Could Artificial Intelligence Actually Foster a Reading Habit?

Imagine a simple situation. Someone wants to know why the price of chillies has risen. Previously, they might have opened a search engine, read several news articles, opened other pieces, and then tried to understand the causes. Now, simply by typing a question to AI, a neatly arranged answer appears within seconds. This is what is often called an instant answer—a response that can be obtained almost immediately. The question then arises: if all answers can be obtained quickly through AI, will people still want to read?

This concern is quite reasonable. The presence of ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and various other generative AI technologies is indeed changing reading habits. We no longer always begin our search from books, articles, or search engines. We can directly ask a machine that is capable of explaining information according to our needs.

However, we may be too quick to conclude that AI will make society lazy about reading. What is happening might actually be the opposite. AI is not killing the culture of reading. AI is changing the way we read.

There is a difference between obtaining information and having the desire to know something. When someone asks AI about climate change, for example, the first answer may only be the beginning. From there, other questions emerge: What are the causes? How does it impact Indonesia? Why are farmers one of the affected groups?

One question can give birth to the next. This is where AI has the potential to act as a trigger of curiosity. Research on the use of ChatGPT in learning shows that this technology can help students understand difficult concepts, simplify terms, create summaries, and simultaneously generate ideas for exploring a topic further.

Imagine a student opening an English-language journal and encountering a term they do not understand. Without help, the journal might be closed immediately. With AI, they can ask for an explanation in simple language. After understanding, they return to the journal. At this point, AI is not a replacement for reading. AI becomes a bridge to reading.

Reading no longer has to be a solitary activity. We have long known reading as an individual activity. We open a book, read page by page, and then try to understand its contents alone. AI makes that experience slightly different. Now readers can ‘converse’ with what they are reading. We can ask AI to explain a paragraph, provide examples, compare two concepts, create questions from an article, or test whether we truly understand the reading. This is what is beginning to be known as human-AI collaboration.

Research on human-AI collaborative reading shows that generative AI can act as a partner in academic reading activities. AI can provide feedback and help readers reflect on the text. The problem with reading is often not a lack of reading material, but that not everyone knows how to deal with difficult texts. AI can be an entry point.

Someone who finds an economics book too complicated can ask for a simple explanation. After understanding the basic concepts, they may actually become interested in reading a more complete book. AI makes the reading process more interactive and personalised.

We often say that society must improve its reading interest. However, we sometimes forget that reading requires an enjoyable experience. Not everyone immediately enjoys scientific journals, philosophy books, economic reports, or articles with heavy academic language. Some people need an ‘entry point’. AI can be one of those doors.

This is important for the digital native generation, the generation that has been accustomed to digital technology since childhood. They live in a condition of information overload, when so much information is available that it is difficult to determine what is truly important. Research on students at Makassar State University also provides an interesting picture. Of the 306 students studied, most had high levels of digital literacy, reading interest, GenAI usage, and learning motivation. This means that high AI usage does not automatically mean low reading interest. The two can go hand in hand.

Of course, AI is not without risk. There is one trap that must be avoided: too much convenience. If every task is simply handed over to AI, a person may lose the opportunity to read, analyse, and find answers on their own.

Research on 405 students aged 14–15 in England provides an important lesson. The use of AI without active learning activities did not provide the same benefits as the use of AI accompanied by activities such as note-taking and processing information.

The message is simple: Do not let AI do all the thinking work. We may ask AI to explain. We may ask for examples. We may ask for reading recommendations. But after that, we still have to read. We need to open the original source, compare information, conduct fact-checking, and question whether the answer makes sense. This is where critical thinking becomes increasingly important.

In the AI era, reading ability is not just about understanding what is written. We must also be able to ask: who said this? Where is the source? What is the evidence? Is there another point of view?

There is a concern that AI will eliminate the habit of deep reading, which is reading deeply and attentively. That concern is understandable. But perhaps what is emerging is not the death of deep reading, but the birth of smarter reading—reading that is more critical, more connected, and more purposeful. AI does not have to be the end of reading. AI can be the beginning of a new way of reading.