Pew Research Center

Majorities in most of the 25 countries surveyed say their political system needs major changes or complete reform. About eight-in-ten adults or more in Argentina, Brazil, Greece, Kenya, Nigeria, South Korea and the U.S. say their system needs this type of change. In contrast, around three-in-ten share this view in the Netherlands and Sweden. However, views are more divided on whether change can happen effectively. In some countries, people who view political change as necessary are broadly confident that it can happen. In others, those who want change mostly lack confidence that it is possible. In some countries, people do not see as much need for reform. Around seven-in-ten adults in the Netherlands and Sweden, along with roughly half in Australia, Canada and Germany, say their political system needs only minor changes or no changes at all. Views by age and other factors In nine countries, young adults are more likely than older people to say the political system needs major changes or complete reform. For example, 71% of Indonesians ages 18 to 34 say significant changes are needed, compared with 49% of those ages 50 and older. In Germany and the Netherlands, however, older people are somewhat more likely than younger people to think their political system needs significant changes. In most countries, belief that the system needs major changes or complete reform is related to support for the governing party or parties. For example, 22% of Hungarians who support Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s party, Fidesz, or its coalition partner, the Christian Democratic People’s Party, say their system needs major changes or complete reform. Among those who do not support either party, 86% say their system needs significant changes. (Refer to the Appendix for more information on how we classify governing parties.) Desire for change is also closely related to views of elected officials. Those who say that few or no elected officials in their country are honest, ethical, well-qualified, understanding of ordinary people’s needs or focused on the country’s most important problems are generally more likely to want significant change to their political system. But even among those who say that these qualities describe all or most elected officials in their country, sizable shares still say the system needs significant change. For example, 65% of Americans who believe that all or most elected officials are ethical still say their political system needs major changes or complete reform. (That compares with 83% of those who say few or no elected officials are ethical.) Confidence that the system can be changed effectively In 13 countries, people who want complete reform or major changes tend to be more pessimistic than optimistic about the potential for change. For example, about two-thirds of adults in Greece say they want significant changes to their political system but are not confident this can happen effectively. Only 15% of Greeks want significant changes and are confident this can be done. In seven countries, people who want reform are more optimistic than pessimistic. In India, 59% of adults say their political system needs complete reform or major changes and are confident those changes can be made. By comparison, 10% want change but are not confident this can happen. In five countries, people who want reform are generally split on whether it can be done. For example, around nine-in-ten Nigerians want major changes or complete reform, with roughly equal shares saying this can and can’t be done. source

Key findings 95% of U.S. adults say they have heard at least a little about artificial intelligence. The share saying they’ve heard a lot has increased from 26% in 2022 to 47% today. About six-in-ten Americans say they would like more control over the use of AI in their own lives. Still, 73% say they’d be willing to let AI assist them at least a little with day-to-day activities. This chapter looks at Americans’ exposure to artificial intelligence and views on its use in their lives. How much have Americans heard about AI and how often do they think they interact with it? How much control do Americans think they have over AI in their lives, and would they like more? AI is increasingly embedded in people’s lives. Public awareness of AI also continues to grow. Nearly half (47%) say that they have heard or read a lot about AI, up 7 percentage points in the last year and 21 points since 2022. Awareness of AI across demographic groups and education levels Almost all Americans say they have heard at least a little about AI, but there are large differences across groups who have heard a lot. AI awareness by age About six-in-ten U.S. adults under 30 (62%) have heard a lot about AI, compared with 32% of those 65 and older. AI awareness by race and ethnicity About two-thirds of Asian Americans (65%) say they have heard or read a lot about AI. In contrast, about half or fewer of Black (49%), Hispanic (47%) and White (45%) Americans say this. AI awareness by education Six-in-ten adults with postgraduate degrees say they have heard a lot about AI, compared with 38% of those with a high school diploma or less education. AI awareness by gender Men are more likely than women to say they have heard a lot about AI (53% vs. 41%). Changing AI awareness by age The share of younger Americans who say they have heard a lot about AI has grown rapidly in recent years. In 2022, one-third of adults under 30 said they had heard or read a lot about AI. In the new survey, 62% of these young adults say this, an increase of 29 points. High awareness also has increased among older Americans, but less dramatically than for younger adults. Among those ages 65 and older, the share who say they have heard a lot about AI has increased by 13 points since 2022. How often do Americans think they interact with AI? In the new survey, 62% of U.S. adults say they interact with AI at least several times a week. As with awareness, there are differences by age, education, gender, and race and ethnicity when it comes to how much U.S. adults say they interact with AI. AI use by age One-third of adults under 30 say they interact with AI at least several times a day, and 26% say they interact with AI less than several times a week. By comparison, 54% of those ages 65 and older say they interact with AI less than several times a week. AI use