BACKGROUND: Mobility devices such as walkers and wheelchairs are often associated with certain stigma. Such devices must be designed with the goal of reducing stigma to decrease the abandonmentrate. Yet there is little empirical evidence on how mobility devices are perceived. OBJECTIVE: This study set out to explore how (N = 40) non-disabled individuals perceived four common mobility devices including a traditional walker, rollator, manual wheelchair and a powered wheelchair. METHODS: A questionnaire based on semantic differential scales was designed. RESULTS: The results show that the more elaborate devices are perceived as more aesthetical and lighter, yet more unsafe and impractical. Moreover, respondents familiar with mobility devices through family and friends gave more biased negative responses in terms of device characteristics compared to nonexperienced respondents. Next, non-experienced respondents perceived the manual wheelchair to be more stigmatizing compared to experienced respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The findings evidence that different designs of products in the same category can evoke different perceptions of non-users regarding practical, aesthetical and symbolic aspects. Insight into how different design characteristics are associated with perceptions of non-users may contribute to the comprehension of assistive The final publication is available at IOS Press through

No abstract