Between benefit and mistrust: Germans are increasingly using AI – but trust remains low
Artificial intelligence has long been part of everyday life for many people in Germany – whether in their private lives, at work or in their studies. Around two-thirds of the population already use AI applications. However, despite its widespread use, trust in the technology remains low: only around one-third of those surveyed trust the results of AI systems. Experiences are mixed, with positive and negative experiences roughly balancing each other out. In a professional context in particular, a lack of skills and clear guidelines is causing uncertainty about how to use the technology.
Artificial intelligence has become part of everyday life for many people in Germany: 66 percent of the population use AI-based technologies either privately, professionally or in their studies. At the same time, there is a clear trust gap – only 32 percent say they believe the information generated by AI. The low level of acceptance is further exacerbated by a lack of knowledge and unclear framework conditions. Germany thus performs worse than other countries in an international comparison. This is the conclusion of the country report for Germany in a global KPMG study conducted in collaboration with the University of Melbourne. More than 48,000 people from 47 countries took part worldwide, including more than 1,000 from Germany.
AI knowledge: clear need for training
Despite the increasing prevalence of AI, many Germans do not feel adequately trained. Only 20 percent have participated in further education or training on the subject to date – worldwide, this figure is significantly higher at 39 percent. Many also have little ability to critically question or correctly assess AI tools. Only 45 percent of respondents in Germany consider themselves capable of evaluating AI applications meaningfully or using them correctly. Around 43 percent use the relevant tools without checking the results. When it comes to AI competence, Germany ranks second to last in an international comparison – a clear signal that urgent action is needed.
Ambivalent attitude: opportunities and risks equally present
The study reveals a divided perception of the impact of AI: around one third of respondents currently see more advantages (37 percent), while another third see more risks (39 percent). Around 59 percent of users report positive experiences, such as increased efficiency or time savings in routine tasks. At the same time, 31 percent have experienced negative effects, such as incorrect information, loss of control or lack of human interaction.
Lack of guidelines: uncertainty in the professional use of AI
Artificial intelligence is also increasingly present in the working environment. 62 percent of respondents report that their employer already uses AI technologies. 55 percent also use such tools themselves. However, in many places this is done without clear legal requirements or internal guidelines. Only 46 percent of companies have so far formulated binding rules for dealing with generative AI.
Almost half of those surveyed say they pass off content from AI systems as their own or deliberately disregard internal regulations. The risks of such practices are considerable – from data loss to wrong decisions. Companies are therefore faced with the challenge of better empowering their employees while at the same time creating clear framework conditions. Nevertheless, less than half (46 percent) have a comprehensive AI strategy in place.
Desire for clear rules: regulation called for
A large proportion of respondents call for more guidance and binding guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence. 75 percent want internationally agreed standards, while 71 percent call for joint regulation by the state and industry. Only around a third consider the existing regulations to be sufficient for the responsible and safe use of AI. At the same time, 91 percent said they were not aware of any specific legal requirements in Germany – an indication of a significant information deficit among the general public.
