I created a reference table so I could see the academic role of each source before I started drafting the full report.

For each reference I recorded the full Harvard citation, source type, what the source actually says, whether I intended to keep it and how it might contribute to the argument.

This helped me move away from simply collecting papers and towards evaluating them.

The table became a way of deciding why a source belonged in the report, not just proving that I had read it.

Core Academic Literature

| Author / year | Full Harvard reference | Source type | What does it actually say? | Keep? | So what? How could I use this? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Doyle (2020) | Doyle, N. (2020) ‘Neurodiversity at work: a biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults’, British Medical Bulletin, 135(1), pp. 108–125. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldaa021. | Peer-reviewed journal article | Explains neurodiversity through a biopsychosocial model. Disability can be shaped by the interaction between an individual and their social/environmental context, rather than being understood only as an individual deficit. | 🟢 CORE | Use near the beginning of the literature review. It helps me argue that design should examine barriers created by environments and systems rather than asking autistic people to simply adapt themselves. |
| Dwyer (2022) | Dwyer, P. (2022) ‘The Neurodiversity Approach(es): What Are They and What Do They Mean for Researchers?’, Human Development, 66(2), pp. 73–92. doi: 10.1159/000523723. | Peer-reviewed theoretical paper | Explains different neurodiversity approaches and argues that researchers should consider both individual characteristics and the surrounding context, recognise strengths and difficulties and listen to neurodivergent people themselves. | 🟢 CORE | Use to explain my research position. It supports involving autistic adults directly and not assuming there is one universal autistic experience. |
| Bhattacharya et al. (2026) | Bhattacharya, P., Matthews, R.J., Field, R., Heath, H., Woodcock, K.A. and Surtees, A.D.R. (2026) ‘Experiencing Independence: Perspectives from Autistic Adults’, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 56, pp. 3523–3538. doi: 10.1007/s10803-025-06812-0. | Qualitative study with 12 autistic adults | Autistic adults described independence as individual rather than “one-size-fits-all”. Independence can involve coping strategies and support rather than always meaning doing everything alone. | 🟢 VERY CORE | Use to define the word “independent” in my research question. It supports the argument that receiving assistance does not automatically mean someone is no longer travelling independently. |
| Thompson-Hodgetts et al. (2023) | Thompson-Hodgetts, S., Ryan, J., Coombs, E., Brown, H.M., Xavier, A., Devlin, C., Lee, A., Kedmy, A. and Borden, A. (2023) ‘Toward understanding and enhancing self-determination: a qualitative exploration with autistic adults without co-occurring intellectual disability’, Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, 1250391. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1250391. | Qualitative study with 19 autistic adults | Explores what self-determination means to autistic adults, the barriers they encounter and how they want to be supported. | 🟢 CORE | Use alongside Bhattacharya. It helps me argue that accessibility should provide support while still leaving the autistic traveller in control of choices and decisions. |
| Buhalis and Darcy (2011) | Buhalis, D. and Darcy, S. (eds.) (2011) Accessible Tourism: Concepts and Issues. Bristol: Channel View Publications. | Academic edited book | Establishes accessible tourism as a broader issue involving environments, services, tourism systems and participation, rather than accessibility being only about physical access. | 🟢 CORE | Use to introduce accessible tourism as a field. It gives me a foundation before narrowing the report specifically to neurodiversity and autism. |
| Jepson, Stadler and Garrod (2024) | Jepson, A., Stadler, R. and Garrod, B. (2024) ‘Tourism and neurodiversity: a problematisation and research agenda’, Current Issues in Tourism, 27(4), pp. 546–566. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2023.2233040. | Peer-reviewed tourism paper | Argues that neurodiversity remains under-researched in tourism and questions approaches to accessibility that focus mainly on physical disability. | 🟢 VERY CORE | Use to establish my research gap. This is strong evidence for why neurodivergent/autistic travel deserves greater attention within tourism research. |
| Conde et al. (2023) | Conde, A.R., Caldeira, S.N., Rego, I.E., Botelho, T., Silva, O., de Sousa, Á.S.T. and Mota, P. (2023) ‘Inclusive tourism and children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders: Systematic review of the literature’, European Journal of Tourism Research, 35, 3502. doi: 10.54055/ejtr.v35i.2806. | Systematic literature review | The review found only 11 relevant publications about inclusive tourism for families with autistic children. Most were qualitative, and there was little empirical testing of tourism products/interventions. | 🟢 CORE, but brief | Use to strengthen the research-gap argument. It also helps show that much existing autism-and-tourism work focuses on children/families, supporting my decision to focus on autistic adults. |