by education Slightly less than half of Americans with a postgraduate degree (46%) say they interact with AI at least several times a day, compared with 20% of Americans with a high school diploma or less education. AI use by race and ethnicity About four-in-ten Asian adults (39%) say they interact with AI almost constantly or several times a day, moderately higher than the shares seen among White (31%), Hispanic (29%) and Black (27%) adults. Refer to the Appendix for more analysis on Americans’ reported AI interaction. Willingness to let AI assist in day-to-day life A large majority of Americans (73%) say they would be willing to let AI assist them at least a little with their day-to-day activities, but only 13% say they would be willing to let AI assist them a lot. About a quarter (27%) say they would not let AI assist with their daily activities at all. Americans with higher education levels are more likely to express willingness to let AI assist them at least a little in daily life, compared with adults with less education. For more on differences by demographic groups and educational levels, refer to the Appendix. Do Americans think they have control over AI in their own lives? Few Americans think they have a lot of control over whether AI is used in their own lives, and most would like more control. Just 13% of Americans think they have a great deal or quite a bit of control over whether AI is used in their lives, while an additional 30% think they have some control. A majority of Americans (57%) say they have not too much or no control in whether AI is used in their lives. About six-in-ten Americans (61%) also say they would like more control over how AI is used in their lives, up 6 points since 2024. Just 17% are comfortable with the amount of control they have and 21% are not sure. For views across demographic groups and education levels, refer to the Appendix. source

We asked adults in 25 countries to rate how common five characteristics are among the elected officials in their country. In general, people give their elected officials fairly negative ratings on these measures. Just under half of adults across the 25 countries (47% median) say few or none of their elected officials are honest. A similar share (46%) believe few or none of them understand the needs of ordinary people. Medians of roughly four-in-ten think few or none of their elected officials are ethical or focus on their country’s most important problems. A 37% median see few or none as well-qualified for their positions. Relatively small shares take the more positive stance. Medians ranging from 14% to 18% say all or most of the elected officials in their country have each of these qualities. Greeks stand out for their especially negative opinions of politicians. Majorities say the positive qualities we asked about describe few or none of their elected officials. For example, roughly three-quarters of Greeks believe few or none of their elected officials are honest or understand the needs of ordinary people. Additionally, people in Italy, Spain, Turkey and the U.S., as well as the sub-Saharan African and Latin American countries polled, tend to give elected officials poor marks on these characteristics. In India, Japan and the Netherlands, around a third of adults or fewer say their elected officials generally lack these qualities. Swedes have much more positive views overall, with relatively large shares saying all or most of their elected officials have these qualities. About four-in-ten think all or most elected officials in Sweden understand the needs of ordinary people (38%), are well-qualified for their jobs (40%) and focus on the most important problems (41%). Almost half of Swedes (47%) think the majority of politicians in their country are ethical, and 36% say they are honest. There are a few differences in views of elected officials by age. In 11 of the 25 countries surveyed, younger adults are more likely to believe that few or none of their elected officials are honest. One of the largest age gaps is in France, where 33% of adults ages 50 and older say this, compared with 58% of those ages 18 to 34 and 55% of those ages 35 to 49. In fact, younger adults in France have much more negative views than older adults on each of the five qualities we asked about. The same pattern exists in the U.S. Rating elected officials: Are they honest? A 47% median of adults across 25 countries say few or none of their elected officials are honest. Roughly a third (36%) say some are honest. Only 14% believe this describes all or most officials in their country. Perceptions of elected officials are especially negative in Greece and most of the African and Latin American countries surveyed. Roughly three-quarters of Greeks say few or none of their elected officials are honest. Majorities also take this stance in Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Kenya, Mexico and Nigeria. In fact, shares in these countries ranging from 15% to 31% of adults say none of their elected officials are honest. In the U.S., 53% of adults think few or none of their officials are honest. Roughly half in Israel, Poland, South Africa, Spain and Turkey say the same. A third or fewer in Canada, India, Japan, the Netherlands and Sweden believe few or none of their elected officials are honest. Rating elected officials: Do they understand the needs of ordinary people? A 46% median across 25 countries surveyed say that few or none of their elected officials understand the needs of ordinary people. About a third (35%) say some elected officials understand their needs. Only 16% say this about all or most elected officials. Six-in-ten adults or more in Brazil, Greece, Italy and Kenya think few or none of their elected officials understand the needs of ordinary people. This includes about a quarter in Greece (27%) and Italy (24%) who say none of their politicians understand these needs. On the other hand, a quarter of adults or more in Canada, Germany, India, Indonesia, the Netherlands and Sweden think all or most of their politicians do understand ordinary people’s needs. Rating elected officials: Do they focus on their country’s most important problems? A 41% median across 25 countries surveyed say that few or none of their elected officials focus on the country’s most important issues. Another 36% say some politicians focus on the right problems, while 16% say this about