My developing project explores how airport journey information, environmental options and traveller-controlled assistance might operate as a connected communication system. Before selecting a final format, I needed to compare how the same information could be delivered through different touchpoints.

For this experiment, I used a fictional scenario in which an autistic adult travelling independently has passed through security and is waiting near gate B12. The confirmed departure gate changes to A04. This scenario provides a bounded design problem; it does not suggest that every autistic traveller would experience the change in the same way.

Working communication requirements

The design needs to communicate three things clearly:

1. What changed: distinguish the previous gate, B12, from the new gate, A04, and show which information is current.
2. What to do next: present an understandable immediate action while preserving access to the wider journey overview.
3. Where to find optional information or assistance: make environmental details and human help discoverable without requiring the traveller to use them.

Directions should remain available if assistance is declined. A request for help must also be distinguished from confirmation that support will be provided.

Comparing three delivery approaches

Figure: Early comparison of phone-led, shared-information and coordinated approaches using the fictional B12 to A04 gate change.

1. Phone-led communication

The phone-led approach brings the gate update, directions and optional choices into one personal interface. This could provide continuity and allow the traveller to control what information they open. Its main limitation is dependence on a charged, working device and the need to attend to a screen during a potentially time-sensitive change. Any proposed route duration or quieter route shown in the sketch is illustrative and would require reliable operational and environmental data.

2. Shared airport information

The shared-information approach communicates the change through public displays, an airport map and an information point. It does not require a personal device and keeps responsibility for core journey information visible within the airport environment. However, the traveller must locate the relevant display, map or staff member, and the information may offer less personal control or detail.

3. Coordinated communication

The coordinated approach uses shared airport communication to confirm the gate change while allowing a personal interface to provide directions, environmental details and optional assistance. This offers more than one route to the same essential information and keeps ordinary guidance available if the traveller does not want support. Its central challenge is consistency: public displays, maps, personal information and staff processes would need to communicate the same verified update.

Provisional design decision

The coordinated approach is the strongest direction to develop because it distributes communication across personal and shared touchpoints while preserving choice. The public system provides the essential confirmed instruction, while the phone adds personal options rather than becoming the only means of accessing the journey.

This remains a design proposition rather than evidence of improved usability. The sketch exposes operational dependencies, particularly the need for consistent information and truthful assistance states, which must remain visible in later prototypes.