Do writers actually use AI when creating books? A survey across X and Reddit reveals a clear pattern: while some embrace AI for editing and research, most draw a firm line when it comes to writing itself.
There is no doubt that Artificial Intelligence (AI) has entered and became integrated in most fields of life. It became part of many systems and mobile apps we are using; search engines are heavily leaning on its usage and presenting it as an additional search option beside images, news, videos ... etc and they are integrating it among search results as well, such as Google AI Overviews; and it plays major part in the creation of many forms of content we digest daily.
Despite this huge integration, some areas remained sacred to AI usage, areas of creativity like writing - which is often treated as a deeply human endeavor - rooted in originality, emotion, and personal expression. This tension led to a rise in new initiatives such as the Human Authored Certification project by the Authors Guild and verification services such as Verify My Writing, reflecting a growing desire to distinguish between human and AI-generated work.
This raises an important question: how do writers themselves feel about AI entering their creative process?
Methodology
To explore this, we conducted a simple poll across social platforms, asking:
"When you write a novel/book, do you use AI and how?"
The response options were:
- I don’t use it at all
- Grammar, minor edits
- Research, fact-checking
- Write full paragraphs
Platform 1: X
On X, the poll, posted on November 30, 2025, received 13 responses. While the sample size was small, the sentiment was strikingly clear: strong resistance to AI use in writing.
| Responses | Votes | Percentages |
|---|---|---|
| I don’t use it at all | 11 | 85% |
| Grammar, minor edits | 1 | 8% |
| Research, fact-checking | 1 | 8% |
| Write full paragraphs | 0 | 0% |
The responses suggest that, within this group, writers appear highly protective of their creative process, allowing little to no role for AI beyond minor assistance.
Platform 2: Reddit
We then ran the same poll in December 2025 within the r/KeepWriting community. Engagement here was significantly higher, both in participation and discussion, with 98 responses.
| Responses | Votes | Percentages |
|---|---|---|
| I don’t use it at all | 61 | 62% |
| Grammar, minor edits | 16 | 16% |
| Research, fact-checking | 21 | 22% |
| Write full paragraphs | 0 | 0% |
Some of the accompanying comments reflected strong skepticism toward AI’s role in writing. As one user put it, “People who use AI to write have fundamentally missed the point of the exercise.” Another noted, “Definitely not. I won’t even use Grammarly or anything like it, because its recommendations often make your work worse.” At the same time, other commenters expressed more neutral or pragmatic views, particularly around using AI for name suggestions and research.
For those interested, the full discussion can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/KeepWriting/comments/1pe9z52/ai_usage/
While a majority still reported not using AI, there was noticeably greater openness to using it as a supporting tool—particularly for research and editing. Notably, even in this more receptive environment, no respondents reported using AI to generate full paragraphs.
What This Tells Us
Across both platforms, one pattern stands out: writers are not rejecting AI outright—but they are carefully limiting its role.
AI is more acceptable at the edges of the creative process—helping with grammar, clarity, or research—while the core act of writing remains strongly associated with human authorship.
Notably, the complete absence of respondents using AI for full paragraph generation suggests that, at least for now, this remains a widely recognized boundary among writers.
The contrast between platforms is also revealing. On X, responses skewed heavily toward rejection, while Reddit showed more nuance and openness. This may reflect differences in community culture, levels of anonymity, or willingness to engage in longer-form discussion.
At the same time, it’s important to note the limitations of this data. The sample sizes are relatively small and limited to two social platforms. As such, these findings should be seen as directional rather than definitive.
Closing Thoughts
AI’s role in creative work is still evolving, and its boundaries are actively being defined. For now, many writers appear to be drawing a clear line: AI may assist, but it should not replace the act of creation itself.
Whether these boundaries hold - or gradually shifts - will depend not only on technological advances, but on how writers choose to define authorship in an AI-augmented world.
What is clear, however, is that this is not just a technological debate, it is a cultural one, and writers are actively shaping its outcome.
Last Updated:
First Published:
Comments