Only one-fifth of Americans feel ready to use Generative AI in their jobs

Some Americans favor support from AI companies or the U.S. government.

Sep 25, 2023

This article is part of my ongoing coverage of the 2023 Generative AI & American Society Survey, a nationally representative survey of Americans conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago. Known for producing some of the most scientifically rigorous surveys in the United States, NORC was my chosen partner for this project, which I both wrote and funded. For more details on the survey, you can check out the project FAQ.

American workers’ readiness to use new Generative AI tools is low

The text-to-image platform Midjourney recently celebrated its first birthday while ChatGPT has yet to mark its one-year launch anniversary. Despite these technologies being in their infancy, Americans are expected to adapt swiftly to Generative AI.

In August of this year, Bloomberg heralded, “Generative AI Is Coming to Your Office.” Just one month later Microsoft announced that it would expand its Bing Chat Copilot into a unified Generative AI experience crossing its widely used suite of M365 tools like Word and Excel as well as the Windows operating system. Google Duet — a rebranding of its Generative AI offering — is already available for customers of its paid Google Workspace suite, which includes Gmail, a market leading email client.

The 2023 Generative AI & American Society Survey reveals that just 21% of Americans feel prepared to employ new Generative AI tools, an understandable sentiment considering the newness and fast changing pace of Generative AI technologies. A third of Americans feel unprepared, and 22% are unsure of their preparedness, perhaps because they are not yet familiar enough with Generative AI tools. More than one-fifth (22%) believe they won’t use Generative AI in their job, a somewhat uncertain prospect at this early stage of Generative AI’s emergence.

There was diversity in feeling ready to work with Generative AI among Americans. Younger Americans tended to feel more ready than older Americans; notably just 12% of those 60 and over feel ready to work with Generative AI compared to 27% of those 18 to 29.

Higher income Americans also tend to feel more prepared with 32% of those making $100,000 or more annually feeling ready compared to just 15% of those making less than $30,000. This difference in perception of preparedness could be a misconception; a report from consulting firm McKinsey found that higher-paying jobs are those most likely to be impacted by Generative AI.

Finally, those with less educational attainment tend to feel particularly unready. Only 12% of those with no high school diploma feel ready compared to nearly a third of those with a bachelor’s degree or higher.

When it comes to feeling unprepared there is only slight variation among age groups, income brackets, and education; about a third of Americans feel unready regardless of their demographic characteristics.

Some Americans favor support from AI companies to help those impacted by Generative AI

When asked if AI companies should contribute to a support fund to provide relief to those whose jobs are impacted by Generative AI, just over four in ten Americans (42%) agreed. Another third of Americans (34%) neither agree or disagree with the proposal, while only 12% disagreed.

Public opinion on the idea of an AI support fund shows only minor differences when it comes to agreement across income levels: 42% for Americans with annual incomes exceeding $100,000 compared to 40% for those earning under $30,000. However, when it comes to disagreement, the divergence becomes more noticeable: 18% of the highest earners oppose the policy, more than twice the 8% recorded among the lowest income group.

Agreement was also slightly higher among Americans age 45 and older (44%), more educated individuals (41%), and Black Americans (51%).

Opinions on support from AI companies are shaped by a consideration of both potential benefits and drawbacks. When soliciting responses, the phrasing of the question was designed to encompass these aspects:

Idea: Companies creating AI systems should contribute to a support fund for workers who lose their jobs because of AI.
Benefit: This could help provide a financial safety net for people who lose their jobs. It might also reduce stress as they transition to new job roles.
Tradeoff: This could result in higher prices to use these AI systems. It might also mean fewer AI systems or companies are created.

One-third of Americans favor Government-funded education to help with Generative AI

While there is public backing for government-funded education to prepare for Generative AI, it's not as strong as the support for funding from AI companies. One-third of Americans endorse government-sponsored educational initiatives, compared to a quarter who oppose them. Additionally, nearly one-third of Americans (30%) remain neutral on the proposal.

