Intelligence applied to large cities is evaluated not only by present terms and technical aspects like sustainability, environmentalism, and TICs, but also on the basis of historical, sociological, landscaping, and urban factors with which a city is developed (Cantarero-García, 2018).

Intelligent cities use information and communication technologies to improve the quality of life of their citizens, the local economy, transportation, traffic management, the environment, and interaction with the government (Ismagilova et al., 2019). With the modernization of smart cities and the technological advancement of the Internet of things (IoT), we are now reaching a point where technology can be woven into the fabric of our cities (Dembsky et al., 2020; Baghezza et al., 2022).

Many demographic pressures have been solved with the use of digital technologies. The solutions implemented in intelligent cities within some developing countries can help satisfy the increasing demand of services and infrastructure (Shapiro, 2016; Tan et al., 2020). More and more, governments are implementing intelligent and digital strategies to promote citizen participation (Brenner, 2002; Caragliu et al., 2011; Van Den Berg et al., 2020). Useful directives were provided to politicians in charge and city administrators in order to define and to bolster their smart city strategies and their action plans towards appropriate implementation (Neiroti et al., 2014).

Researchers affirm that the rate and the reach of technology, as a force to solve problems, connect people, share information, and organize civic life, have increased as a result of COVID-19. They critically review how the use of technology influences the potential of civic commitment of an intelligent city, especially for people with disabilities. They also articulate new challenges for virtual participation in citizen life in terms of accessibility, viability, and fairness (Bricout et al., 2021).

Cardullo and Kitchin (2019) state that, in reaction to criticism of the smart city being too technocratic and instrumental, companies and cities have reformulated their initiatives to be more citizen-centric. They used this concept to measure the inclusion, participation, and empowerment of Smart Citizens in smart city initiatives. Both concluded that meaningful policies are needed to rethink the concepts of Smart Citizens and Smart Citizenship and smart cities need to be reworked if they are to really focus on the citizen.

Tomor (2020) shows that citizen participation in a smart city should not be understood as a technological utopia or dystopia, but as an evolving practice, technologically mediated and configured by a variety of factors. Nan and Pardo (2011) offer strategic principles that align with the three main dimensions of a smart city, which are technology, people, and institutions. The strategies are the integration of infrastructures and services mediated by technology, social learning to strengthen human infrastructure, and governance through institutional improvement and citizen participation.

Four years ago, on December 2–6, 2018 at the 18th International Conference on Electronic Business in Guilin, China, researchers from the Tsinghua University in China and the Northumbria University in the United Kingdom spoke of the four dimensions in the Smart Citizen study. The four dimensions are: 1) slacktivism and the knowledge bubble, 2) personal digitalization, 3) virtual social relationship, and 4) digital life process burden (Tian et al., 2018).

Blacut and Roche (2020) affirmed that smart cities are particularly suitable for improving urban inclusion by combining digital transition and social innovation. The authors demonstrated that, through spatial modification and having better control of spatial skills, deaf people can be offered new skills to improve their use of technology in support of urban mobility, as well as to provide them with tools to feel safer in urban environments. Researchers highlight the importance of an accessible environment to ensure the rights of people with disabilities. They show the role of urbanism in this process, addressing the concept and essence of urban planning and reveal a new task to provide accessibility for residents with disabilities (Kurbatova et al., 2020).

However, the advent of this new digital age brings with it new challenges, including the digital divide. Based on the context and problems of people with intellectual disabilities, researchers Romero-Torres and Lussier-Desrochers (2018) presented a model of accessibility for the digital world. They outlined possible solutions and three recommendations to develop alliances between citizens and institutions for creating an intelligent community.

In terms of citizen intelligence, the field of psychology has analyzed society in more detail as well as the behavior of the individual living within it. However, architects and urban planners have had little training in the physical-spatial interaction of the inhabitant in architecture and urbanism. In other words, a working connection is lacking between architects, urban planners, and engineers with psychologists.