all or most of their politicians. About half of adults or more in eleven countries say that few or none of their elected officials focus on the most important problems. The most positive assessments are again seen in Sweden: 41% of Swedes say all or most of their elected officials focus on the right issues. In Indonesia, 37% hold this view, as do roughly three-in-ten in Canada, Germany, India and the Netherlands. Rating elected officials: Are they ethical? A 40% median across 25 countries say that few or none of their elected officials are ethical. A similar share (37%) believes some are ethical, and 17% think all or most officials are ethical. Views are particularly negative in Greece, Italy, Kenya and the three Latin American countries surveyed: Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. About two-thirds of Greeks and Brazilians say few or none of their politicians are ethical. Roughly half of adults in Nigeria, Turkey and the U.S. say the same. But 47% of adults in Sweden and 45% in Indonesia say all or most of their elected officials are ethical. And roughly a third or more in Canada, Germany, India and the Netherlands agree. Japan and South Korea have relatively tepid views of their elected officials on this measure, with about half in each country saying some are ethical. Rating elected officials: Are they well-qualified? Across the countries surveyed, a 37% median say few or none of their elected officials are well-qualified for their position. A 39% median say this about

(SmileStudioAP) How we did this Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ views of artificial intelligence (AI) and its potential impact on people and society. For this analysis, we surveyed 5,023 adults from June 9 to 15, 2025. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), a group of people recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses who have agreed to take surveys regularly. This kind of recruitment gives nearly all U.S. adults a chance of selection. Interviews were conducted either online or by telephone with a live interviewer. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education, presidential vote (among voters) and other factors. Read more about the ATP’s methodology. Here are the questions used for this report, the topline and the survey methodology. Key takeaways Americans are much more concerned than excited about the increased use of AI in daily life, with a majority saying they want more control over how AI is used in their lives. Far larger shares say AI will erode than improve people’s ability to think creatively and form meaningful relationships. At the same time, a majority is open to letting AI assist them with day-to-day tasks and activities. Most Americans don’t support AI playing a role in personal matters such as religion or matchmaking. They’re more open to AI for heavy data analysis, such as for weather forecasting and developing new medicines. Americans feel strongly that it’s important to be able to tell if pictures, videos or text were made by AI or by humans. Yet many don’t trust their own ability to spot AI-generated content. Artificial intelligence tools are now playing a role in many aspects of life and society, spanning politics, the arts, work and beyond. While Americans express some openness to AI’s potential benefits, they’re concerned about its impact on some human abilities, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. U.S. adults are generally pessimistic about AI’s effect on people’s ability to think creatively and form meaningful relationships: 53% say AI will worsen people’s ability to think creatively, compared with 16% who say it will improve this. An identical share (16%) says AI will make this skill neither better nor worse. Far more say AI will worsen rather than improve people’s ability to form meaningful relationships (50% vs. 5%). One-quarter say AI won’t make this better or worse. Americans are relatively more optimistic about AI improving problem-solving: 29% of U.S. adults say it will make people better at this skill. Still, a larger share (38%) says AI will make this worse. Notably, sizable shares of U.S. adults are uncertain about these questions. Between 16% and 20% say they aren’t sure about whether AI will have a positive or negative impact on these human skills. Building on our larger body of work tracking public opinion about AI’s societal impact, this study examines how Americans view AI’s effect on human abilities, as well as broader questions about AI’s impact on society. The survey, conducted among 5,023 U.S. adults from June 9 to 15, 2025, also updates our trends on Americans’ AI awareness and attitudes. In addition, in open-ended responses, survey respondents describe in their own words what they see as AI risks and benefits to society. AI awareness and attitudes Americans are forming impressions of AI at a time when nearly all U.S. adults (95%) say they have heard at least a little about it. Overall, Americans continue to be wary about its broader impact: 50% say they’re more concerned than excited about the increased use of AI in daily life, up from 37% in 2021. 10% are more excited than concerned. 38% say they’re equally excited and concerned. And more than half of Americans (57%) rate the societal risks of AI as high, compared with 25% who say the benefits of AI are high. When asked to describe in their own words why they rated the risks as high, the most common concern mentioned was about AI weakening human skills and connections. In their own lives, about six-in-ten say they’d like more control over how AI is used, compared with 17% who are comfortable with their amount of control and 21% who are unsure. Still, nearly three-quarters say they’d be willing to let AI assist at least a little with day-to-day tasks and activities. Detecting content created by AI versus humans Related to Americans’ desire for more control over AI’s use, most Americans (76%) say it’s extremely or very important to be able to tell if pictures, videos and text were made by AI or people. But 53% of Americans are not too or not at all confident they can detect if something is made by AI versus a person. Related: From political speeches to songs, how would Americans react if they found out AI was involved? Views on AI playing different roles in society Similar to Americans’ concern about AI’s effect on people’s ability to form meaningful relationships, they largely do not see a role for AI in personal aspects of life such as matchmaking or religion. But there’s some receptiveness to AI doing heavy analytical tasks in the scientific, financial and medical realms. Majorities say AI should play at least a small role in: Forecasting the weather (74%) Searching for financial crimes (70%) Searching for fraud in government benefits claims (70%) Developing new medicines (66%) Identifying suspects in a crime (61%) And slightly less than half (46%) say this about AI providing mental health support to people. In contrast, about two-thirds say AI should play no role in judging whether two people could fall in love. An even larger share (73%) says that AI should play no role in advising people about their faith in God. Notably, no more than about one-third of Americans say AI should play a big role in any of the areas we asked about. Young adults and AI Young adults

