the correlates of successful aging in older adults. Research on Aging. 2017; 39(5):657-77. [DOI:10.1177/0164027516656040] [PMID]
14. Kleineidam L, Thoma MV, Maercker A, Bickel H, Mösch E, Hajek A, et al. What is successful aging? A psychometric validation study of different construct definitions. The Gerontologist. 2019; 59(4):738-48. [DOI:10.1093/geront/gny083] [PMID]
15. Darby KP, Castro L, Wasserman EA, Sloutsky VM. Cognitive flexibility and memory in pigeons, human children, and adults. Cognition. 2018; 177:30-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.03.015] [PMID]
16. Stratman JL, Youssef-Morgan CM. Can positivity promote safety? Psychological capital development combats cynicism and unsafe behavior. Safety Science. 2019; 116:13-25. [DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.031]
17. Lee B, Cai W, Young CB, Yuan R, Ryman S, Kim J, et al. Latent brain state dynamics and cognitive flexibility in older adults. Progress in Neurobiology. 2022; 208:102180. [DOI:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2021.102180] [PMID]
18. Hijas-Gómez AI, Ayala A, Rodríguez-García M, Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Rodríguez-Rodríguez V, Rojo-Pérez F, et al. The WHO active ageing pillars and its association with survival: Findings from a population-based study in Spain. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 2020; 90:104114. [DOI:10.1016/j.archger.2020.104114] [PMID]
19. Serrat R, Scharf T, Villar F, Gómez C. Fifty-five years of research into older people’s civic participation: Recent trends, future directions. The Gerontologist. 2020; 60(1):e38-e51. [DOI:10.1093/geront/gnz021] [PMID]
20. Piškur B, Daniëls R, Jongmans MJ, Ketelaar M, Smeets RJ, Norton M, et al. Participation and social participation: Are they distinct concepts? Clinical Rehabilitation. 2014; 28(3):211-20. [DOI:10.1177/0269215513499029] [PMID]
21. Evans IE, Martyr A, Collins R, Brayne C, Clare L. Social isolation and cognitive function in later life: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2019; 70(s1):S119-S44. [DOI:10.3233/JAD-180501] [PMID]
22. Morrow-Howell N, Wang Y, Amano T. Social participation and volunteering in later life. Oxford research encyclopedia of psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. [DOI:10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.404]
23. Child ST, Lawton L. Loneliness and social isolation among young and late middle-age adults: Associations with personal networks and social participation. Aging & Mental Health. 2019; 23(2):196-204. [DOI:10.1080/13607863.2017.1399345] [PMID]
24. Li C, Jiang S, Li N, Zhang Q. Influence of social participation on life satisfaction and depression among Chinese elderly: Social support as a mediator. Journal of Community Psychology. 2018; 46(3):345-55. [DOI:10.1002/jcop.21944]
25. Sutin AR, Luchetti M, Aschwanden D, Lee JH, Sesker AA, Stephan Y, et al. Sense of purpose in life and concurrent loneliness and risk of incident loneliness: An individual-participant meta-analysis of 135,227 individuals from 36 cohorts. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022; 309:211-20. [DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2022.04.084] [PMID]
26. Damon W, Menon J, Bronk KC. The development of purpose during adolescence. Beyond the self. Milton Park: Routledge; 2019. [DOI:10.4324/9780203764688-2]
27. Musich S, Wang SS, Kraemer S, Hawkins K, Wicker E. Purpose in life and positive health outcomes among older adults. Population Health Management. 2018; 21(2):139-47. [DOI:10.1089/pop.2017.0063] [PMID]
28. Caplar N, Tacchella S, Birrer S. Quantitative evaluation of gender bias in astronomical publications from citation counts. Nature Astronomy. 2017; 1(6):0141. [DOI:10.1038/s41550-017-0141]
29. Lewis NA, Turiano NA, Payne BR, Hill PL. Purpose in life and cognitive functioning in adulthood. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition. 2017; 24(6):662-71. [DOI:10.1080/13825585.2016.1251549] [PMID]
30. Hooker SA, Masters KS. Purpose in life is associated with physical activity measured by accelerometer. Journal of Health Psychology. 2016; 21(6):962-71. [DOI:10.1177/1359105314542822] [PMID]
