---

---

18.12.2025 18:31

Who Uses Artificial Intelligence in Research − And for What?

Dr. Myriam Rion Pressestelle
Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

A new study provides answers based on a survey with more than 6,000 researchers from the Max Planck Society and the Fraunhofer Society. The Highlights: Researchers actively use AI, including for core and creative research tasks. The gender gap in AI use largely reflects differences in familiarity, not attitudes. Researchers cite legal uncertainty as a major barrier to AI adoption.

In June 2024, all employees of the Max Planck Society and the Fraunhofer Society were invited to take part in an anonymous survey on their use of AI tools for their work. As researchers and support staff have substantially different task profiles and opportunities to use AI, they are considered separately. The current analysis focuses on the 6,215 complete responses from researchers, which are broadly representative of the two research organizations. The survey addressed AI tools in general rather than generative AI specifically, though the latter may have featured prominently in respondents’ considerations due to their visibility in public discourse.

The key insights into researchers’ use of AI have now been published in "Research Policy", an internationally leading peer-reviewed journal focusing on research, technology, and innovation policy and their implications for science, the economy, and society.

RESEARCHERS ACTIVELY USE AI TOOLS, WITH ADAOPTION PATTERNS VARYING WITH ROLES AND BELIEFS.

Many researchers in the sample are already using AI tools: 42.4% say they are very or fairly familiar with these tools, while 44.0% say they have used them a few times or more. Nearly a quarter (25.9%) of all researchers use AI tools daily or more frequently. Only about one in five researchers (22.2%) never use AI for work.

Clear patterns emerge regarding who is more familiar with AI. Younger researchers tend to use AI more often than older ones. Those with higher education levels are also more familiar with AI tools. Women report lower familiarity with AI tools than men.

Respondents who use AI tools tend to be more positive about their potential impact on research quality, skill development, and society in general. While an overwhelming majority of researchers (69.2%) expect AI to transform, or even revolutionize, their field in the next decade, they are more divided in their opinions about the effect of AI tools on society: 40.6% believe AI tools offer more opportunities than risks, while 22.2% think they pose more risks than opportunities.

A GENDER GAP IN AI USE APPEARS – AS ALSO DOCUMENTED IN OTHER STUDIES – AND IS LARGELY EXPLAINED BY DIFFERENCES IN FAMILIARITY WITH AI TOOLS.

Other studies have documented that women tend to use AI less than men do. We also document this tendency among scientists for research tasks. Our fine-grained data establish that the gender gap in AI usage for research is not due to ability or negative beliefs about AI, but rather due to familiarity with AI tools. Once women start using AI tools, they find them to be just as helpful as men do.

AI IS BECOMING A CO-CREATOR, SUPPORTING NOT ONLY PERIPHERAL BUT CORE RESEARCH TASKS.

Researchers now use AI at every stage of the research process. The most common applications include testing ideas, writing code, and drafting research papers. Interestingly, researchers use AI tools more for the tasks on which they spend the most time.

EFFICIENCY IS A MAJOR DRIVER FOR USE, YET MANY STRUGGLE WITH EFFECTIVE PROMPTING.

Half of the researchers (50.4%) reported using AI to speed up their work. However, our survey suggests that effectively using AI tools requires skill. To proxy prompting ability, we showed respondents a picture of a visual phenomenon and asked them to create a prompt to identify the phenomenon from a Large Language Model (LLM). We considered a prompt successful if, after ten iterations with an LLM, at least one returned the correct answer or suggested uploading the picture to an LLM. Despite their advanced educational background and awareness of AI tools, only a fifth of researchers (21.0% ) managed to create a successful prompt for the test task. Learning to write prompts seems to be a new skill in itself. Those who have received training on how to write prompts and use AI are much more likely to produce good prompts.

INSTITUTIONS CAN ACCELERATE ADOPTION BY ADDRESSING KEY BARRIERS: LEGAL UNCERTAINTY, LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, AND LIMITED ACCESS TO SUITABLE TOOLS.

Many of the obstacles to more frequent AI use could be mitigated through institutional action. The most frequently mentioned barriers are legal uncertainties (17.6%), lack of knowledge (17.4%), and limited availability of suitable tools (16.6%). Legal uncertainties are especially important for researchers who handle a lot of administrative work, such as personnel and project management.

Researchers also want clearer guidelines. Most respondents prefer high-level guidance to address legal uncertainties. 58.7% expect guidance from supranational bodies, such as the EU, and 51.3% expect guidance from their own research organizations (the Max Planck Society or the Fraunhofer Society).

CONCLUSION

The rapid development of AI has led to the quick adoption of new tools by the research community, making AI an important subject of research as well as a tool for advancing research. Researchers are increasingly integrating AI into their core activities. While opinions are divided about the long-term impact of AI on breakthrough innovation, skill development, and research equity, there is a general consensus that this technology will transform research practice profoundly. As AI becomes an increasingly important research tool, it is essential to understand who uses it, for which tasks, and what challenges they face. This knowledge is crucial for designing future policies, supporting researchers in adopting the technology effectively and responsibly, and safeguarding scholarly standards.

ABOUT THE MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR INNOVATION AND COMPETITION

The Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition is committed to fundamental legal and economic research on processes of innovation and competition and their regulation. The Institute's research focuses on the incentives, determinants and implications of innovation. With an outstanding international team of scholars and excellent scientific and administrative infrastructure including the renowned library, the Institute hosts academics from all over the world and actively promotes young researchers. Through dedicated educational efforts, the Institute engages in the training and mentoring of early-career researchers and fosters knowledge exchange with national and international institutions. The Institute informs and guides legal and economic discourse on an impartial basis. As an independent research institution, the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition provides evidence-based research results to academia, policymakers, the private sector as well as the general public.

To the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition: https://www.ip.mpg.de/en/

---

Wissenschaftliche Ansprechpartner:

Dr. Marina Chugunova
Senior Research Fellow
https://www.ip.mpg.de/en/persons/chugunova-marina.html

---

Originalpublikation:

Chugunova, Marina; Harhoff, Dietmar; Hölzle, Katharina; Kaschub, Verena; Malagimani, Sonal; Morgalla, Ulrike; Rose, Robert (2026). Who Uses AI in Research, and for What? Large-Scale Survey Evidence from Germany, Research Policy, 55 (2), 105381.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2025.105381

---

---

Merkmale dieser Pressemitteilung:
Journalisten, Studierende, Wissenschaftler, jedermann
fachunabhängig
überregional
Buntes aus der Wissenschaft, Forschungsergebnisse
Englisch

---