November 17, 2025
stockasso/Depositphotos.com
SantaGPT and Holiday 2025: Do Americans Care if They Receive an AI-Suggested Gift?
With the holiday shopping season fully upon us, the amalgamation (or bifurcation, depending upon your personal perspective) of thoughtful and personal gifting and AI-driven shopping list completion was brought to the fore by a recent HUMAN Security survey of over 2,300 U.S. respondents.
The survey, somewhat cheekily titled “SantaGPT: How Many Americans Use AI To Holiday Shop?,” brought forward a number of interesting data points to discuss, including:
- A massive increase (from 11% to 64%) in respondents indicating that they would be engaging with AI tools such as ChatGPT to do their holiday shopping this year. That 53-point rise “underscores how rapidly generative AI and agentic browsers are moving from novelty to everyday utility,” per HUMAN’s Jeff Edwards, who outlined the survey’s findings.
- More than half (52%) of those polled indicated that they “wouldn’t care” if a gift they’d received had been suggested by an AI model, with over one-third (36%) saying they’d react positively to the news. A very slim minority (12%) said they would have negative feelings if this proved to be the case.
- There was a bit of a generational divide on the above question as well. Perhaps surprisingly, Gen Z respondents were much more likely to react negatively to an AI-driven gift (20%) versus the cohort of baby boomers who said the same (5%). On the other hand, 25% of zoomers said they’d react positively to such a present, while 46% of boomers said the same.
- On the security and personal details side, about one-third would share their purchase history and income information with AI models to improve gift recommendations this year, while a slightly smaller demographic (about one-quarter) would share their browser history to the same end.
Trust Remains a Concern for Consumers Using ChatGPT and Other AI Models for Shopping This Holiday Season and Beyond
It appears that usage of ChatGPT over the holiday season is extending more broadly to the general U.S. population year-round, with 74% of all Americans saying they are at least somewhat likely to use AI models to help them in their shopping journeys — including purchase completion — and that number increasing to 87% of daily users and 83% of weekly users who have already “bought in.”
There are a few caveats, however, with survey data suggesting that the most expensive purchase American shoppers are, on average, comfortable with letting the AI handle rests at just under $100. Lingering caution remains, and security concerns could be part and parcel of that take.
“This holiday season marks a real turning point in how people use AI,” said Tomer Elias, senior director of product at HUMAN Security.
“With agentic browsers like Comet and ChatGPT now available for shopping online, consumers can let AI handle more of the busywork, like finding deals, comparing products, and even making purchases. But with that convenience comes a growing need for trust. During this holiday season, shoppers still want to feel confident that their experiences (and their data) are secure, even as AI takes on a bigger role in how they shop,” Elias added.
BrainTrust
Brian Numainville
Principal, The Feedback Group
Peter Charness
Retail Strategy - UST Global
Pamela Kaplan
Principal, PK Consulting
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Do you agree with the premise put forth in the survey data; that a majority of Americans don’t care if the gift they receive was AI-suggested? Why or why not?
What are the fundamental differences in consumer perception around gift-giving customs when considering Google searches versus AI-prompted suggestion? Do you think these will evaporate in the years to come?
Poll
Loading …
No, no one will care. That having been said, I don’t think I’d go out of my way to publicize the fact.
(Now for the big question: should we care whether or not they care? Let’s see what AI itself says: That’s a really important question. Yes, we should care about how people use AI, and there are a few key reasons for that…. Well guess I was wrong 🙁 )
I agree. No one will care. Why should anyone know?
If a gift giver were to use an AI engine to find the ‘right’ gift for someone and was satisfied with the result, why should the recipient care how the giver arrived at the choice? Additionally, how would the recipient know that the gift suggestion was made by AI?
I don’t see why people would mind receiving an AI-suggested gift. We already crowdsource ideas from the internet all the time. AI just makes that process faster and more tailored.
I can’t imagine a large number of people would care that AI was used to research and generate gift ideas this season. Ultimately, the gift giving person knows the recipient best, and makes the final decision in the end.
Who cares if a gift is suggested by AI? And how would you ever know?