31. Madhi S, Najafi M. [The relationship between spiritual well-being and hope with quality of life, and happiness in older adults Psychological Science (Persian)]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2018; 17(65):78-94. [Link]
32. Jordan PW. An introduction to usability. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2020. [DOI:10.1201/9781003062769]
33. McGilton KS, Vellani S, Yeung L, Chishtie J, Commisso E, Ploeg J, et al. Identifying and understanding the health and social care needs of older adults with multiple chronic conditions and their caregivers: a scoping review. BMC Geriatrics. 2018; 18:1-33. [DOI:10.1186/s12877-018-0925-x] [PMID]
34. Jiang Y, Yang F. Association between internet use and successful aging of older Chinese women: A cross-sectional study. BMC Geriatrics. 2022; 22(1):536. [DOI:10.1186/s12877-022-03199-w] [PMID]
35. Roupa Z, Nikas M, Gerasimou E, Zafeiri V, Giasyrani L, Kazitori E, Sotiropoulou P. The use of technology by the elderly. Health Science Journal. 2010; 4(2):118. [Link]
36. Li YB, Perkins A. The impact of technological developments on the daily life of the elderly. Technology in Society. 2007; 29(3):361-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.04.004]
37. Bali C, Feher Z, Arato N, Kiss BL, Labadi B, Zsido AN. The mediating role of ICT learning confidence and technostress between executive functions and digital skills. Scientific Reports. 2024; 14(1):12343. [DOI:10.1038/s41598-024-63120-w] [PMID]
38. Tyrer HW, Alwan M, Demiris G, He Z, Keller J, Skubic M, editors. Technology for successful aging. New York: 2006 International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society; 2006. [DOI:10.1109/IEMBS.2006.4398150] [PMID]
39. Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Xu X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly. 2012; 157-78. [DOI:10.2307/41410412]
40. World Population Aging. Department of economic and social affairs. New York: World Population Aging; 2017. [Link]
41. Hooman H. [Statistical inference in behavioral research (Persian)]. Tehran: Samt; 2014. [Link]
42. Tabachnick B. Using multivariate statistics [B. Eizanloo, H. P Sharifi, Persian trance] . Tehran: Roshd; 2013. [Link]
43. Reker GT. A Brief Manual of Successful Aging Scale (SAS). Peterborough, Ontario, Canada: Trent University; 2009. [DOI:10.13140/2.1.4238.7201]
44. Reker GT. Personal meaning orientations and psychosocial adaptation in the later years. New York: Sage; 2011. [Link]
45. Dennis JP, Vander Wal JS. The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 2010; 34:241-53. [DOI:10.1007/s10608-009-9276-4]
46. Shareh H, Farmani A, Soltani E. Investigating the reliability and validity of the cognitive flexibility inventory (CFI-I) among Iranian university students. Practice in Clinical Psychology. 2014; 2(1):43–50. [Link]
47. Fazeli M, Ehteshamzadeh SE. Cognitive flexibility and its dimensions in patients with gastrointestinal diseases. Thought and Behavior in Clinical Psychology. 2015; 9(34):27-36. [Link]
48. Gilmour H. Social participation and the health and well-being of Canadian seniors. Health Reports. 2012; 23(4):23-32. [Link]
49. Zare A, Torkan R. [The Relation between Social Investment and Low-evasion among Yazd Citizens (Persian)]. Journal of Cultural Studies Communication. 2012; 27(8):84-115. [Link]
50. Crumbaugh JC, Maholick LT. Manual of instruction for the Purpose - in - life test. Retrieved. Abilene, TX: Viktor Frankl Institute of Logotherapy; 1969. [DOI:10.1037/t01175-000]
51. Cheraghi M, Arizi H, Farahani H. [Reliability, validity, factor analysis and normalization of the Crumbaugh and Maholick’s questionnaire of purpose-in-life (Persian)]. Journal of Psychology. 2009; 12(4):396-413. [Link]
52. Matsunaga M. Item parceling in structural equation modeling: A primer. Communication Methods and Measures. 2008; 2(4):260-93. [DOI:10.1080/19312450802458935]
53. Ghasemi H. [Investigating the use of technology and promoting social skills among Tehran University Students (Persian)] [MA thesis]. Tehran: Tehran University; 2013.
