As computer networking becomes increasingly important, participation of older adults in cyberspace is an important issue for analysis; travel through cyberspace does not need physical movement, so they can be in contact with social networks from their home even though they may have a disability (Blit-Cohen and Litwin 2004). Communication via the Internet is ageless, and physical appearance does not affect this participation, therefore there is not any limitation for elders to participate in this kind of social network (Featherstone 1995). The Internet is expected to lead to changes in how people communicate, how they work, and how they spend their leisure.

The number of elderly internet users isexpected to increase as the cost of internet technology declines continually, computer education programs for elder adults increase and the cohort of late baby boomers becomes older (Wright 2000). Indeed, advancement in computer technologies and internet use has changed the way many individuals live, work, play and communicate (Colvin, Chenoweth et al. 2004). Browne stated that universal access to this technology is one important step, but the more important goal is making this technology usable by everyone, including the elderly(Browne 2000). In this trend, Browne suggested that there are currently two barriers to using the internet with elderly people. First,  personal computing technology did not exist through out the majority of the lifespan of the currently elderly people has been spending. Secondly, income and education are some obstacles in this group which reduce the accessibility to this technology and also physical, mental and cognitive impairment reduce its usability among them (Browne 2000). Fortunately, the next generation of elders will be more familiar with computing technology; therefore some barriers will be modified. However, a study conducted by American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) reported that age is not a major predictor of computer ownership; in contrast, education and high income were the most important predictors among all adult age groups(Browne 2000). Therefore, there are different ideas related to accessibility and usability of computer technology among elderly people; although it is clear that some socioeconomic factors such as education and income are effective in this process (Sarah A and Horvath 2002). And it is important that accommodations need to be made for people with different physical and cognitive disabilities and different ages, skills and even cultures (Browne 2000).

Bassuk & colleagues found that elderly adults who did not have social ties were at increased risk for cognitive decline, compared with those who had social ties (Bassuk, Glass et al. 1999). Elders live longer than in the past and often alone. Loneliness has a major impact on mental status and is a predictor for psychological problems, including depression (Prince and Harward 1997). Conversely, social interaction, especially with family and community networks is strongly associated with positive mental health outcomes (Fratiglioni, Wang et al. 2000). As the National Strategy for an Aging Australia recognizes, social isolation is prevalent among older Australians and has been associated with increased risk of depression, suicide, alcoholism and institutionalization (Bishop 2000). People who get less emotional and social support due to social isolation are more likely to experience less well being (Hall and Havens 2001). Therefore, it is important to pay more attention to elders' social relationships.

In Australia as in many other countries, there is a growing interest in the role that social capital may play in determining social, economic and health outcomes. Accordingly, the policies of the National Strategy for improving the health and well-being of older Australians place  a great deal of importance on the development of social capital(Bishop 2000). Social capital can be defined as networks of social relations which are characterized by norms of trust and reciprocity and which lead to outcomes of mutual benefit (Putnam 2001). Social capital is a multidimensional approach (Bryant and Norris 2002). The four themes of social capital used in this study are: Social participation and civic engagement; Level of empowerment; Perception of community; Trust and reciprocity (Bryant and Norris 2002).

The protective functions of social capital and social networks are well documented for adults. Cohen and Syme have asserted that social support improves well-being through prevention of isolation, being understood, being valued, and receiving help and advice when needed, this has an effect on self-esteem, self-control and life satisfaction(Cohen and Syme 1984). The sense of well-being promotes physical and mental health, equipping people better to deal with various problems and stresses of life (Diener, Suh et al. 1999). There are a number of separable components of Subjective well-being: life satisfaction (global judgments of one’s life), satisfaction with important domains (e.g., work satisfaction), positive affect (experiencing many pleasant emotions and moods), and low levels of negative affect (experiencing few unpleasant emotions and moods) (Diener 2000). It is important to investigate the use made of the Internet by people over the age of 55 in order to ascertain the actual or potential role of the Internet in promoting the social inclusion of older people and in the maintenance or development of social capital and well-being among older adults.

The National Strategy has identified a greater understanding of social capital in the context of population aging as a priority for research (Bishop 2000). Therefore, it is very important to find an appropriate way to build social capital among older people. Internet communication has considerable potential to build social capital. Some studies have been done on the social capital and the Internet use in population; however in most of them the focus was not on elderly adults. There are different ideas about the effect of using the internet on social capital. Some scholars believe that cyberspace decreases social capital, in contrast, some others asserted that it transports social capital among people. However, a more interesting idea is that of using the internet to supplement social capital. Therefore, it is important to discuss these different arguments.