We’re supposed to be grateful for every gift we receive, but let’s be honest, how many of us have been given something from a department store merchandise outpost, you know those main aisle displays that are loaded with junk no one wants? That’s what happens when the person giving the gift had no idea what to get you. Or worse, doesn’t care?
Thanks for the idea Nicholas! I’m going to ask ChatGPT to suggest gifts for the hard to buy for people on my list. And I promise to scrutinize the ideas. This article just made Christmas shopping a whole lot easier for me.
Most respondents don’t care if gifts are AI-suggested because they assume AI functions like an enhanced Google search, a tool for research, while they maintain decision authority. But that’s not how platform-controlled agents actually work. ChatGPT might recommend gifts from across the retail landscape, appearing neutral, but will only complete transactions seamlessly through integrated partners. Consumers experience this as “I can buy these three options with one click, or manually navigate to those other sites.” That friction asymmetry steers purchasing toward platform partners while maintaining the illusion of choice. This is manipulation infrastructure disguised as consumer service. True consumer agents would either integrate with ALL retailers equally or remain deliberately transaction-agnostic to avoid ecosystem bias. The current model gives platforms control over the critical transaction moment while claiming to serve consumer interests across all options.
The Gen Z data reveals this tension: they’re paradoxically more negative about AI-suggested gifts (20%) compared to boomers (5%), despite being digital natives. That’s not generational technophobia—it’s recognition that authenticity and personal curation effort matter in gift-giving, and current platform agents can’t capture that while serving ecosystem incentives.
Retailers face a critical choice: build manipulation infrastructure disguised as helpful agents, or optimize for genuine consumer advocacy that agents will consistently recommend. The companies investing in the most sophisticated suggestion algorithms today may be optimizing for yesterday’s consumer behavior patterns—before consumers recognize the difference between platform control and authentic consumer agency.
People will judge the gift for what it is, not how the giver found or discovered it. And unless they were explicitly told, how would anyone know a gift idea had come from AI? Quite honestly, I find all of this very silly. It’s a bit of PR puffery trying to hitch a ride on the AI buzzword bandwagon.
Hallucination originated gifts could create a whole new category of White Elephants. Could be interesting
I am of the school that AI should be used as an assistant, to make your life easier – this could be the best use of it to date! And I know if I received a gift that was thoughtful, I wouldn’t care if it was suggested by AI or not.
I agree with the survey’s premise and most Americans probably don’t care whether a gift idea came from AI or a human. For many, the holiday season is already a juggling act of work, family, and social commitments, and gift shopping often feels more like a to-do list item than a creative pursuit. If an AI tool can surface a thoughtful, personalized idea in seconds, that’s not seen as “cheating” anymore but it’s just smart delegation.
The intent to delight the recipient remains, but the shopper is outsourcing the “search and filtering” portion to technology. With just a few contextual prompts about someone’s interests or hobbies, AI can narrow thousands of possibilities into a focused shortlist. This experience fundamentally beats the traditional shopping or Google search path, which still forces the customer to wade through product grids, comparison-shop, and navigate ad clutter.
The fundamental difference between Google and AI suggestions lies in cognitive load. Google presents options; AI curates them. One demands filtering, the other delivers synthesis. And that shift from information retrieval to intelligent curation is exactly why adoption will continue to rise. Once people experience how precise AI-generated recommendations can feel, it’s hard to go back to scrolling through pages of search results.
As for privacy, most AI gift suggestions don’t require personally identifiable data. Even with an anonymized or generic prompt (“a brother who loves golf and travel”), you can get remarkably relevant ideas without exposing private details. So the risk of data leakage in this context is minimal compared to other AI applications.
In short, the spirit of gifting hasn’t changed and it is still thoughful. The only difference is that AI helps us express that thoughtfulness faster and with a little less holiday stress.
People used Google to help find gifts. Now they use AI. So what.
From my experience, customers care far more about the relevance of the gift than the method behind the choice. AI recommendations do not change that. What does matter is trust. Customers want convenience, but they still question how their data is used and whether the suggestion reflects their real preferences.