| MacLennan et al. (2023) | MacLennan, K., Woolley, C., @21andsensory, E., Heasman, B., Starns, J., George, B. and Manning, C. (2023) ‘“It Is a Big Spider Web of Things”: Sensory Experiences of Autistic Adults in Public Spaces’, Autism in Adulthood, 5(4), pp. 411–422. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0024. | Participatory study with 24 autistic adults | Identified six interconnected principles affecting sensory accessibility: Sensoryscape, Space, Predictability, Understanding, Adjustments and Recovery. | 🟢 VERY CORE | Use to argue that travel barriers are connected. An airport problem may not simply be “noise”; uncertainty, space, lack of adjustments and previous sensory load can interact. This supports looking at the journey as a whole. |
| Edwards et al. (2026) | Edwards, C., Love, A.M.A., Cai, R.Y., Tutton, T. and Gibbs, V. (2026) ‘Exploring autism-friendly initiatives in Australian airports: “A lot better than a lot of airports that I’ve experienced”’, Current Issues in Tourism. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2024.2422049. | Qualitative airport study | Directly examines autistic experiences and perceptions of autism-friendly initiatives in Australian airports. The article was first published online in October 2024. | 🟢 VERY CORE | Use as direct evidence about airports. It lets me discuss whether existing airport accessibility initiatives actually meet travellers’ needs rather than simply listing what airports provide. |
| Edwards et al. (2025) | Edwards, C., Love, A.M.A., Cai, R.Y., Tutton, T., Beardsley, E. and Gibbs, V. (2025) ‘Autistic-led insights on airport accessibility: A retrospective analysis of environmental assessments’, Autism, 29(8), pp. 2151–2162. doi: 10.1177/13623613251337200. | Autistic-led analysis of six Australian airports | Autistic-led assessments found barriers associated with overwhelming sensory environments, security, crowded spaces, communication, preparation and predictability across six airports. | 🟢 VERY CORE | One of my strongest sources. Use for direct evidence about airport design, sensory environments, wayfinding, predictability and why autistic lived experience should inform accessibility decisions. |
| Castro, Batista and Andrada (2025) | Castro, R.T., Batista, M.M. and Andrada, M.E.S. (2025) ‘Airport accessibility for neurodivergent passengers: a global survey of initiatives and its implications’, Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, 19, e-3077. doi: 10.7784/rbtur.v19.3077. | Peer-reviewed global airport study | Examines accessibility initiatives at selected airports around the world. Airports were selected because they had adopted the Sunflower programme, and the research found that simpler measures are more common than substantial structural adaptations. | 🟢 CORE | Use to answer “what already exists?” It supports my argument that airports offer many interventions, but provision is uneven and often centred on simpler measures. Important limitation: the sample is not representative of every airport globally. |
| Miller et al. (2020) | Miller, I.T., Miller, C.S., Wiederhold, M.D. and Wiederhold, B.K. (2020) ‘Virtual Reality Air Travel Training Using Apple iPhone X and Google Cardboard: A Feasibility Report with Autistic Adolescents and Adults’, Autism in Adulthood, 2(4), pp. 325–333. doi: 10.1089/aut.2019.0076. | Small VR feasibility study | Seven autistic adolescents/adults used a virtual airport simulation covering entry, check-in, security, waiting and boarding. The research found the approach feasible and acceptable, but it was a very small preliminary study. | 🟢 CORE | Very important for my final design direction. Use to show that rehearsing airport processes before travel has already been explored. It supports the idea behind rehearsal, but it does not prove VR or rehearsal solves airport accessibility. |
| Mauro et al. (2026) | Mauro, N., Ferrero, F., Ardissono, L. and Cena, F. (2026) ‘Human-centered AI for inclusive tourism: enhancing travel planning for adults with autism spectrum disorder’, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 208, 103696. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103696. | Human-centred design / AI study with 14 autistic adults | Tested an AI trip planner that provided step-by-step guidance while allowing autistic adults to retain control over planning choices. | 🟢 CORE / could become SUPPORT | Use for autonomy and personalisation. It supports the principle that technology can guide someone without taking over. Useful even though I have moved away from an app-first outcome. |
| Yao et al. (2026) | Yao, D.P.G., Labbé, D., Prajapati, H. and Miller, W.C. (2026) ‘Access to fly: A scoping review of travellers with disabilities’ experiences in air travel’, Travel Behaviour and Society, 44, 101276. | Scoping review of disability and air travel | Reviews research into disabled travellers’ experiences of air travel and considers accessibility across the wider aviation system. | 🟢 CORE | Use to place autism within the wider aviation-accessibility problem. Helpful for arguing that information, staff, environments, procedures and policy all contribute to the passenger experience. Caveat: it covers disability generally, not autism specifically. |
| Milton (2012) | Milton, D.E.M. (2012) ‘On the ontological status of autism: the “double empathy problem”’, Disability & Society, 27(6), pp. 883–887. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2012.710008. | Theoretical paper | Challenges the assumption that communication difficulties exist entirely within autistic people and proposes that misunderstanding can be reciprocal between autistic and non-autistic people. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Use if staff interaction/communication becomes important in my findings. It could support an argument that airport communication problems cannot simply be framed as autistic people failing to communicate effectively. |

