Research question. Can an abstract character add recognition and warmth to Grounded while staying optional, adult in tone and separate from the information an airport traveller needs to act on?
The mascot is one part of Grounded’s identity, not the service itself. The primary audience is autistic adults travelling independently through airports. Maia’s Critical Report gives the project useful context about independence and control, sensory environments, changing support needs and fragmented information. Its ten self-declared autistic respondents did not evaluate this character, and they cannot tell me whether a wink, a loop shape or a mascot is right for every autistic traveller. I treat the following visual meanings as design interpretations to explore, then test.
The supplied characters vary in style and purpose, but several visual devices recur: simple silhouettes, a small number of facial marks, expressive poses and bright colour. These are observations about this selection of images, not universal rules about successful mascots. The useful question is how Grounded can be distinctive without taking over a practical travel task.
Reference synthesis: observations, interpretations and audience questions
Maia's mascot references, recomposed on a white ground without added labels
This white-ground board recomposes Maia’s six supplied references without added labels. Their common device is a simple body with very small facial marks or gestural limbs; the different examples range from abstract shapes to character-led app screens. Finch is a useful comparator for an ongoing companion, though it is a self-care app and cannot establish what is suitable for airport information. The provenance/creator credit for some supplied images needs checking. I have used them as inspiration, not as designs to reproduce.
The character should help the identity feel recognisable and approachable, but it is not the wayfinding system. The traveller needs to find the current gate, understand what changed and decide whether to open another step. The character must not become a guide who gives orders, carry operational meaning, or claim to know how someone feels. It should be possible to hide it and still use every essential feature.
For the intended audience, “friendly” needs to remain adult and optional. Autistic adults do not share one sensory profile or one preferred communication style. Maia’s small self-selected questionnaire gives a reason to prioritise agency and clear information; it did not measure mascot preference. I will use these audience needs as design criteria and leave preference claims open until the character is reviewed with travellers.
The current silhouette direction is an abstract loop or ribbon. My interpretation is that a continuous curve can suggest a journey that carries on, while an open centre can suggest space for a next step. These meanings are not fixed: the same shape might read as a knot, a letterform or decoration. Rounded edges give this drawing a softer visual tone than angular alternatives, but that is an aesthetic judgement, not evidence that rounded forms are inherently more comfortable for autistic adults.
Abstraction lets the character sit across different travel moments without representing a particular traveller. A compact, distinct outline may be easier to recognise at small size, but that also needs testing. The useful question is whether the shape reads as a companion and whether it stays visually separate from the route line and gate panel.
I separated the body from its face so I could judge recognition through silhouette alone. The studies compare an open loop, a taller sweep, a lower curl and a compact bend. I am looking for a shape that carries the route idea without becoming a literal arrow or map, and that still reads at the small scale of a phone. The lime is held constant at #DDFF4E so these comparisons are about form rather than colour.
Four separate lime body silhouette explorations
The open loop remains the strongest direction because it has a clear outer contour and an open centre. That is my visual interpretation, not a claim that autistic travellers will all read it as movement or openness. The next check is whether people can recognise it without relying on its face or nearby text.