I agree with others that technology only works when it serves a clear customer need. This is not about replacing intent or removing the human element from gifting. It is about giving customers another tool to navigate an overwhelming holiday season. Younger customers expect deeper personalization, while older customers focus on usefulness, and both perspectives highlight the same point: AI needs to feel transparent and helpful to earn its place.
My view is that retailers should keep the focus on clarity and control. If customers understand what data is used, why it is used, and how it improves the recommendation, acceptance will rise. Offering simple opt-in choices and clear explanations would be a practical way to strengthen trust while supporting better gifting experiences
Seems like AI should be able to elevate both the giving and the receiving of gifts. I’m not particularly good at selecting gifts. I tend to revert to known likes of the people I’m gifting. But if AI can help me expand my thinking about, and the sourcing of, a fun new way to gift someone, then that sounds pretty cool to me. And I think the recipient will appreciate the fact that I took a little extra effort, whatever the nature of that effort, to break loose of a tired pattern. “Oh wow. A (another) new sweater. Gosh, thanks.” (Immediately folds and stores on top shelf of closet.) Yeah, absolutely…HELP ME! The recipient will be most grateful!
Will AI-suggested gifts have a tag? No one will care. Personally, I suspect the quality of my gifts will improve with AI- no more unwrapping socks.
I believe it’s too early to confidently say how consumers will perceive — and value — receiving a gift that was AI-suggested. The survey data cited in the discussion show that a majority of Americans claim they “wouldn’t care” if a gift they received had been suggested by AI. While I don’t dispute that openness, I’m cautious about the deeper sentiment beneath—especially given the emotional nature of gift-giving and the generational nuance (e.g., younger consumers expressed relatively more negativity toward AI-driven gifts). My view is that what really matters is if the technology enabled a better gifting experience — for both the giver and the recipient — rather than whether it was labeled “AI-suggested.”
When we compare consumer perceptions of using a Google search versus an AI-prompted suggestion, the difference lies in ownership and transparency. A Google search still feels like you (the gift-giver) did the research; you find ideas and decide. An AI-prompted suggestion starts to shift that agency — the tool is selecting for you or with you. I don’t believe these perceptions will simply evaporate in time — they’ll evolve. As AI becomes more embedded and seamless, the “source” of the suggestion may matter less if the outcome consistently delivers gift-relevance, personalization, and emotional resonance. In short: if AI improves the experience — making gift-giving easier, more thoughtful and less stressful — most consumers will embrace it, regardless of its origin.
If a gift is thoughtful, does it really matter where the idea originated? As long as ChatGPT, Rufus and Sparky users don’t share highly personal information about the recipient, AI tools are legitimate sources of gift inspiration. These tools can iilluminate our blindspots, providing efficient product discovery as fresh retail solutions.
Beyond selecting an appropriate gift, shoppers can use AI to delete frequently returned gifts. Gift cards work because they don’t get returned, they get used. For someone who enjoys giving actual gifts, AI can be an excellent assistant.
“Shop for” is a bit blurry. As a gift suggestion engine I see AI use as high. As for executing to purchase, the data says that’s still through the shopper’s retailer of preference.
if the AI agent had access to the gift recipient’s search history, it could affect the receiver’s response. Either the suggestion is spot on or the gift somehow crosses the “privacy line”. For example, if the recipient was searching a new affinity they had not yet shared with others ( say a travel destination or new sport interest) a gift related to one of these yet to be discussed topics might feel intrusive. This scenario is becoming less hypothetical with Google’s integration of Gemini AI personalization tools.
So it depends on whether the AI tool is fed a description of the person or their actual identity.
More Discussions
How Much Of A Discount Drives New Grocery Trial?
How Much Of A Discount Drives New Grocery Trial?Gap Brings ‘Fashiontainment ‘to Loyalty with Experiential Focus
Gap Brings ‘Fashiontainment ‘to Loyalty with Experiential FocusCan Discounting And Smarter Displays Reduce Food Waste?
Can Discounting And Smarter Displays Reduce Food Waste?
No, no one will care. That having been said, I don’t think I’d go out of my way to publicize the fact.
(Now for the big question: should we care whether or not they care? Let’s see what AI itself says: That’s a really important question. Yes, we should care about how people use AI, and there are a few key reasons for that…. Well guess I was wrong 🙁 )
I agree. No one will care. Why should anyone know?
