Having established that my design direction is to explore a more connected approach to airport accessibility, I wanted to understand how this could work in practice. My intention is to investigate how journey information, sensory accessibility and assistance could operate together, rather than being experienced as separate services.
Before developing the visual identity or deciding on a final product, I felt it was important to explore the traveller's experience more closely. This would allow me to identify where communication problems might occur and consider how graphic design could respond.
My research has highlighted unpredictability, environmental pressures, fragmented information and the importance of individual control. I therefore wanted to translate these findings into a realistic airport situation that could help guide my design development.
I decided to begin with the example of an unexpected gate change.
This scenario connects with my primary research, particularly P01's account concerning changing gate locations and P10's desire for earlier access to gate information. It also relates to the wider airport accessibility research discussed by Edwards et al. (2025, 2026), which identifies communication, preparation and predictability among the barriers experienced by autistic travellers.
I chose this situation because it brings several aspects of my research together. A change in gate information may require a traveller to reconsider their route, process unfamiliar instructions and navigate a different part of the airport. It may also influence which environmental conditions or forms of assistance are relevant to them.
However, I recognise that an unexpected gate change will not necessarily create difficulty for every autistic traveller. I am using it as an illustrative scenario to investigate my design proposition, rather than claiming it represents a universal experience or the most significant airport accessibility problem.
To begin mapping the experience, I considered a hypothetical autistic adult waiting at an airport before their flight.
The traveller has already passed through security and is waiting for boarding information. They may have prepared for the journey in advance, familiarised themselves with the airport layout or identified places where they feel comfortable waiting.
In this scenario, the departure gate changes unexpectedly from B12 to A04. This change is fictional and is being used to examine how different sources of information and support might interact.
The traveller now needs to establish whether the new information is confirmed, understand where the updated gate is located and decide how to reach it.
They might consult a flight-information display, check an airline application, look for airport signage or approach a member of staff. The options available would depend on the airport and its existing services.
The traveller may also want to understand the sensory conditions of the new route, locate an alternative waiting area or request assistance.
These resources might already exist, but they may be communicated through different systems and require separate actions to access them.
This raised an important question for my design development: could connecting relevant information and assistance make it easier for a traveller to understand their options when circumstances change?
Looking at the scenario helped me identify several points where additional effort or uncertainty might arise.