Published: Nov 15, 2025 by Dr. Lili Luo

Generative AI (GAI) tools like ChatGPT have quickly become part of everyday professional life — and the library world is no exception. As these technologies reshape how we write, search, teach, and create, understanding how librarians are adopting them becomes increasingly critical. In my recent study, “Use of Generative AI in Aiding Daily Professional Tasks: A Survey of Librarians’ Experiences,” I set out to explore exactly that — how librarians are experimenting with generative AI in their daily work, what benefits they’re seeing, and what challenges they face along the way.

While AI applications in libraries have been discussed for years — from cataloging automation to discovery enhancement — the emergence of generative AI marks a major shift. These tools can draft, summarize, illustrate, and even teach. Yet, despite their potential, little empirical evidence existed on how librarians themselves were using them in practice.

My study aimed to fill this gap by surveying 272 librarians across diverse settings — academic, public, medical, law, government, and special libraries. The goal was simple: to document real-world practices and perceptions surrounding GAI use in the library profession.

Two-thirds (66.5%) of respondents reported using GAI tools at work. Text-based tools like ChatGPT were the most common, used by 165 librarians for tasks ranging from drafting reports and presentations to creating teaching examples and supporting reference services.

Librarians also used image-generation tools such as DALL·E or Midjourney for instructional materials, and some experimented with audio or video generation for outreach and training. This broad range of uses underscores GAI’s versatility across library functions.

On a scale of 0–10, librarians rated the effectiveness of GAI tools at an average of 6.76, suggesting strong perceived value in improving efficiency and quality of work. Respondents cited benefits such as faster content creation, enhanced communication, and improved instructional support.

These findings align with studies in other professions showing that GAI can significantly improve productivity — particularly by helping professionals generate ideas, edit text, and streamline workflows.

Despite enthusiasm, librarians also shared thoughtful concerns. The most frequently cited challenges were:

• Inconsistent accuracy and reliability of AI outputs
• Ethical and data privacy concerns
• Difficulty crafting effective prompts

These issues highlight the dual need for critical evaluation and technical skill development in AI use. As one respondent noted, mastering prompt design and understanding AI’s limitations are becoming essential professional competencies.

Over half of respondents emphasized the need for hands-on training — workshops, webinars, and tutorials focused on practical AI applications and prompt engineering. Others pointed to the importance of institutional support, such as access to paid tools and clear policies that guide ethical and responsible AI use.

Many librarians also expressed interest in communities of practice where colleagues can exchange experiences, share examples, and build collective knowledge about GAI. Collaboration, respondents suggested, is key to sustainable learning and innovation.

While many librarians are experimenting independently, the study suggests that institutional strategies are essential for long-term success. Libraries and universities can:

• Create secure “AI sandboxes” for experimentation (like Harvard’s model)
• Sponsor institutional AI tool subscriptions
• Encourage internal showcases and knowledge-sharing sessions

These supports help librarians test, reflect, and refine their use of GAI in safe and productive ways.

Interestingly, among librarians who hadn’t yet used GAI, the most common reason was a lack of interest. This points to a cultural challenge — not just a technical one.

To foster greater engagement, professional organizations and institutions can highlight success stories, celebrate librarian-led AI projects, and communicate clearly about both the benefits and the ethical boundaries of AI. Building a positive culture of experimentation will help more librarians see AI as a tool for empowerment, not replacement.

The study’s results reveal both optimism and realism. Librarians recognize GAI’s potential to enhance creativity and productivity but remain cautious about accuracy, privacy, and ethics.