Many scholars state not all the internet activity is social (Quan-Hass and Wellman 2002). Wellman et al have mentioned that internet communication involves people and takes them away from face to face and phone contact (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001). Kraut and his colleagues reported that using a home computer and internet increases physical inactivity and limits face to face social interaction similar to watching television (Kraut, Patterson et al. 1998). In their longitudinal analysis they have concluded that excessive internet use causes declines in participant’s involvement with family and friends; and increases in their depression and loneliness (Kraut, Patterson et al. 1998).

Furthermore, it is suggested that people using the internet lose touch with their community environment and decrease time socializing and attending events outside the home. Many scholars have worried that the excessive using the internet might encourage people to spend more time alone and push them to social isolation which increase the rate of depression (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001). Some of them believe that online conversation may have a positive effect on people but it has a lower quality than face-to-face and telephone conversation (Nie and Erbring 2000; Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001).Wellman et al have asserted that the internet pulls people’s attention away from their immediate physical environment because when they are online, they pay less attention to their physical and social surroundings (Nie and Erbring 2000; Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001).

Many scholars believe that the internet enhances and transports social capital among internet users. Indeed, the internet has a positive effect on people’s lives because it creates new forms of online interaction which improves offline relationships (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001). Some of them pointed out that it is a great opportunity to overcome limitations of time and space. Moreover, the internet provides a meeting space for people with common interests (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001) . In this context, Muller asserted that cyberspace interaction may continue in physical space and creates a new form of interaction (Muller 1999). Wellman comments that internet fills the gap which is between face-to-face interactions (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001).

Furlong has noted that the internet can provide useful information on a wide range of subjects, including retirement homes, questions and answers on financial matters and health information for older adults (Furlong 1989). Furthermore, it is likely that participation in virtual community reduces the level of social isolation especially in elders with limited mobility (Blit-Cohen and Litwin 2004). Elders who have active participation in cyberspace acquire an opportunity to find people with similar problems and questions. They share information and any age relevant social and emotional issues via the internet (Blit-Cohen and Litwin 2004). According to Furlong’s report, involvement in the virtual community increases self-image and self-confidence of seniors and provides better support for them (Furlong 1989).

The argument of those who believe the internet enhances social capital is based on many reasons. Firstly, people for example, friends and kin have opportunity to interact at a low cost, and it increases the rate of face-to-face and phone conversation (Homans 1961, cited in Wellman et al 2001). Secondly, people exchange pictures, songs and other files more. Thirdly, via the internet, they make arrangements to meet each other and by telephone. Internet also increases organizational involvement (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001).

Much research literature has shown that internet provides more opportunities for social interactions and increases individuals’ ability to communicate and keep in touch with others (Cole and Robinson 2002; Katz. 2002; Restnbaum et al. 2002; cited in Shklovski and Kraut et al. 2004). They argued that because the internet lets social contact occur across time, distance and personal circumstances, it permits people to make contact with distant as well as local family and friends, business contacts and with who those share similar interests (Shklovski, Kraut et al. 2004). Wellman et al have contended that there is a positive relationship between using the internet and organizational participation (Wellman, Quan-Hass et al. 2001). Generally speaking, social participation including contact with neighbours, friends and family, and participation in social groups develop people’s social support, their sense of meaning in life, their self-esteem, their participation in social norms and their psychosocial and physical well-being (Cohen and Wills 1985; Diener, Suh et al. 1999).

Some evidence has shown that the internet has neither increased nor decreased social capital. On the other hand, it has a supplementary effect on social capital. According to this argument, the internet adds on to other patterns of communication (Flangan and Metzger 2001). Indeed the internet is the same as other kinds of traditional communication forms (Quan-Hass and Wellman 2002). According to this notion email, chat and other communication capabilities of the internet supplement social contact by helping to people to organize meetings and social events; in this way it fills communication gaps, for example in face-to-face communication (Wellman and Haythornthwaite 2002, cited in Quan-Hass and Wellman 2002). Therefore, cyberspace provides an additional means of communication to telephone and face-to-face contact (Muller 1999).

Nahm and Resnick claim that cyberspace provides a new connection to the outside world for elderly people, so it can improve quality of seniors’ lives (Nahm and Resnick 2001). Besides that , elders need variety of information (health, travel, hobbies etc) which they can obtain via the internet. These characteristics of the net can enhance social communication and well-being of seniors (Nahm and Resnick 2001). In  research conducted with Cody et al, it was pointed out that older adults who were trained to use the internet reported having high levels of social connectivity, high levels of perceived social support and generally more positive attitude towards ageing (Cody, Dun et al. 1999).

According to these arguments there are a wide range of findings regarding the role of cyberspace in enhancing or restricting  social capital. Unfortunately, participation of seniors in cyberspace is more limited than other groups, so a better underestanding is needed of the consequences of elder’s participation in cyberspace. Specially, it is important to clarify  whether the internet builds social capital and improves well-being in elders, if the answer is yes, in what way.