Useful Academic Background — Not Necessarily Core

| Author / year | Full Harvard reference | Source type | What does it actually say? | Keep? | So what? How could I use this? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Botha et al. (2024) | Botha, M., Chapman, R., Giwa Onaiwu, M., Kapp, S.K., Stannard Ashley, A. and Walker, N. (2024) ‘The neurodiversity concept was developed collectively: An overdue correction on the origins of neurodiversity theory’, Autism, 28(6), pp. 1591–1594. doi: 10.1177/13623613241237871. | Peer-reviewed commentary/theoretical paper | Corrects oversimplified accounts of where neurodiversity theory came from and stresses its collective development within neurodivergent communities. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Use only if I discuss the history of neurodiversity. Helpful for accuracy, but probably not essential to my argument about travel. |
| Price (2022) | Price, D. (2022) Unmasking Autism: The Power of Embracing Our Hidden Neurodiversity. London: Monoray. | Book / popular-academic lived-experience writing | Discusses masking, stereotypes, identity and pressures on autistic people to perform according to neurotypical expectations. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Could help with context around masking or hidden disability. However, stronger peer-reviewed sources should carry my main academic argument. |
| Hacking (2009) | Hacking, I. (2009) ‘Autistic autobiography’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1522), pp. 1467–1473. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0329. | Philosophical / academic article | Examines the importance of autistic first-person narratives in shaping how autism is understood. | 🟡 SUPPORT / probably cut | Could justify valuing first-person autistic accounts, but Dwyer and my newer participatory studies probably do this job more directly. |
| Dudzic et al. (2026) | Dudzic, K., Drożdż, K., Wodziński, M., Szuła, A. and Moskalewicz, M. (2026) ‘Computational Phenomenology of Temporal Experience in Autism: Quantifying the Emotional and Narrative Characteristics of Lived Unpredictability’, arXiv, arXiv:2602.10947. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.10947. | Preprint | Looks at autistic experiences of unpredictability and temporal experience. | 🔴 CUT / CONTEXT | It helped me think about unpredictability, but I have stronger peer-reviewed and travel-specific evidence now. Because it is a preprint, there is little reason to prioritise it. |
| Noy (2004) | Noy, C. (2004) ‘This Trip Really Changed Me: Backpackers’ Narratives of Self-Change’, Annals of Tourism Research, 31(1), pp. 78–102. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2003.08.004. | Qualitative tourism study | Explores backpackers’ narratives of identity, self-change and transformative travel. | 🔴 CONTEXT / CUT | This mattered in my original project direction. I could use one sentence in the introduction about why independent travel can matter, but transformative travel is no longer the question I am trying to answer. |