Key findings Americans remain far more concerned (50%) than excited (10%) about the increased use of AI in daily life. Concern is up from 37% in 2021. More Americans, on balance, think AI will make people worse than better at key human abilities, such as thinking creatively or forming meaningful relationships with other people. Majorities do not want AI to play a role in deeply personal matters such as advising people about their faith in God or judging whether two people could fall in love. But many want AI to play at least a small role when it comes to making sense of large amounts of data in the scientific, financial and medical realms, including forecasting the weather, searching for financial crimes and developing medical treatments. As artificial intelligence becomes more integrated into society, this chapter covers how Americans evaluate its potential impact. How do Americans feel about the use of AI in daily life? What potential impacts for society are Americans concerned about, and what are some areas where they see a role for AI? Americans are more concerned than excited about the increased use of AI in daily life. Half of U.S. adults say the increased use of AI in daily life makes them feel more concerned than excited, compared with 10% who are more excited than concerned. About four-in-ten (38%) say they are equally excited and concerned. The percentage who say they are more concerned than excited is now 13 percentage points higher than it was in 2021. Americans across demographic groups are much more likely to be concerned than excited about AI in daily life. Refer to the Appendix for more detailed analysis. How big of a deal is AI? While Americans express concern about AI’s increased use in daily life, they have mixed views about whether these technologies are getting the attention they deserve. More Americans say AI has been made a smaller deal than it really is (36%) than say it’s been made a bigger deal (21%). Another 36% say it has been described as about right. Refer to the Appendix for more detailed analysis. How important do Americans think it is to understand AI? To equip Americans to navigate the increasing presence of AI in the world, the federal government and educators have made calls to increase education about these technologies. And most Americans agree about the importance of AI literacy. Nearly three-quarters of Americans say that looking ahead, it is extremely or very important for people to understand what AI is. One-fifth of U.S. adults say it is somewhat important that people understand AI, while few (6%) think this is not too or at all important. Views by education Americans with more education are more likely to think understanding AI is important: 86% of those with a postgraduate degree and 83% of those with a bachelor’s degree think this is extremely or very important. In contrast, 63% of those with a high school diploma or less education say this. Views by age Younger Americans are also somewhat more likely than older Americans to say it is extremely important for people to understand what AI is, but large majorities across all age groups think this is at least very important. Concerns about AI’s impact on society Overall, Americans are more concerned about people’s ability to do things on their own getting worse because of AI use than they are about potential missed opportunities of not using it. About half of Americans (51%) say they are extremely or very concerned that people’s ability to do things on their own will get worse because of AI use. Another 31% are somewhat concerned about this. Concerns that people will miss opportunities to improve their lives by being too reluctant to use AI are more muted, but still notable. About two-in-ten Americans (21%) express high concern about missed opportunities from reluctance to use AI, while 29% are somewhat concerned. The largest share (40%) say they are not too or not at all concerned about this. Concerns about AI by age Concern about people’s ability to do things getting worse because of AI use is somewhat higher among younger adults than older adults. Roughly six-in-ten adults under 30 (57%) say they are extremely or very concerned about this, compared with 46% of adults ages 65 and older. Concerns about AI by race and ethnicity White Americans (47%) in particular are not too or not at all concerned about people missing opportunities to improve their lives by being too reluctant to use AI, compared with Asian (30%), Hispanic (27%) and Black (26%) Americans. The impact of AI on human abilities AI simulates human behavior in many dimensions, and we asked Americans their predictions about the impact of this technology on fundamental human abilities, including thinking creatively, forming meaningful relationships, making difficult decisions and solving problems. On the whole, relatively small shares of Americans have neutral or positive views about how the increased use of AI in society will affect creativity or connections: 16% say it will make people’s ability to think creatively better, while 53% say this would make it worse, and 16% say its impact on this ability will be neither better nor worse. Half say it will make people worse at forming meaningful relationships with others. Just 5% say AI will improve this ability, and 25% say AI will neither improve nor worsen this. Americans are about half as likely to say the increased use of AI in society will make people’s ability to make difficult decisions better (19%) as to say it will make it worse (40%), with 20% expressing a neutral opinion. Views on the impact of the increased use of AI to solve problems are more mixed but still tilt negative: 29% say the increased use of AI in society will make people’s ability to solve problems better, while 38% say it will make this worse. Sizable shares of Americans – between 16% and 20% – say they are not sure about how

