Social representation, self-identity, and anticipated guilt in universal design: A constructivist approach to (non-)visible disabilities

Social representation, self-identity, and anticipated guilt in universal design: A constructivist approach to (non-)visible disabilities

Details

Written by:

Tommy Chan

First Published:

01 Jul 2025, 2:15 pm

Tags:

Social representation, self-identity, and anticipated guilt in universal design: A constructivist approach to (non-)visible disabilities

Hong Kong’s transit-driven vibe inspired this study. Every day, you see “priority seats” and elevators with signs for those “in need” or with “disabilities” (like the red signage above), but it’s not always clear who gets to use them. Time and again, we spot someone skipping empty priority seats or struggling upstairs and escalators—maybe catching their breath, clinging to the rail, or moving slowly from hidden pain or tiredness—yet they hesitate to use facilities they deserve because their struggle doesn’t show. It’s a shame when people who need these resources avoid them, leaving elevators quiet and seats untouched (see also the “elevator for cyclists” in Belgrade, Serbia, from Suboticki and Sørensen, 2020, in this journal). That pushed our team to explore how people with non-visible disabilities get around, looking beyond just ramps and railings.

What Drives Their Walking Route Choices?

This study zooms in on why people with/out non-visible disabilities pick certain walking paths when elevators are options. We didn’t just focus on physical hurdles—we wanted to unpack the social and emotional side: how society sees these facilities, how people view themselves, and the guilt that comes with using them. Using a mix of surveys, statistical modeling, and interviews, we found some eye-opening insights. For some, guilt can outweigh physical impairment or even identifying as “disabled” when someone decides whether to take an elevator. Picture feeling uneasy about using one because your pain isn’t obvious—that’s a real mental block! Women, we learned, often feel this guilt more but still use elevators a lot, maybe because of cultural norms or practical needs like carrying groceries. Interviews showed people wrestling with needing help versus worrying about judgmental stares.

Why It Matters: Beyond the Physical

Getting around isn’t just about point A to point B—it’s about fairness for all. Our work spotlights non-visible disabilities, which urban planners often miss. Unlike older studies stuck on obvious impairments, we used a social constructivist view—disability isn’t just a doctor’s note; it’s shaped by how society thinks. Mixing this fresh take with quantitative data and personal stories gives a richer view of city life. Key takeaway? Guilt and social attitudes can block access more than any staircase.

So, what’s next?

For researchers, planners, policymakers, and even travellers, here are some reflections: Disability isn’t yes-or-no—transport needs to fit all kinds of physical, mental, and emotional realities, even the hidden ones. Accessibility isn’t just personal; it’s about changing how we all think. Non-visible disabilities need a “seat” at the planning table for designing and testing solutions—they know what works. Awareness campaigns and staff training can also cut stigma and spark empathy. Invisible disabilities are common, but they’re barely seen in stats, policies, or our shared mindset. Let’s make the invisible visible.

Looking ahead, we see this field evolving to consider these hidden experiences. Future planning could use community input to capture self-perceived needs, not just official stats. Imagine elevators and seats with signs saying, “For anyone who needs it—no judgment”. Our study nudges toward that kind, inclusive approach, mixing ambitious theory with practical policy ideas. Hong Kong’s streets and trains belong to everyone—let’s keep the conversation going with dialogue, collaboration, and challenging norms to make cities truly welcoming.