Surveys consistently show that many candidates are wary of AI in hiring: only 26 percent of candidates in one Gartner release said they trust AI to evaluate them fairly, and Greenhouse found that only 8 percent of job seekers think AI makes hiring more fair. At the same time, majorities say they want transparency, and many have already met AI in the process. For employers using AI recruiting agents, the lesson is not to hide automation but to use it where it helps candidates, disclose it plainly, and keep a path to a person.
What Do the Major Surveys Say?
| Finding | Source | Date |
|---|---|---|
| 26% of job candidates trust AI will fairly evaluate them | Gartner press release | July 2025 |
| 25% say they trust employers less if they use AI to evaluate their information | Gartner press release | July 2025 |
| 71% of U.S. adults oppose AI making a final hiring decision | Pew Research Center, fieldwork December 2022 | Published April 2023 |
| 66% of U.S. adults would not want to apply to an employer that uses AI to help make hiring decisions | Pew Research Center, fieldwork December 2022 | Published April 2023 |
| 87% of U.S. job seekers say it is important for employers to be transparent about their own AI use | Greenhouse 2025 AI in Hiring Report | November 2025 |
| 54% have encountered an AI-led interview | Greenhouse | November 2025 |
| 8% believe AI makes hiring more fair | Greenhouse | November 2025 |
| 46% of U.S. job seekers say their trust in hiring has decreased | Greenhouse | November 2025 |
A note on the data: the Pew figures reflect public opinion in late 2022, before AI recruiting tools became common, so treat them as a baseline of attitudes rather than current behavior. Greenhouse surveyed 4,136 people across the U.S., U.K., Ireland, and Germany, including 2,900 job seekers. Gartner’s release cites a survey of 2,918 candidates in the first quarter of 2025 for some of its figures.
Why Are Candidates Skeptical?
Three themes run through the data:
- Fairness. Candidates worry that algorithms embed bias or filter out good applicants unfairly. In the Greenhouse report, 35 percent said AI has shifted bias from humans to algorithms and about one in five said it has amplified bias.
- Opacity. Candidates often do not know whether AI reviewed their application. Gartner reported that 52 percent of candidates believe AI screens their information, while employers rarely say so explicitly.
- Loss of human contact. Many candidates want to be seen by a person, especially for decisions about their livelihood.
Do Candidates Change Their Behavior in Response?
Yes. Candidates use AI to apply and, in some cases, to game screening. Greenhouse reported that 41 percent of surveyed job seekers admitted to using prompt injections, hidden text designed to bypass AI filters. That is one reason to treat candidate-supplied text as untrusted input in any screening agent. See how AI recruiting agents fail and AI auto-apply agents.
Does Telling Candidates About AI Help or Hurt?
Research gives a nuanced answer. A 2025 study by Schilke and Reimann, published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, ran 13 experiments and found that people who disclosed using AI were trusted less than those who did not. The penalty held whether disclosure was voluntary or mandatory, though it was smaller than when a third party revealed the AI use. Note that the study measured trust in a person who discloses AI use, not applicants’ trust in an employer, so it does not map directly to hiring.
A separate 2025 experimental study of students compared AI-driven and human-driven hiring and found AI-driven hiring was seen as less trustworthy and less just, with lower intent to apply, mediated by trust and procedural justice. The sample size was not stated on the record we reviewed.
Taken together with Greenhouse’s finding that 87 percent of U.S. job seekers say employer transparency about AI matters, the practical reading is this: disclosure carries a trust cost, but being found out carries a larger one, and many jurisdictions are moving toward requiring notice anyway. Under the EU AI Act, deployers of high-risk systems must inform people subject to certain decisions that the system is used on them.
How Should Employers Respond?
- Disclose plainly. Say when candidates are talking to an AI, in simple language, at the start of the interaction.
- Offer a human path. Make it easy to reach a person, especially after a rejection.
- Use AI where candidates feel the benefit. Fast replies, easy scheduling, and clear status updates are experiences candidates value. See conversational apply and the AI interviews guide.
- Keep humans on consequential decisions. See human-in-the-loop recruiting.
- Monitor fairness and publish what you can. See our governance framework.
- Track candidate experience. Add satisfaction and drop-off to your scorecard. See candidate experience statistics.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do candidates trust AI recruiters?
Mostly not yet. Gartner reported that 26 percent of candidates trust AI to evaluate them fairly, and Greenhouse found only 8 percent believe AI makes hiring more fair.
Should employers tell candidates they are using AI?
Transparency is what most surveyed job seekers say they want, and some laws require notice. Disclose clearly and pair it with a human option.
Do candidates like AI interviews?
Surveys show many have encountered them (54 percent in Greenhouse’s survey), but trust and fairness concerns are widespread. Quality of experience and explanation matter.
Does AI in hiring reduce applications?
Experimental research suggests AI-driven hiring can lower perceived trust and intent to apply, though results vary by context and design.
What is the best way to use AI without losing candidate trust?
Use it for speed and convenience, disclose it, keep people accountable for decisions, and monitor outcomes.