Key findings A majority of Americans (57%) rate the risks of AI for society as high. Far fewer (25%) see high benefits, while 15% rate both the risks and the benefits as significant. Our survey asked respondents to explain, in their own words, the main reason they see AI as having high or low benefits or risks for society. Those who rate AI negatively most commonly say AI erodes human abilities and connections. Those who see high benefits most often cite gains in efficiency. When asked to rate separately both the benefits and risks of artificial intelligence, far more Americans rate the risks of AI as high than rate the benefits as high. A majority of U.S. adults (57%) say the risks of AI for society are high or very high. Smaller shares rate the risks of AI as medium (26%), low or very low (6%), or say they are not sure (11%). In contrast, a quarter of Americans rate the benefits of AI for society as very high or high. Another 41% of Americans see some advantages of AI, rating the benefits as medium. At the other end of the spectrum, 18% rate the benefits of AI as low or very low. And 15% are unsure. Some people see both risks and benefits of AI: 15% rate both as high. What people told us about the risks and benefits of AI The survey asked Americans to tell us the main reason they rated the benefits or risks of AI as very low or low, or as very high or high, for society. The following section summarizes the key themes in people’s responses about the risks and benefits of AI. Reasons why Americans see high risks of AI Among the 57% of Americans who rate the risks of AI for society as high or very high, the most common reason was concerns about AI eroding human abilities and connections, such as making people lazy or less able to think creatively or critically (27%). As one woman put it: “I think a sizable portion of humanity is inclined to seek the path of least resistance. As annoying and troublesome as hardships and obstacles can be, I believe the experience of encountering these things and overcoming them is essential to forming our character.” – Woman, age 30-39 A teacher pointed to concerns about children developing skills like curiosity, problem-solving and critical thinking: “As a school teacher, I understand how important it is for children to develop and grow their own curiosity, problem-solving skills, critical thinking skills and creativity, to name just a few human traits that I believe AI is slowly taking over from us. Since children are digital natives, the adults who understand a world without AI need to still pass the torch to children for developing these human qualities with our own human brains, instead of relying on the difficulty to be passed on to AI so that humans don’t have to feel the struggle of what real learning is.” – Woman, age 40-49 Some Americans (18%) also say the main reason they rate the risks as high is the negative impact AI could have on accurate information, such as making it harder to tell what is real and what was created by AI. For example: “Misinformation is already a huge problem and AI can create misinformation a lot faster than people can.” – Man, age 30-39 Another commonly cited reason for rating the risks as high is concerns over people’s ability to control AI (17%). One man wrote: “Society will be too slow to regulate and control AI. The technology will advance rapidly and outpace our ability to anticipate outcomes (both positive and negative). It will therefore be extremely difficult to implement and deploy risk management strategies, plans, policies and legislation to mitigate the upheaval that AI has the real potential to unleash on every member of our society” – Man, age 60-69 Finally, some (11%) worry about the use of AI for nefarious purposes, including crime. As one respondent wrote: “AI can very easily be used to fake people’s likeness and voice. This is absolutely dangerous in the hands of criminals or other dishonest people. Identities can be stolen; innocent people could be framed for doing or saying things they didn’t do/say.” – Man, age 40-49 Reasons why Americans see high benefits of AI Among the 25% who say the benefits of AI are high or very high, the most commonly cited reason is efficiency gains that would free people up to use their time in better ways (41%). “AI takes mundane tasks that often waste talent and effort and allows us to automate them. AI also allows us to access information in a more streamlined way and allows us to save something that we can never get back: time!” – Man, age 30-39 “AI has the potential to make society more efficient than ever. AI sort of transcends time and space in that it can be used to study the past, inform the present, and shape the future. It can be used by individuals, by corporations, by governments.” – Woman, age 20-29 Others (23%) pointed to the possibility that AI would expand human and technological abilities, such as leading to more rapid scientific and medical developments or increasing access to information. One older respondent focuses on its possibility to improve health care: “Use of AI could significantly speed diagnosis of medical issues. Now we rely on any given doctor’s ability to know about certain conditions. [This is] a real issue particularly in rural areas.” – Woman, age 60-69 The survey also asked respondents the main reason they rated the benefits for society as low or very low. About one-third pointed toward the concern that AI will erode human abilities and connections. This was also the most common reason for rating the risks as high. Refer to the Appendix for more. (The sample size for those who say the risks are low or very low is too