Major Reports and Contemporary Evidence

| Author / year | Full Harvard reference | Source type | What does it actually say? | Keep? | So what? How could I use this? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Autistica (2025) | Autistica (2025) Neurodivergence & Public Transport: How to Make Public Transport More Accessible and Inclusive for a Neurodivergent Community. London: Autistica. | Research report | Large neurodivergent transport study identifying sensory, informational, social and environmental barriers and possible improvements. | 🟢 KEEP / SUPPORT | Great supporting statistics and recommendations. Use when discussing noise, lighting, quiet spaces, communication or walkthroughs. Always state that it covers neurodivergence and public transport broadly, not autistic air travellers specifically. |
| National Autistic Society (2025) | National Autistic Society (2025) Empowering Autistic Travel: A Journey to Accessible Transport Through Participatory Research. London: National Autistic Society. | Participatory research report | Uses large survey data, interviews and transport-industry input to explore autistic people’s experiences of transport. | 🟢 KEEP / SUPPORT | Strong lived-experience context. Useful when discussing autonomy, uncertainty, sensory barriers and inaccessible transport. Mainly broader ground transport rather than aviation. |
| Universitat Oberta de Catalunya / PATHS (2025) | Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (2025) ‘Experts from the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya and the Universitat Rovira i Virgili present recommendations to make airports more inclusive for people with autism’, 14 October. | Research-project findings / university report | PATHS gathered around 300 survey responses plus focus groups/co-creation. It suggests stress can begin before reaching the airport and that different autistic passengers want different forms of support. | 🟢 VERY USEFUL | Use for one of my main arguments: there is no single autistic traveller profile. It also supports whole-journey thinking and preparation before travel. Make clear these are project findings rather than a peer-reviewed paper. |
| Suau-Sánchez, Morales-Hidalgo and Colacios-Parra (2026) | Suau-Sánchez, P., Morales-Hidalgo, P. and Colacios-Parra, R. (2026) ‘Air transport and autism: how to make air travel accessible?’, SOM Salud Mental 360, 15 June. | Expert/research communication article | Presents findings and recommendations associated with the PATHS work around accessible air travel. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Useful for translating PATHS into practical design areas, but don't treat this and the UOC article as two independent studies because they relate to the same project. |
| UK Civil Aviation Authority (2026a) | UK Civil Aviation Authority (2026) Wave Fourteen: UK Aviation Consumer Survey: Full Survey Report (CAP3213). London: UK Civil Aviation Authority. | Government/regulator survey | Gives broader evidence about disabled and non-disabled consumers’ participation and satisfaction with aviation. | 🟡 CONTEXT | Use for one or two contextual statistics if useful. Do not present disability-wide figures as autism-specific. |
| UK Civil Aviation Authority (2026b) | UK Civil Aviation Authority (2026) ‘UK airports improve accessibility as demand for assistance reaches record levels’, 4 August. | Regulator/industry data | Reports very high use of airport assistance services in the UK. | 🟡 CONTEXT | Use to show that airport accessibility affects a substantial passenger population. Do not say the figure represents autistic passengers. |
| UK Civil Aviation Authority (n.d.) | UK Civil Aviation Authority (n.d.) Your Accessibility Rights. London: UK Civil Aviation Authority. | Regulatory guidance | Explains passenger rights and assistance available to disabled passengers, including people with non-visible disabilities. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Use if I need to explain what assistance passengers are already entitled to. Helps distinguish a lack of legal provision from problems with how support actually works in practice. |

