File photo
The research paints a picture of uneven AI adoption across American society, with significant gaps between personal and professional use, and wide disparities based on demographic factors.
"The survey results lend themselves to three main conclusions: One, AI use is remarkably consistent across firm size. Two, while personal use is common, professional AI use is far from ubiquitous and many respondents expressed skepticism that it would be as revolutionary as some experts expect. And three, there are important differences across AI use by demographics, including increased use among those with higher education and lower usage for retirement-age respondents," the researchers wrote.
Fifty-seven percent of respondents reported using generative AI for at least one personal purpose, with internet searches and web browsing the most common applications. In contrast, only 21% use the technology in their professional roles, the survey found.
The research, conducted in late June through the AmeriSpeak panel at the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center, surveyed 1,163 adults and revealed stark disparities in workplace AI adoption based on educational attainment.
The education divide proved particularly pronounced in professional settings. Among workers with bachelor's degrees or higher, 33% currently use AI tools professionally, compared to 20% of those with some college or an associate's degree, 12% of high school graduates, and just 5% of individuals without high school diplomas.
"This adoption rate follows a clear education gradient," the authors noted.
Personal use also varied by education level, with 67% of those holding bachelor's degrees or higher using AI for personal purposes, compared to 46% of high school graduates.
Around 40% of all respondents reported increased AI use compared to one year ago, but here too education mattered significantly. "Over half (55%) of respondents with a bachelor's degree or higher (BA+) report some level of increased AI use in the past year. This is more than double the rate of increased use for respondents with no HS diploma (24%) and for those in the HS grad or equivalent group (27%)," according to the report.
Income levels showed similar patterns. Professional AI usage ranged from 9% among earners making less than $30,000 annually to 34% among those earning $100,000 or more.
Despite growing adoption, workers expressed considerable skepticism about AI's impact on their productivity and job security.
"The impact of generative AI on worker productivity is often unclear, even to the workers themselves. Only 19% of all respondents report that AI increased their productivity in their daily tasks, and only 4% say it increased their productivity significantly," the report stated.
Even among respondents with bachelor's degrees or more, just 28% said AI increased their productivity in daily tasks. More than half of all respondents—53%—said they were either unsure about AI's effect on their productivity or indicated the question didn't apply to them.
The survey also found widespread pessimism about AI's effect on employment opportunities. Only 11% of respondents anticipate that AI will increase job opportunities in their field over the next five years.
"Optimism is mildly higher among lower-income earners (<$30k: 15.6%) and high-school graduates (13%) than among BA+ holders (10%) and young adults (18–29: 10%)," the authors wrote.
Age proved another significant dividing line in AI adoption. Professional AI use peaked at 31% among workers aged 30-44 and remained high for those aged 45-59 at 26% and 18-29 at 25%, but plummeted to just 8% for adults aged 60 and above.
Frequency of personal AI engagement also scaled with education. Twenty percent of respondents with bachelor's degrees or higher and 21% of those with some college or an associate's degree engage with AI "daily or more," compared to just 8% of high school graduates and 8% of respondents without a diploma.
Gender differences also appeared in workplace AI use. Men's overall professional use at 25% slightly exceeded women's at 17%. "Men lead women in nearly every workplace-AI category except hiring and recruiting," the report found.
One surprising finding challenged assumptions about AI adoption by company size. The survey revealed remarkably similar usage patterns across small and large businesses.
"Approximately 29% of sampled small businesses respondents use generative AI professionally compared to 27% of respondents employed at larger firms. Furthermore, 59% of small business respondents report that their workplace's use of AI has increased over the last six months, while 60% of larger business respondents said the same," according to the report.
The authors suggested the data "could support the findings of earlier surveys which indicate that smaller firms have caught up to larger firms in AI adoption."
In specific industries, adoption rates varied considerably. Among health care professionals surveyed, 53% reported AI use, with patient communication tools cited by 25% of respondents as their primary application.
In finance, insurance, and real estate, 62% of the fewer than 50 respondents working in those fields said they use AI, with customer service the most common application at 35%.
However, both sectors showed significant gender gaps. In health care, 82% of male professionals reported AI use compared to only 40% of female professionals. In finance, 79% of men reported use compared to 39% of women.
When examining institutional AI support in the workplace, the survey found that document writing and editing was the most common application—and it too followed the education gradient.
"Among BA+ employees, 35% use AI for documents versus 16% of those with some college or an AA, 10% of high-school graduates, and only 2% of workers without a diploma," the report stated.
Higher earners also reported greater on-the-job AI adoption, with 35% of respondents earning $100,000 or more using AI for documents compared to just 8% of those earning under $30,000.
While 22% of respondents said AI use in their workplace had increased over the last six months, an even larger share—61%—said they were either unsure or that the question was not applicable.
The research was conducted by Brookings scholars Malihe Alikhani, a visiting fellow in Economic Studies, Ben Harris, vice president and director of Economic Studies, and Sanjay Patnaik, director of the Center on Regulation and Markets.
The authors noted that survey results reflect respondents' personal interpretation of their AI use rather than an objective accounting, as "respondents may have differing interpretations as to what constitutes AI usage, and some respondents may not be aware that they are using AI in certain applications."
The findings come amid ongoing debate about AI's potential to transform the American economy and labor market, with the survey suggesting that while adoption is growing, actual impact on productivity and employment remains uncertain in many workers' minds.