An election official counts ballots for European Parliament elections at a polling station in Thessaloniki, Greece, on June 9, 2024. (Sakis Mitrolidis/AFP via Getty Images) How we did this This Pew Research Center analysis focuses on views of elected officials and political reform in 25 countries across the Asia-Pacific region, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, North America and sub-Saharan Africa. For non-U.S. data, this analysis draws on nationally representative surveys of 28,333 adults conducted from Jan. 8 to April 26, 2025. All surveys were conducted over the phone with adults in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Surveys were conducted face-to-face in Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Israel, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa and Turkey. In Australia, we used a mixed-mode probability-based online panel. In the United States, we surveyed 3,605 U.S. adults from March 24 to 30, 2025. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), a group of people recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses who have agreed to take surveys regularly. This kind of recruitment gives nearly all U.S. adults a chance of selection. Surveys were conducted either online or by telephone with a live interviewer. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology. Here are the questions used for this analysis, along with responses, and the survey methodology. People in regions across the globe are unhappy with their political systems and elected officials, according to a Pew Research Center survey in 25 countries. Majorities in 20 of the 25 countries say their political system needs either major changes or complete reform, with roughly eight-in-ten adults or more holding this view in Argentina, Brazil, Greece, Kenya, Nigeria, South Korea and the United States. However, many of those who want significant political change in their country are not confident it can happen. The discontent is, at least in part, tied to frustration with political leaders. Median shares of roughly four-in-ten or more across the 25 countries say that few or none of their elected officials are honest, ethical, well-qualified, understanding of ordinary people’s needs or focused on the country’s most important problems. Attitudes toward political change In 12 countries, roughly four-in-ten adults or more express a strong desire for change, alongside skepticism that their political system can change. For example, 68% of Greeks want complete reform or major changes to their political system but are not confident effective change is possible, while 15% want significant change and do think this is possible. Just 17% say their political system needs minor changes or no change at all. People who want change but lack confidence that it is possible are often relatively negative about the state of their country and its elected officials. They are particularly unlikely to associate positive traits with elected officials, to feel satisfied with the way their democracy is working or to describe their nation’s economic situation as good. This group is also especially likely to have negative views of both the main governing party and the leading opposition party in their country. For more on views of parties, read “How people in 24 countries feel about their political parties.” In contrast, there are seven nations where about four-in-ten adults or more believe their political system needs only minor changes or no change at all. Roughly seven-in-ten hold this view in the Netherlands and Sweden. Jump to Chapter 1 for more on attitudes toward political reform. Links between views on political and economic change We surveyed the same 25 countries last year and included a similar question about the need for economic change. In many nations where support for major economic changes or complete reform was widespread in 2024, there is strong demand for political change now. For example, 94% of Nigerians wanted major changes or complete reform for their economic system in 2024, and 91% want this for their political system today. In contrast, 40% of Swedes thought their country’s economic system needed significant changes last year, and just 29% feel this way about their political system in 2025. What do people think about elected officials? Respondents were given a list of five positive characteristics and asked whether they describe elected officials in their country. Political leaders receive mixed assessments on these measures at best and get decidedly negative marks in a number of places. Across the 25 nations polled, a 47% median say few or none of their elected officials are honest, 36% believe some are, and just 14% think all or most can be described this way. A 46% median say few or none understand the needs of ordinary people. And around four-in-ten believe few or no elected officials are focused on their country’s most important problems, ethical or well-qualified for their position. People in Greece, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the U.S. tend to stand out for their negative assessments of politicians, as do those in the African and Latin American countries surveyed. By contrast, people in Canada, India, Japan, the Netherlands and Sweden are generally less critical of their elected leaders. These findings are consistent with Pew Research Center’s previous international polling. Our 2023 survey found widespread belief that political leaders do not care what ordinary citizens think, as well as support for changes to the types of people elected to public office. And when we asked people what would improve the way democracy works in their country, the most common response was putting better or different politicians in office. Jump to Chapter 2 for more on views of elected officials. Views among young people In general, there are relatively few demographic differences across the questions in this report. However, younger adults stand out in some interesting ways. In nine countries, the desire for significant political change is higher among young adults than among older adults. For example,

For this analysis, we grouped people into two political categories: those who support the governing political party (or parties) in their country, and those who do not. These categories were coded based on the party or parties in power at the time the survey was fielded and on respondents’ answers to a question asking which political party, if any, they identify with in their country. In countries where multiple political parties govern in coalition (as is the case in many European countries), survey respondents who indicate support for any party in the coalition were grouped together. In Germany, for example, where the Social Democratic Party governed with Alliance 90/The Greens at the time of the 2025 survey, supporters of either party were grouped together. In countries where different political parties control the executive and legislative branches of government, the party holding the executive branch was considered the governing party. Survey respondents who did not indicate support for any political party, or who refused to identify with one, were categorized as not supporting the government in power. The table below outlines the governing political parties in each survey country. source