The level of support for government-funded Generative AI education varies notably across different education levels, income brackets, and racial or ethnic groups. Specifically, 46% of Americans who hold a bachelor's degree or higher support the idea, compared to just 20% of those without a high school diploma. Among income categories, the highest support comes from individuals earning $100,000 or more, at 39%, whereas the support level for those earning less than $30,000 is 30%. Regarding race and ethnicity, individuals who identify as Asian, Native American, or from other racial categories show the highest level of support at 41%.

The situation is nuanced when it comes to opposition to the policy. Interestingly, individuals with higher incomes, who are most likely to support the policy, are also the most likely to oppose it, with 31% disagreeing. This contrasts with the 17% disagreement rate among those earning less than $30,000. Similarly, those with lower educational levels show a moderate level of disagreement at 35%, as do Whites at 30%.

The varying levels of support across income, racial, and educational groups may be influenced by concerns about potential tax increases or cuts to other government programs needed to fund Generative AI education. Typically, individuals with lower education, lower incomes, and non-White ethnicities are more reliant on government benefits,1 which could be affected, while those with more education and higher incomes tend to pay more in taxes.2 When soliciting the level of agreement, the survey question explicitly mentioned these possible trade-offs:

Idea: The government should fund AI education to prepare the workforce.
Benefit: This could reduce unemployment and boost the economy.
Tradeoff: This could result in higher taxes. It could also require cuts to other government programs.

How were these figures determined?

Results from the 2023 Generative AI & American Society Survey came from the National Opinion Research Center’s probability-based AmeriSpeak panel of adults ages 18 and over. AmeriSpeak is one of the most scientifically rigorous survey options available in the U.S. market. The sample size was 1,147 and responses were weighted to ensure national representation. The exact questions posed to respondents about AI preparedness and support are below. For more information, please refer to the FAQ page.

Readiness to use Generative AI tools

Think about the next three years. Do you feel ready to use Generative AI tools in your job over that period? Think about tasks like using AI for data analysis, computer programming, writing help, or creative projects.
Very ready
Somewhat ready
Not very ready
Not ready at all
I won't use AI in my job
I don’t know

A total of 13 policy questions were presented in a grid format, grouped into three thematic categories. Each question allowed respondents to choose their level of agreement. The order of the 13 questions presented to respondents was randomized. Each policy question included an idea along with potential benefits and tradeoffs.

Support for funding from AI companies

The following are some ideas for potential changes to how Generative AI systems and companies operate. Each idea has benefits, but there could also be downsides, or "tradeoffs." We've included potential benefits and tradeoffs for context, but there might be more that we haven’t mentioned.
Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each idea. Keep in mind, your opinion is only about the idea itself. The benefit and tradeoff might help guide your opinion.
Idea: Companies creating AI systems should contribute to a support fund for workers who lose their jobs because of AI.
Benefit: This could help provide a financial safety net for people who lose their jobs. It might also reduce stress as they transition to new job roles.
Tradeoff: This could result in higher prices to use these AI systems. It might also mean fewer AI systems or companies are created.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Don’t know

Support for Government-funded education programs

The following are some ideas for how governments might handle Generative AI. Each idea has benefits, but there could also be downsides, or "tradeoffs". We've included potential benefits and tradeoffs for context, but there might be more that we haven’t mentioned.
Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each idea. Keep in mind, your opinion is only about the idea itself. The benefit and tradeoff might help guide your opinion.
Idea: The government should fund AI education to prepare the workforce.
Benefit: This could reduce unemployment and boost the economy.
Tradeoff: This could result in higher taxes. It could also require cuts to other government programs.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Don’t know

If you have additional questions, comments, or suggestions please do leave a comment below or email me at james@96layers.ai. To help advance the understanding of public attitudes about Generative AI I’m making all raw data behind the 2023 Generative AI & American Society Survey available free of charge. Please email me if you’re interested.

See Figure 2 in “The Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2020” produced by the United States Census.

See this chart from the Tax Foundation, or the full 2023 article for more details. Education is strongly correlated with income and therefore with paying more in federal income taxes.