Effectiveness of the International Symbol of Access and inclusivity of other disability groups.

BACKGROUND

The International Symbol of Access (ISA) is recognized world-wide for designating and identifying areas which are wheelchair accessible, however its meaning has evolved to include both restricted use and universal accessibility.

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to investigate the effectiveness of the ISA in representing individuals of all impairment types.

METHODS

A mixed-method survey was disseminated in the U.S. and internationally to persons without self-identified impairment and individuals of various impairment group types, including mobility, vision, hearing, and cognitive impairments, using convenience sampling (n = 981). Quantitative data was analyzed using ranking patterns and regression analysis. Qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis and triangulation.

RESULTS

Participants with self-identified mobility impairments rated the ISA more favorably than other disability groups (p = 0.002). In addition, there is a significant correlation between age and effectiveness of the ISA, with participants rating the symbol more favorably as age increases. Common themes included association of the ISA with a mobility impairment, implications for restricted use or reserved space, and physical accessibility.

CONCLUSIONS

The ISA is not effective in representing individuals with non-mobility impairments and its ambiguous nature leads to confusion for both persons with and without impairment.