Most Americans expect AI to make creative thinking worse

The writer's problem

A novelist deciding how openly to talk about using an AI drafting tool is guessing at an audience's mood, not just a platform's rule. Pew Research Center's report on how Americans view AI, based on a survey of the general public rather than any publisher or platform, offers a documented measure of that mood, including views on creativity specifically.

What the documents show

Pew's own methodology states the survey drew on 5,023 U.S. adults from its American Trends Panel, a group recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses and weighted to represent the adult population, fielded 9 to 15 June 2025. That is a materially different sampling method from a self-selected online poll, and Pew's report is explicit about the distinction. On the specific question of creativity, a chapter of the same report states that 16 percent of respondents think increased AI use in society will make people's ability to think creatively better, 53 percent think it will make that ability worse, and 16 percent expect neither effect, with the remainder unsure. This is a question about a general human ability, not a question naming books, music or art specifically, and the report does not claim otherwise. The same report notes that concern about AI's effects on daily life generally, at 50 percent of adults, is up from 37 percent in 2021, while only 10 percent say they are more excited than concerned.

The editorial choice

A writer or publisher should not treat this finding as evidence that readers will punish visible AI assistance in a specific book; the survey measures a broad, forward-looking prediction about human ability in general, not a verdict on any disclosed AI-assisted work. Editorially, the more defensible use of this data is as a baseline for audience skepticism about AI's effect on creativity broadly, which argues for clear, specific disclosure of what a tool actually did in a given book rather than relying on a general sense that readers are already either comfortable or hostile.

What stays with the author

Pew's survey describes public sentiment; it does not describe what any individual reader will think of an individual book, and it says nothing about craft quality. Deciding how to present a book's use of AI tools, and standing behind the finished text, remains a choice the survey cannot make and does not attempt to settle.

• Does a general worry about AI and creativity change how a specific, disclosed use should be framed?
• Would this finding differ if Pew asked about books, music or art by name rather than creative thinking broadly?
• What would a similar survey of an author's own readership find, compared with the general public?

The report is a documented measure of general public sentiment as retrieved on 16 September 2026, not a verdict on any particular book, tool or disclosure choice.