Existing Airport / Design Practice Precedents

| Organisation | Harvard reference | Source type | What does it actually show? | Keep? | So what? How could I use this? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hidden Disabilities Sunflower | Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Scheme Limited (2023) Hidden Disabilities. Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Scheme Limited. | Accessibility scheme / practice precedent | Gives people with non-visible disabilities a discreet way of signalling that they may need additional time, understanding or support. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Use to show that identifying a hidden disability is already widespread. Then critically ask: identifying that someone needs support is not the same as telling us what support they actually need. |
| Heathrow Airport | Heathrow Airport Limited (n.d.) Non-visible Disabilities. London: Heathrow Airport Limited. | Airport case study | Heathrow provides autism familiarisation through Flight Ready, covering stages of the passenger journey before someone actually travels. | 🟢 STRONG PRECEDENT | Very relevant to my physical rehearsal idea. Shows airport familiarisation already exists. My project can explore how rehearsal might become portable, repeatable and available in community settings. |
| Gold Coast Airport | Gold Coast Airport (n.d.) Hidden Disabilities. Gold Coast: Gold Coast Airport. | Airport case study | Combines visual Social Stories, sensory maps, communication materials, virtual familiarisation and other hidden-disability resources. | 🟢 STRONG PRECEDENT | Use for information and rehearsal design. Particularly useful for showing that processes such as security can be broken down visually before travelling. |
| Vancouver Airport Authority / YVR | Vancouver Airport Authority (n.d.) Resources for Neurodivergent Passengers. Vancouver: Vancouver Airport Authority. | Airport case study / interactive training | Provides preparation resources and interactive travel training that walks users through stages of an airport journey. | 🟢 VERY STRONG PRECEDENT | Probably the closest precedent to my concept. Use to prove that interactive rehearsal already exists, then explain what my adult-focused portable/community approach might add. |
| Dubai Airports | Dubai Airports (n.d.) DXB for All. Dubai: Dubai Airports. | Airport/service-design case study | Brings multiple forms of accessibility support together across the passenger journey. | 🟢 STRONG PRECEDENT | Use for service design. Helps me argue that accessibility may work better as a connected system rather than isolated individual products. |
| Changi Airport | Goh, S.M. (2025) ‘Changi Airport’s first sensory space at Terminal 2 welcomes travellers with invisible disabilities’, Now Boarding, 16 October. | Airport/environmental design case study | Shows an airport approach using different sensory zones and spaces rather than one universal sensory environment. | 🟡 SUPPORT | Use when discussing sensory choice and personalisation. My concern about conflicting sensory needs is my own critical reflection, not something the case study itself proves. |

Methodology Sources

| Author / year | Full Harvard reference | Source type | What does it actually say? | Keep? | So what? How could I use this? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Braun and Clarke (2006) | Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp. 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. | Foundational methodology article | Introduces thematic analysis as a method for identifying and interpreting patterns within qualitative data. | 🟢 CORE METHOD | Use to justify why I used thematic analysis on questionnaire responses. |
| Braun and Clarke (2021) | Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE. | Methodology book | Develops their more recent approach to reflexive thematic analysis and explains coding, developing themes and researcher interpretation. | 🟢 VERY CORE METHOD | Probably my main analysis-method reference. Use to explain that themes were developed through engagement with the data rather than decided in advance. |
| Byrne (2022) | Byrne, D. (2022) ‘A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis’, Quality & Quantity, 56(3), pp. 1391–1412. doi: 10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y. | Worked methodology example | Shows practically how Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis can move from raw data through coding and theme development. | 🟢 KEEP METHOD | Use to explain how I actually applied the method, not merely what thematic analysis theoretically is. |
| Malterud, Siersma and Guassora (2016) | Malterud, K., Siersma, V.D. and Guassora, A.D. (2016) ‘Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power’, Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), pp. 1753–1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444. | Qualitative-methodology paper | Argues that suitable qualitative sample size depends on the information the sample provides rather than one universal numerical rule. | 🟡 SUPPORT METHOD | Useful when discussing the scale and limitations of my primary research. Helps me avoid making an unsupported claim that I reached “saturation”. |