Productivity Puzzle Time saved by AI offset by new work created, study suggests Survey of 2023–2024 data finds that AI created more tasks for 8.4 percent of workers. Benj Edwards – May 1, 2025 5:32 pm | 17 Credit: Malte Mueller via Getty Images Credit: Malte Mueller via Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more A new study analyzing the Danish labor market in 2023 and 2024 suggests that generative AI models like ChatGPT have had almost no significant impact on overall wages or employment yet, despite rapid adoption in some workplaces. The findings, detailed in a working paper by economists from the University of Chicago and the University of Copenhagen, provide an early, large-scale empirical look at AI's transformative potential. In "Large Language Models, Small Labor Market Effects," economists Anders Humlum and Emilie Vestergaard focused specifically on the impact of AI chatbots across 11 occupations often considered vulnerable to automation, including accountants, software developers, and customer support specialists. Their analysis covered data from 25,000 workers and 7,000 workplaces in Denmark. Despite finding widespread and often employer-encouraged adoption of these tools, the study concluded that "AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours in any occupation" during the period studied. The confidence intervals in their statistical analysis ruled out average effects larger than 1 percent. "The adoption of these chatbots has been remarkably fast," Humlum told The Register about the study. "Most workers in the exposed occupations have now adopted these chatbots... But then when we look at the economic outcomes, it really has not moved the needle." AI creating more work? During the study, the researchers investigated how company investment in AI affected worker adoption and how chatbots changed workplace processes. While corporate investment boosted AI tool adoption—saving time for 64 to 90 percent of users across studied occupations—the actual benefits were less substantial than expected. The study revealed that AI chatbots actually created new job tasks for 8.4 percent of workers, including some who did not use the tools themselves, offsetting potential time savings. For example, many teachers now spend time detecting whether students use ChatGPT for homework, while other workers review AI output quality or attempt to craft effective prompts. Indeed, the reported productivity benefits were modest in the study. Users reported average time savings of just 2.8 percent of work hours (about an hour per week). The Register points out that the finding contradicts a randomized controlled trial published in February that found generative AI increased worker productivity by 15 percent on average. Humlum suggested to The Register that the difference stems from other experiments focusing on tasks highly suited to AI, whereas most real-world jobs involve tasks AI cannot fully automate, and organizations are still learning how to integrate the tools effectively. And even where time was saved, the study estimates only 3 to 7 percent of those productivity gains translated into higher earnings for workers, raising questions about who benefits from the efficiency. More research needed This conclusion, however, may face future scrutiny regarding its timing and scope. For example, data from 2023–2024 captures only an early phase of generative AI deployment, potentially missing lagging effects or the impact of more integrated generative AI uses beyond chatbots. Also, focusing on data from Denmark might overlook localized impacts already happening in other labor markets or specific fields like freelance creative work. Even so, the Danish study provides a valuable but limited snapshot that challenges some narratives of immediate, widespread labor market transformation from generative AI. Given the rapid pace of AI development, the longer-term economic impact of generative AI remains an uncertain and debated question that will likely be the subject of many future research papers. In that sense, this early look is unlikely to be the final word. Benj Edwards Senior AI Reporter Benj Edwards Senior AI Reporter Benj Edwards is Ars Technica's Senior AI Reporter and founder of the site's dedicated AI beat in 2022. He's also a tech historian with almost two decades of experience. In his free time, he writes and records music, collects vintage computers, and enjoys nature. He lives in Raleigh, NC. 17 Comments