Overall, there is many reasons to suppose that this technology has the capacity to generate and maintain social networks among elders (Blit-Cohen and Litwin 2004; Shah et al 2001; Quan and Barry 2002; Shklovski et al 2004). However, many questions about the internet behavior of older adults remain unanswered (Vuori and Holmlund-Rytkönen 2005). There is a lack of information about older Internet users, so it is important to learn if using the internet builds social capital, develops well-being and more importantly how the use of internet might make these changes.

Therefore, two main questions need to be considered to find the impact of the Internet on seniors’ social capital and well-being;

“Does the Internet build social capital and develop well-being among elderly people?

“In what way does using the Internet build social capital and develop well-being among elderly people?

The answerto these questions will provide an evidence base for future research and better practice in the application of Internet technology for improving the well-being of Australia’s aging population.

Bassuk, S., T. Glass, et al. (1999). "Social engagement and incident cognitive decline in community-dwelling elderly person." Ann Intern med 131: 165-173.

Bishop (2000). The national strategy for an ageing Australia: Attitudes, lifestyle and community support. Discussion paper, Commonwealth of Australia.

Blit-Cohen, E. and H. Litwin (2004). "Elder participation in cyberspace: A qualitative analysis of Israeli retirees." Journal of Aging Studies 18(4): 385-398.

Browne, H. (2000). Accessibility and usability of information technology by the elderly. 2005.

Bryant, C. A. and D. Norris (2002). measurement of social capital: canadian experience. International conference on social capital measurement, London, OECD.

Cody, M. J., D. Dun, et al. (1999). "Silver surfers: Training and evaluating Internet use among older adult learners." Communication Education 48: 269-286.

Cohen, S. and T. Wills (1985). "Stress, social support and buffering hypothesis." Psychological Bulletin 98(2): 310-357.

Cohen, S. and S. L. Syme (1984). Social support and health. Orlando, Florida: Academic press.

Colvin, J., L. Chenoweth, et al. (2004). "Caregivers of Older Adults: Advantages and Disadvantages of Internet-based Social Support*." Family Relations 53(1): 49.

Diener, E., E. Suh, et al. (1999). "Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress." Psychological Bulletin 125(2): 276-302.

Featherstone, M. (1995). Post-bodies, ageing and virtual reality. Images of ageing: cultural representations of later life. M. Featherstone and A. wernick. London, Routlege: 227-244.

Flangan, A. and M. Metzger (2001). "Internet use in the contemporary media environment." Human computer research 27: 153-181.

Fratiglioni, L., H. Wang, et al. (2000). "Influence social network on occurence of dementia: a communiity-based longitudinal study." Lancet 355: 1315-1319.

Furlong, D. (1989). "An electronic community for older adults: The seniornet network." Journal of cCommunication 39: 145-153.

Hall, M. and B. Havens (2001). The effect of social isolation and loneliness on the health of older women. Older women's health. P.-o. projects. Manitoba, Prairie women's health center of excellence(PWHCE). 2005.

Kraut, R., M. Patterson, et al. (1998). "Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvment and psychological well-being?" American psychologist 53(9): 1017-1031.

Muller, C. (1999). Networks of personal communities and group communities in different online communication setvices. Proceeding of the exploring cyber society: social , political, economic and cultural issues, Newcastle, Uk, University of Nurthumberia.

Nahm, E. and B. Resnick (2001). "Homebound older adults' experiences with the Internet and email." Computer in Nursing 19: 257-263.

Nie, N. H. and L. Erbring (2000). Internet and society: A preliminary report. CA. Stanford, Stanford institution for the quantitative study of society.

Prince, M. and R. Harward (1997). "Social support dificits, loneliness and life events as risk factors for depression in old age. The Oak project." Psycho Med 27(323-332).

Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling Alone: the collaps and revival of American community. London, Simon & Schuster.

Quan-Hass, A. and B. Wellman (2002). How does the Internet affect social capital. F. i. M. H. a. V. Wulf. Totonto, University of Toronto. 2005.

Sarah A, B. and P. Horvath (2002). "Psychological predictors of internet social communication." JCMC 6(1): 30.pgs.

Shklovski, I., R. Kraut, et al. (2004). "The Internet and social participation: contrasting cross-sectional and longtudinal analyses." JCMC 10(1).

Vuori, S. and M. Holmlund-Rytkönen (2005). "55+ people as internet users." Marketing Intelligence & Planning 23(1): 58.

Wellman, B., A. Quan-Hass, et al. (2001). "Does the Internet increase, decrease or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation and community commitment." American behavioral scientist 45.

Wright, K. (2000). "Computer-mediated social support, older adults, and coping." Journal of Communication 50(3): 100.