Intelligence is the general mental capacity that implies, among other things, aptitude to reason, plan, solve problems, think in an abstract way, understand complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience (Colom et al., 2022).

In 2019, R. J. Sternberg developed studies based on including and understanding intelligence such as the capacity of adaptation to one’s environment (Sternberg, 2019). He defends that to measure the traditional intellectual quotient (IQ), few speak of the capacity of the individual to adapt to the context. Other authors like H. Gardner with his popular theory of multiple intelligences Gardner (1983) or D. Goleman (1995) with the concept of emotional intelligence, also indicate other important factors in the understanding of the intellectual functioning of people.

Although the term intellectual disability (ID) has always been linked to the concept of intelligence, new theoretical models try to move away from the most rigid criteria of the understanding of ID, which only considers the IQ, and take into account other aspects (Carrillo Marcos, 2013). Shalock defines ID as a construct characterized by significant limitations in the ability to manipulate symbolic information and adaptive behavior (adaptive, conceptual, and practical skills) that affect one’s quality of life Shalock et al. (2010).

There is more and more research focused on evaluating different aspects of the life of people with disabilities and developing initiatives that improve their quality of life. In spite of this, in a context in which cities are more complex, it is still difficult to face all the necessities of the population and to motivate completely inclusive projects (Rebernik, 2017).

Little literature exists with studies on the relationship between the ID inhabitant, architecture, and urbanism, which gives rise to non-inclusive projects that foster inequality and the dependency of people with ID (Rebernik, 2017). In particular, some people with ID present or display deficits in their visuospatial abilities, which seriously harms their capacity for direction and, therefore, their autonomy (Rosselli, 2015).

The objective of this review is to establish a methodology to analyze the learning performance of students with disabilities with the use of tools that stimulate their visuospatial abilities. Two spatial activities were developed that serve to implement the method. Two specific places were selected for the development of these activities. The first area is a limited section in the Madrid Río area (Space SA1-Activity 1) to the south of the capital of Spain. The second is within a university campus (SA 2- Space Activity 2) with the purpose of establishing a time lag route. To carry out this objective, the following hypotheses are proposed:

- The use of spatial orientation GPS tools improves the learning of students with disabilities in comparison with the use of other traditional methods.

Assuming that all citizens are not equipped with the same intellectual quotient and that a citizen will process information differently at different ages in his or her life, it is difficult to understand the concept of a Smart Citizen from a general spectrum. The citizen may suffer from a temporary or permanent disease that may cause the quotient to be lowered in a specific time throughout his or her life. For that reason, generalizing this concept is not advisable. Nevertheless, we can focus the study in the pertinent fields of investigation and thus understand how to improve the quality of life of a person with an intellectual disability and his or her integration into an inclusive society.

It is necessary for the physical space (not only the virtual one) to become a field of study for the development of spatial intelligence in people with intellectual disabilities and their interaction with the already studied smart city. This has yet to be determined.

These activities awaken an awareness of autonomy in the student and his or her non-dependence on digital systems. A comparison is established in using and not using technology in one’s day-to-day life and, as a personal challenge, allows the student to be in a space, urban or natural, and discover that the different elements can help guide him or her without the aid of a navigator.

It was necessary to start from this basic base to check results to take in consideration for next future steps that could open paths and new research hypotheses in which “time” is not the only factor involved but rather 2D or 3D Dimensions (if the 3D blueprint is better understood than the 2D blueprint), the environment or the landscaping character (if it is an urban landscape route or if it is a natural landscape route), Sun light (if the Sun lights and shadows affect to the orientation sense), the students age and the student’s IQ.

Despite the fact that the results indicate that GPS seems to be the most favorable condition for autonomy, it would be necessary to study whether, in the long term, the possible dependence on this tool favors or limits the development of visuospatial skills. For this reason, the implementation of putting into practice the present method opens up different lines of study in the field of architecture and psychology but also in other lesser-known fields such as optometry:

- Further development of the concept of the Smart Citizen in areas that are not only technological but humanistic as well.