If a gift giver were to use an AI engine to find the ‘right’ gift for someone and was satisfied with the result, why should the recipient care how the giver arrived at the choice? Additionally, how would the recipient know that the gift suggestion was made by AI?
I don’t see why people would mind receiving an AI-suggested gift. We already crowdsource ideas from the internet all the time. AI just makes that process faster and more tailored.
I can’t imagine a large number of people would care that AI was used to research and generate gift ideas this season. Ultimately, the gift giving person knows the recipient best, and makes the final decision in the end.
Who cares if a gift is suggested by AI? And how would you ever know?
We’re supposed to be grateful for every gift we receive, but let’s be honest, how many of us have been given something from a department store merchandise outpost, you know those main aisle displays that are loaded with junk no one wants? That’s what happens when the person giving the gift had no idea what to get you. Or worse, doesn’t care?
Thanks for the idea Nicholas! I’m going to ask ChatGPT to suggest gifts for the hard to buy for people on my list. And I promise to scrutinize the ideas. This article just made Christmas shopping a whole lot easier for me.
Most respondents don’t care if gifts are AI-suggested because they assume AI functions like an enhanced Google search, a tool for research, while they maintain decision authority. But that’s not how platform-controlled agents actually work. ChatGPT might recommend gifts from across the retail landscape, appearing neutral, but will only complete transactions seamlessly through integrated partners. Consumers experience this as “I can buy these three options with one click, or manually navigate to those other sites.” That friction asymmetry steers purchasing toward platform partners while maintaining the illusion of choice. This is manipulation infrastructure disguised as consumer service. True consumer agents would either integrate with ALL retailers equally or remain deliberately transaction-agnostic to avoid ecosystem bias. The current model gives platforms control over the critical transaction moment while claiming to serve consumer interests across all options.
The Gen Z data reveals this tension: they’re paradoxically more negative about AI-suggested gifts (20%) compared to boomers (5%), despite being digital natives. That’s not generational technophobia—it’s recognition that authenticity and personal curation effort matter in gift-giving, and current platform agents can’t capture that while serving ecosystem incentives.
Retailers face a critical choice: build manipulation infrastructure disguised as helpful agents, or optimize for genuine consumer advocacy that agents will consistently recommend. The companies investing in the most sophisticated suggestion algorithms today may be optimizing for yesterday’s consumer behavior patterns—before consumers recognize the difference between platform control and authentic consumer agency.
People will judge the gift for what it is, not how the giver found or discovered it. And unless they were explicitly told, how would anyone know a gift idea had come from AI? Quite honestly, I find all of this very silly. It’s a bit of PR puffery trying to hitch a ride on the AI buzzword bandwagon.
Hallucination originated gifts could create a whole new category of White Elephants. Could be interesting
I am of the school that AI should be used as an assistant, to make your life easier – this could be the best use of it to date! And I know if I received a gift that was thoughtful, I wouldn’t care if it was suggested by AI or not.
I agree with the survey’s premise and most Americans probably don’t care whether a gift idea came from AI or a human. For many, the holiday season is already a juggling act of work, family, and social commitments, and gift shopping often feels more like a to-do list item than a creative pursuit. If an AI tool can surface a thoughtful, personalized idea in seconds, that’s not seen as “cheating” anymore but it’s just smart delegation.
The intent to delight the recipient remains, but the shopper is outsourcing the “search and filtering” portion to technology. With just a few contextual prompts about someone’s interests or hobbies, AI can narrow thousands of possibilities into a focused shortlist. This experience fundamentally beats the traditional shopping or Google search path, which still forces the customer to wade through product grids, comparison-shop, and navigate ad clutter.
The fundamental difference between Google and AI suggestions lies in cognitive load. Google presents options; AI curates them. One demands filtering, the other delivers synthesis. And that shift from information retrieval to intelligent curation is exactly why adoption will continue to rise. Once people experience how precise AI-generated recommendations can feel, it’s hard to go back to scrolling through pages of search results.
