Despite widespread discussions about artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on society, little work has objectively measured how often people use this technology in the wild. The present article collected up to 90 days of web-browsing data from students (Study 1: N = 499) and those in the general public (Study 2: N = 455), quantifying how often people used AI and evaluating the psychological correlates of such use. Upon coding 4.1 million websites in Study 1 and 9.9 million websites in Study 2, the evidence suggested that AI use was relatively infrequent, totaling 1% of student web-browsing and 0.44% of general public web-browsing, on average. The most consistent predictors of AI use across studies were aversive personality traits (e.g., Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy), albeit the traits were differentially associated with AI use across studies. Demographics were largely unrelated to AI use across studies. Finally, we observed that self-reported AI use and actual AI use were only moderately correlated (ρ = 0.329), suggesting limitations in subjective measures of media use. These findings provide some of the first behavioral measurements of AI in naturalistic settings and establish important benchmarks for understanding the individual differences associated with AI adoption.
WangD-Q, FengL-Y, YeJ-G, et al.Accelerating the integration of ChatGPT and other large-scale AI models into biomedical research and healthcare. MedComm – Future Medicine, 2023; 2(2):e43; doi: 10.1002/mef2.43
3.
PiersonE, ShanmugamD, MovvaR, et al.Using large language models to promote health equity. Nejm Ai, 2025; 2(2):AIp2400889; doi: 10.1056/AIp2400889
4.
HautalaJ, HeinoH. Spectrum of AI futures imaginaries by AI practitioners in Finland and Singapore: The unimagined speed of AI progress. Futures, 2023; 153:103247; doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2023.103247
5.
MengJ, DaiY (Nancy). Emotional support from AI chatbots: Should a supportive partner self-disclose or not? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2021; 26(4):207–222; doi: 10.1093/jcmc/zmab005
6.
CaveS, DihalK. Hopes and fears for intelligent machines in fiction and reality. Nat Mach Intell, 2019; 1(2):74–78; doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0020-9
7.
TamburriniG. The AI carbon footprint and responsibilities of AI scientists. Philosophies, 2022; 7(1):4; doi: 10.3390/philosophies7010004
8.
MonteithS, GlennT, GeddesJR, et al.Artificial intelligence and increasing misinformation. Br J Psychiatry, 2024; 224(2):33–35; doi: 10.1192/bjp.2023.136
9.
LewisSC, MarkowitzDM, BunquinJBA. Journalists, emotions, and the introduction of generative AI chatbots: A large-scale analysis of tweets before and after the launch of ChatGPT. Soc Media Soc, 2025; 11(1):20563051251325597; doi: 10.1177/20563051251325597
10.
NowlandR, NeckaEA, CacioppoJT. Loneliness and social internet use: Pathways to reconnection in a digital world? Perspect Psychol Sci, 2018; 13(1):70–87; doi: 10.1177/1745691617713052
11.
ValkenburgPM, PeterJ. Online communication and adolescent well-being: Testing the stimulation versus the displacement hypothesis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2007; 12(4):1169–1182; doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00368.x
12.
KahnAS, RatanR, WilliamsD. Why we distort in self-report: Predictors of self-report errors in video game play. J Comput-Mediat Comm, 2014; 19(4):1010–1023; doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12056
13.
BoaseJ, LingR. Measuring mobile phone use: Self-report versus log data. J Comput-Mediat Comm, 2013; 18(4):508–519; doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12021
14.
GreenbergBS, EastinMS, SkalskiP, et al.Comparing survey and diary measures of internet and traditional media use. Communication Reports, 2005; 18(1–2):1–8; doi: 10.1080/08934210500084164
15.
LiuH, DingN, LiX, et al.Artificial intelligence and radiologist burnout. JAMA Netw Open, 2024; 7(11):e2448714; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48714
16.
LiY, SongY, SunY, et al.When do employees learn from artificial intelligence? The moderating effects of perceived enjoyment and task-related complexity. Technology in Society, 2024; 77:102518; doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102518
17.
CardonPW, MarshallB. Can AI be your teammate or friend? Frequent AI users are more likely to grant humanlike roles to AI. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 2024; 87(4):654–669; doi: 10.1177/23294906241282764
18.
LiuY, ZhangZ, WuY. Will generative AI create a new social divide? Investigating the impacts of cenerative AI use on social capital in China. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2025; 41(18):11324–11340; doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2443242
19.
Clemm von HohenbergB, StierS, CardenalAS, et al.Analysis of web browsing data: A guide. Social Science Computer Review, 2024; 42(6):1479–1504; doi: 10.1177/08944393241227868
20.
StachlC, AuQ, SchoedelR, et al.Predicting personality from patterns of behavior collected with smartphones. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2020; 117(30):17680–17687; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1920484117
21.
HarariGM, VaidSS, MüllerSR, et al.Personality sensing for theory development and assessment in the digital age. Eur J Pers, 2020; 34(5):649–669; doi: 10.1002/per.2273
22.
Amichai-HamburgerY, VinitzkyG. Social network use and personality. Comput Human Behav, 2010; 26(6):1289–1295; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018
23.
McCainJL, CampbellWK. Narcissism and social media use: A meta-analytic review. Psychol Pop Media Cult, 2018; 7(3):308–327; doi: 10.1037/ppm0000137
24.
SeidmanG. Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Pers Individ Dif, 2013; 54(3):402–407; doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009
25.
GoslingSD, RentfrowPJ, SwannWB. A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. J Res Pers, 2003; 37(6):504–528; doi: 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
26.
JonesDN, PaulhusDL. Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3). Assessment, 2014; 21(1):28–41; doi: 10.1177/1073191113514105
27.
GrassiniS. Development and validation of the AI attitude scale (AIAS-4): A brief measure of general attitude toward artificial intelligence. Front Psychol, 2023; 14:1191628; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1191628
28.
DavisFD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 1989; 13(3):319–340; doi: 10.2307/249008
CoxDR, LewisPAW. The Statistical Analysis of Series of Events. Methuen’s Monographs on Applied Probability and Statistics. Springer. Dordrecht: 1966.
34.
SerotaKB, LevineTR. A few prolific liars: Variation in the prevalence of lying. J Lang Soc Psychol, 2015; 34(2):138–157; doi: 10.1177/0261927x14528804
35.
MarkowitzDM. Toward a deeper understanding of prolific lying: Building a profile of situation-level and individual-level characteristics. Communication Research, 2023; 50(1):80–105; doi: 10.1177/00936502221097041
GavriletsS, VoseA. The dynamics of Machiavellian intelligence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2006; 103(45):16823–16828; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0601428103
38.
BrewerG, AbellL, LyonsM. Machiavellianism, competition and self-disclosure in friendship. Individual Differences Research, 2014; 12(1):1–7.
39.
Aplin-HoutzMJ, LeahyS, WilleyS, et al.Tales from the dark side of technology acceptance: The dark triad and the technology acceptance model. Empl Responsib Rights J (Dordr), 2023; 36(4):1–33; doi: 10.1007/s10672-023-09453-6
40.
ThomaesS, BrummelmanE, SedikidesC. Narcissism: A Social-Developmental Perspective. In: The SAGE Handbook of Personality and Individual Differences: Applications of Personality and Individual Differences Sage Reference; 2018; pp. 377–396; doi: 10.4135/9781526451248.n16
RyanRM, DeciEL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol, 2000; 55(1):68–78; doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
44.
XuX, GaoL, LianS, et al.How the Dark Triad associated with internet gaming disorder? The serial mediation of basic psychological needs satisfaction and negative coping styles. Curr Psychol, 2022; 42(34):1–9; doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03996-x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