(EvgeniyShkolenko/Getty Images) About this research This Pew Research Center report examines the U.S. public’s views on whether God influences presidential elections, whether Christians think it is essential to support or oppose President Donald Trump, and how much religion influences the way people vote. Why did we do this? The Center conducts high-quality research to inform the public, journalists and leaders. Studying the public’s views about religion’s role in public life is a key part of the Center’s long-standing research agenda. Learn more about Pew Research Center. How did we do this? This report includes findings from a survey of 8,937 U.S. adults who are part of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP). The survey was conducted from May 5 to 11, 2025. The survey’s overall margin of error is plus or minus 1.4 percentage points. Here are the questions used for this report, the topline and the survey methodology. What role do Americans think God played in the last two presidential elections? In a May 2025 survey, most U.S. adults say God played no role at all, while about a third say recent election results are part of God’s overall plan but don’t necessarily mean God approved of the winner’s policies. Very few say God chose the winners because of their policies. For example, when asked what role they think God played in the 2024 presidential election, more than six-in-ten U.S. adults surveyed say either that God doesn’t get involved in presidential elections (49%) or that they don’t believe in God (14%). Roughly one-third say President Donald Trump’s victory must have been part of God’s plan, but that this doesn’t necessarily mean God approves of Trump’s policies. Just 4% say God chose Trump to become president in 2024 because God approves of his policies. The same survey asked Americans what role God played in the 2020 election, and the results are strikingly similar. Overall, 62% say either that God doesn’t get involved in presidential elections or that they don’t believe in God. Roughly one-third say Biden’s 2020 victory must have been part of God’s plan but didn’t imply that God endorsed Biden’s policies. And 2% say God chose Biden to become president because God approved of his policies. Americans’ views about God’s role in these recent elections are similar to what we found in a February 2020 poll, when we asked Americans to look back on Trump’s 2016 election and Obama’s 2008 and 2012 victories. Another question in the survey, given only to Christian respondents, asked if it is essential for “a good Christian” to support Trump, essential for “a good Christian” to oppose Trump, or if “good Christians can disagree about Donald Trump.” Overall, there’s consensus among most American Christians that “good Christians” do not need to take a particular view on Trump: 80% of U.S. Christians say good Christians can disagree about Donald Trump. 11% say opposing Trump is essential to being a good Christian. 7% say supporting Trump is essential to being a good Christian. The survey also explored the link between religion and politics in another way: It asked Americans how important religion is in shaping their votes. The findings show that a majority of Americans say religion plays a relatively small role or none at all in their vote: 56% say religion shapes how they vote a little or not at all. 18% say religion shapes how they vote some. 25% of U.S. adults say religion shapes how they vote a great deal or quite a bit. Compared with how religion shapes their vote, Americans are more than twice as likely to say religion has a great deal or quite a bit of impact on the way they treat other people (59%) and how they think about morality (56%). These are among the key findings about religion and politics from a Pew Research Center survey conducted May 5-11, 2025, among a nationally representative sample of 8,937 U.S. adults. They were asked these questions as part of the Center’s long-running effort to gauge the public’s views on how religion intersects with public life, including U.S. elections. Read on to learn more about: How Americans view God’s role in recent presidential elections Relatively few Americans in either political party think God chose their party’s candidate to become president in 2020 or 2024 specifically because God approved of the candidate’s policies. Just 8% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say God chose Trump in 2024 because God approved of Trump’s policies, and just 3% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say this of Biden’s victory in 2020. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say that recent election results must be part of God’s overall plan even if God didn’t necessarily approve of the winner’s policies. For instance, 44% of Republicans say Trump’s election was part of God’s overall plan even though the results don’t necessarily mean God approved of Trump’s policies. Just 22% of Democrats agree that Trump’s election was part of God’s plan. By contrast, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say that God does not get involved in elections or to say they don’t believe in God. Views among White evangelical Protestants When it comes to religious groups, most White evangelical Protestants tie Trump’s election to God in some way. But relatively few (8%) say that God chose Trump because God approves of his policies. Instead, most (63%) take the view that Trump’s election must be part of God’s overall plan, but that this doesn’t necessarily mean God endorses his policies. Most White evangelicals also tie Biden’s 2020 victory to God in some way, though just 1% of them say God chose Biden to become president in 2020 because God approved of his policies. Instead, most White evangelicals (67%) say Biden’s election must have been part of God’s overall plan but that this didn’t necessarily mean God approved of Biden’s policies. Views among Black Protestants Around half of Black Protestants also tie Trump’s election to God in some way, either by saying that God chose

