How and Why People Use Gen AI
The recently released data explaining how individuals use artificial intelligence (AI) presents a complicated first glance.
In an April 9, 2025 "How People Are Really Using Gen AI in 2025" article published in the Harvard Business Review , Marc Zao-Sanders identified 1)Therapy/companionship, 2)Organizing my life, and 3)Finding Purpose as the top three reasons people use generative AI tools.
To download the full report via PDF, click here.
Why people are using generative AI in the manner in which they currently do remains both practical and simultaneously complicated. As one South Africa respondent noted as to why they use generative AI for Therapy/companionship “Where I’m from, in South Africa, mental healthcare barely exists; there’s a psychologist for 1 in every 100,000 people and a psychiatrist for 1 in every 300,000 people. Large language models are accessible to everyone, and they can help. Unfortunately, data safety is not a concern when your health is deteriorating, and survival is the morning agenda.”
With ubiquitous generative AI tools available around the world, the sudden and tremendous gap between individuals who have access to the tools and the corresponding lack of trained professionals to treat people makes perfect sense. No professional training of a specific occupation (ex: psychologists) could possibly keep pace with the global accessibility of generative AI tools.
A global epidemic of loneliness remains another explanation as to these latest findings. For example, President Joe Biden’s Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, issued an advisory warning about an “epidemic of loneliness” and governments in the United Kingdom and Japan appointed ‘loneliness ministers’ to help find solutions.
Additionally, a Global Loneliness Awareness Week 2025 will now take place from June 9 to 15. The theme for the week is "Meeting Loneliness Together,” aiming to reduce the stigma around loneliness and encourage supportive communities. Even if the debate around the extent of the global loneliness epidemic requires additional research, analysis and discussion, it remains safe to suggest some people are using generative AI tools for companionship to combat their loneliness.
Another layer of complexity in understanding how and why individuals use generative AI lies in the personalization and adaptability of these tools. Unlike traditional static digital services, generative AI tailors responses based on user input, tone, and evolving emotional states.
This adaptability can create an illusion of empathy and understanding, which offers comfort during moments of vulnerability. As interactions with these tools increase, the boundary between utility and emotional connection becomes increasingly blurred—especially for individuals who lack consistent access to human support systems. Generative AI does not judge, interrupt, or display impatience. These perceived characteristics, though algorithmically generated, may fulfill emotional needs that would otherwise go unmet, at least temporarily.
In addition, the organizational support provided by generative AI resonates with those overwhelmed by the demands of modern life. Balancing professional responsibilities, family duties, personal aspirations, and mental wellness often results in significant stress. A growing number of people now depend on generative AI to handle scheduling, generate written communications, facilitate brainstorming sessions, and recommend wellness routines. These tools operate as digital assistants, coaches, and even sources of encouragement.
For example, a professional managing both household obligations and a remote team might utilize generative AI to draft meeting agendas, create proposals, and simultaneously receive guidance on stress management techniques. This broad functionality elevates generative AI from a mere technical asset to an indispensable element of daily life.
In terms of the human quest for purpose, the motivations are less tangible but no less powerful. The decline of traditional societal structures—such as organized religion, multigenerational families, and long-term career trajectories—has left many individuals searching for meaning in an increasingly digital landscape.
Generative AI has begun to serve in this introspective space, assisting with self-reflection exercises, goal setting, and philosophical inquiries. Some users instruct AI to conduct Socratic-style dialogues, while others request analysis of personal writing to identify emotional or behavioral trends. While generative AI cannot genuinely comprehend the human experience, it often mimics emotional intelligence effectively enough to provide a sense of being acknowledged.
Nonetheless, the ethical implications of such usage remain significant. Concerns about data privacy, emotional dependence, and the potential displacement of authentic human interaction continue to prompt serious discussions.
Despite these issues, many individuals persist in using generative AI tools because these systems address needs that traditional infrastructures often overlook. Whether the demand involves emotional support, practical organization, or existential exploration, generative AI fills a crucial void. Although it cannot provide genuine companionship, flawless efficiency, or absolute purpose, its responses are immediate, tailored, and perceived as supportive.