As for privacy, most AI gift suggestions don’t require personally identifiable data. Even with an anonymized or generic prompt (“a brother who loves golf and travel”), you can get remarkably relevant ideas without exposing private details. So the risk of data leakage in this context is minimal compared to other AI applications.
In short, the spirit of gifting hasn’t changed and it is still thoughful. The only difference is that AI helps us express that thoughtfulness faster and with a little less holiday stress.
People used Google to help find gifts. Now they use AI. So what.
From my experience, customers care far more about the relevance of the gift than the method behind the choice. AI recommendations do not change that. What does matter is trust. Customers want convenience, but they still question how their data is used and whether the suggestion reflects their real preferences.
I agree with others that technology only works when it serves a clear customer need. This is not about replacing intent or removing the human element from gifting. It is about giving customers another tool to navigate an overwhelming holiday season. Younger customers expect deeper personalization, while older customers focus on usefulness, and both perspectives highlight the same point: AI needs to feel transparent and helpful to earn its place.
My view is that retailers should keep the focus on clarity and control. If customers understand what data is used, why it is used, and how it improves the recommendation, acceptance will rise. Offering simple opt-in choices and clear explanations would be a practical way to strengthen trust while supporting better gifting experiences
Seems like AI should be able to elevate both the giving and the receiving of gifts. I’m not particularly good at selecting gifts. I tend to revert to known likes of the people I’m gifting. But if AI can help me expand my thinking about, and the sourcing of, a fun new way to gift someone, then that sounds pretty cool to me. And I think the recipient will appreciate the fact that I took a little extra effort, whatever the nature of that effort, to break loose of a tired pattern. “Oh wow. A (another) new sweater. Gosh, thanks.” (Immediately folds and stores on top shelf of closet.) Yeah, absolutely…HELP ME! The recipient will be most grateful!
Will AI-suggested gifts have a tag? No one will care. Personally, I suspect the quality of my gifts will improve with AI- no more unwrapping socks.
I believe it’s too early to confidently say how consumers will perceive — and value — receiving a gift that was AI-suggested. The survey data cited in the discussion show that a majority of Americans claim they “wouldn’t care” if a gift they received had been suggested by AI. While I don’t dispute that openness, I’m cautious about the deeper sentiment beneath—especially given the emotional nature of gift-giving and the generational nuance (e.g., younger consumers expressed relatively more negativity toward AI-driven gifts). My view is that what really matters is if the technology enabled a better gifting experience — for both the giver and the recipient — rather than whether it was labeled “AI-suggested.”
When we compare consumer perceptions of using a Google search versus an AI-prompted suggestion, the difference lies in ownership and transparency. A Google search still feels like you (the gift-giver) did the research; you find ideas and decide. An AI-prompted suggestion starts to shift that agency — the tool is selecting for you or with you. I don’t believe these perceptions will simply evaporate in time — they’ll evolve. As AI becomes more embedded and seamless, the “source” of the suggestion may matter less if the outcome consistently delivers gift-relevance, personalization, and emotional resonance. In short: if AI improves the experience — making gift-giving easier, more thoughtful and less stressful — most consumers will embrace it, regardless of its origin.
If a gift is thoughtful, does it really matter where the idea originated? As long as ChatGPT, Rufus and Sparky users don’t share highly personal information about the recipient, AI tools are legitimate sources of gift inspiration. These tools can iilluminate our blindspots, providing efficient product discovery as fresh retail solutions.
Beyond selecting an appropriate gift, shoppers can use AI to delete frequently returned gifts. Gift cards work because they don’t get returned, they get used. For someone who enjoys giving actual gifts, AI can be an excellent assistant.
“Shop for” is a bit blurry. As a gift suggestion engine I see AI use as high. As for executing to purchase, the data says that’s still through the shopper’s retailer of preference.
if the AI agent had access to the gift recipient’s search history, it could affect the receiver’s response. Either the suggestion is spot on or the gift somehow crosses the “privacy line”. For example, if the recipient was searching a new affinity they had not yet shared with others ( say a travel destination or new sport interest) a gift related to one of these yet to be discussed topics might feel intrusive. This scenario is becoming less hypothetical with Google’s integration of Gemini AI personalization tools.
So it depends on whether the AI tool is fed a description of the person or their actual identity.