Fireflies glow in the forest in rural Japan. (tdub303/Getty Images) How we did this Pew Research Center conducted this study to better understand the religious and spiritual beliefs, practices, and views of the growing number of people around the world who are religiously unaffiliated (meaning they say they are atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” when asked about their religion). We particularly wanted to look at the internal diversity among the unaffiliated, who are also called religious “nones.” This report is based on surveys in 36 countries. However, we have focused on 22 countries where the survey’s samples of religiously unaffiliated adults are large enough to analyze and report separately. “Nones” make up 5% or fewer of adults in the remaining 14 countries. For more about sample sizes, refer to the methodology. Outside the United States, this report draws on nationally representative surveys of a total of 23,202 adults interviewed from Jan. 5 to May 15, 2024. Interviews were conducted over the phone with adults in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Hungary, Mexico, Peru and South Africa. In Australia, we used a mixed-mode, probability-based online panel. For the U.S., data comes from respondents contacted in three separate surveys, each with more than 10,000 respondents. The surveys were conducted over the following dates. Select each survey title to read about the specific survey’s methodology. This report was produced by Pew Research Center as part of the Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures project, which analyzes religious change and its impact on societies around the world. Funding for the Global Religious Futures project comes from The Pew Charitable Trusts and the John Templeton Foundation (grant 63095). This publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation. The RLS was made possible by The Pew Charitable Trusts, which received support from the Lilly Endowment Inc., Templeton Religion Trust, The Arthur Vining Davis Foundations and the M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust.  Here are the questions and responses used for this report (including information about the U.S. source used for each question), along with the survey methodology. Around the world, many people who do not identify with any religion nevertheless hold a variety of spiritual and religious beliefs, including the belief that there is life after death, according to a Pew Research Center study of religiously unaffiliated adults in 22 countries. The number of adults who are religiously unaffiliated – describing themselves as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” – has climbed rapidly in the recent past across North America, Europe, parts of Latin America and some countries in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Australia and South Korea. In general, religiously unaffiliated people are less likely to hold spiritual beliefs, less likely to engage in religious practices, and more likely to take a skeptical view of religion’s impact on society than are Christians, Muslims and people who identify with other religions. But sizable percentages of religiously unaffiliated adults – often called religious “nones” – do hold some religious or spiritual beliefs, according to our nationally representative surveys of 22 countries with relatively large unaffiliated populations. For example, in all 22 countries, about a fifth or more of “nones” believe in life after death. The shares who say there is definitely or probably an afterlife range from 19% of unaffiliated adults in Hungary to 65% in Peru. In seven of the 22 countries, 50% or more of all “nones” believe in life after death. In addition, large shares of “nones” in some countries say “there is something spiritual beyond the natural world, even if we cannot see it.” For instance, 61% of “nones” in Mexico and 65% in Brazil express this belief. Many religiously unaffiliated adults also express belief in God. This includes solid majorities of “nones” in South Africa (77%) and several countries in Latin America, such as Brazil (92%), Colombia (86%) and Chile (69%). Religiously unaffiliated adults in Europe and Australia are much less inclined to believe in God. Just 18% of “nones” in Australia, 10% in Sweden and 9% in Hungary are believers. In the United States, 45% of “nones” say they believe in God, according to our 2023 survey. Jump to more on belief in God among “nones” in Chapter 1. Another relatively common belief among people who do not affiliate with any religion is that animals can have spirits or spiritual energies. In Greece and several Latin American countries, at least three-quarters of “nones” believe this. It might seem surprising that sizable shares of “nones” express any religious or spiritual beliefs. Yet nonbelief isn’t always the main reason people have no religious affiliation. In a 2023 survey we conducted in the U.S., 30% of “nones” said an extremely or very important reason they are nonreligious is that they have had “bad experiences with religious people,” about the same share who cited nonbelief in God or a higher power as a key reason (32%). Even more “nones” said they are nonreligious because they “don’t like religious organizations” (47%). How many ‘nones’ are secular? While sizable shares of “nones” in these 22 countries hold spiritual or religious beliefs, some express a more consistently secular outlook – saying they believe neither in God nor in an afterlife nor that there is “something spiritual beyond the natural world.” In Sweden, where 52% of adults are religiously unaffiliated, around half of “nones” (or 28% of the total adult population) express nonbelief in all three of these measures. Other places where relatively large shares of adults are “nones” expressing such nonbelief are Australia (24%), the Netherlands (24%) and South Korea (23%). Meanwhile, in several countries in the Americas, a much smaller portion of the population can be described as consistently secular in this way. In Mexico, for instance, 20% of adults are “nones,” but just 2% are “nones” who express nonbelief in the three measures analyzed here. In the U.S., 29% of adults have no religious