54. Borghesi F, Chirico A, Pedroli E, Cipriani GE, Canessa N, Amanzio M, et al. Exploring biomarkers of mental flexibility in healthy aging: A computational psychometric study. Sensors. 2023; 23(15):6983. [DOI:10.3390/s23156983] [PMID]
55. Einbeigi A, Soleimanian, Aliakbar, Jajarmi, M. Comparing the effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy and existentialism therapy on increasing improving cognitive flexibility in the elderly. North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences. 1400; 13(1):85-91. [DOI:10.52547/nkums.13.1.85]
56. Agree EM, Freedman VA. A quality-of-life scale for assistive technology: Results of a pilot study of aging and technology. Physical Therapy. 2011; 91(12):1780-8. [DOI:10.2522/ptj.20100375] [PMID]
57. Douglas H, Georgiou A, Westbrook J. Social participation as an indicator of successful aging: An overview of concepts and their associations with health. Australian Health Review. 2016; 41(4):455-62. [DOI:10.1071/AH16038] [PMID]
58. Van Leuven KA. Health practices of older adults in good health: Engagement is the key. Journal of Gerontological Nursing. 2010; 36(6):38-46. [DOI:10.3928/00989134-20091110-99] [PMID]
59. Chen KM, Hung HM, Lin HS, Haung HT, Yang YM. Development of the model of health for older adults. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2011; 67(9):2015-25. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05643.x] [PMID]
60. Suls J, Rothman A. Evolution of the biopsychosocial model: Prospects and challenges for health psychology. Health Psychology. 2004; 23(2):119. [DOI:10.1037/0278-6133.23.2.119] [PMID]
61. Rowe JW, Kahn RL. Successful aging 2.0: Conceptual expansions for the 21st century. Oxford: Oxford University Press US; 2015. [DOI:10.1093/geronb/gbv025] [PMID]
62. Cumming E, William E. Growing old: The process of disengagement. New York: Basic Books; 1961. [Link]
63. Yuen M, Lee QA, Kam J, Lau PS. Purpose in life: A brief review of the literature and its implications for school guidance programs. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools. 2017; 27(1):55-69. [DOI:10.1017/jgc.2015.18]
64. AshaRani P, Lai D, Koh J, Subramaniam M. Purpose in life in older adults: A systematic review on conceptualization, measures, and determinants. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(10):5860. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph19105860] [PMID]
65. Kang Y, Cosme D, Pei R, Pandey P, Carreras-Tartak J, Falk EB. Purpose in life, loneliness, and protective health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Gerontologist. 2021; 61(6):878-87. [DOI:10.1093/geront/gnab081] [PMID]
66. Kang Y, Strecher VJ, Kim E, Falk EB. Purpose in life and conflict-related neural responses during health decision-making. Health Psychology. 2019; 38(6):545. [DOI:10.1037/hea0000729] [PMID]
67. Soren A, Ryff CD. Meaningful work, well-being, and health: enacting a eudaimonic vision. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(16):6570. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph20166570] [PMID]
68. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly. 2003; 425-78. [DOI:10.2307/30036540]
69. Yap Y, Tan S, Choon S. Elderly’s intention to use technologies: A systematic literature review. Heliyon. 2022; 8(1):e08765. [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08765] [PMID] []
70. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989; 319-40. [DOI:10.2307/249008]
71. Ryff CD. Meaning-making in the face of intersecting catastrophes: COVID-19 and the plague of inequality. Journal of Constructivist Psychology. 2023; 36(2):185-203. [DOI:10.1080/10720537.2022.2068707] [PMID]
72. Alipour M, Salehabadi R, Akram R, Ganjloo J. [The relationship between social capital and successful aging in the elderly community of Sabzevar, 2019-2020 (Persian)]. Journal of Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences. 1399; 27(4):514. [Link]
73. Abolhassani FB. Successful ageing in the dimensions of life satisfaction and perception of ageing in the iranian elderly adults referring to the health center in the west of Tehran, Iran. Iran Journal of Nursing. 2017; 31(116):61-74. [DOI:10.29252/ijn.31.116.61]
74. Yousefi F, Mohammadi F, Motabebi SA,  Pahlevan S. The Relationship between spiritual health and successful aging. Iran Journal of Aging. 2020; 15(2):246-57. [DOI:10.32598/sija.2020.3.2183.2]
75. Molashahri M, Nouri PR, Hosseinian S, Alikhani M, Aras R, Tabatabayi H. [Comprehensive study of elderly’s happiness in Zahedan City (Persian)]. Journal of Aging Psychology. 2015; 1(2):23-34. [Link]
76. Naseh L, Khankeh H, Nourouzi K. Successful aging: Concept analysis using walker and avant’s approach. Iranian Journal of Aging. 1403; 19(2):161-75. [DOI:10.32598/sija.19.2.2]
77. Ahiandi M, Razaghi M. [Culture of respect and successful aging; building a participation-oriented lifestyle for the elderly (Persian)]. Journal of Visual and Applied Arts. 2017; 10(19):75-91. [Link]
78. Sabahi M. The importance of new technologies in the great challenge of the country’s aging. Journal of Gerontology. 2022; 7(1):1-2. [Link]
79. Safdari R, Shamsabadi AR, Pahlevanynejad S. Improve health of the elderly people with M-health and technology. Iran Journal of Aging. 2018; 13(3):288-99. [DOI:10.32598/sija.13.3.288]
80. Shirazi F, Haberi A, Zahedian N. Effect of a technology-based exercise program on physical fitness and activities of daily living in the elderly with balance impairment: A clinical trial. Iran Journal of Aging. 2023; 18(2):178-90. [DOI:10.32598/sija.2023.3448.1]