More than one-third of adults aged 65 and older believe artificial intelligence will have a mostly negative impact on society, and 39% expect worse healthcare outcomes as AI becomes more integrated into health services, according to a Pew Research Center report released in June. Only 17% of older adults surveyed think AI will benefit them, the data shows.
TL;DR: Pew Research found 39% of adults 65+ expect worse healthcare from AI adoption, creating a trust gap as senior living operators rapidly deploy the technology for operations, monitoring, and resident communications.
The findings stand in sharp contrast to senior living operators’ enthusiasm for the technology. A 2025 Argentum executive survey found that 76% of senior living technology and C-suite executives believe AI will have a transformative and positive effect on the industry, according to reporting by Senior Housing News. Seventy percent of operators surveyed said they currently use AI in operations for predictive analytics, staff efficiency, chatbots for resident interactions, and health monitoring technology.
Residents Pressing Operators for Transparency
The perception gap has already surfaced in operator-resident conversations. Residents at RoseVilla, a continuing care retirement community, asked the operator to define how AI aligns with the organization’s sustainability values before moving forward with new implementations, according to RoseVilla CEO Glen Lewis, who addressed the topic at the Senior Housing News Sales & Marketing conference earlier this year.
“They have actually pushed back on us, saying, wait, before you go down that path, how does this align with us as an organization?” Lewis said, according to the report.
NIC Principal of Operations and AgeTech Dorice Redman told Senior Housing News that questions from residents could provide operators an opportunity to educate prospects “on the measurable benefits AI brings to senior living communities.” Operators currently disclose AI use through website privacy policies when the technology enhances communications, such as chatbots or virtual receptionists, and require resident consent for ambient health monitoring technology, Redman said.
Regulatory Landscape Remains Fragmented
No comprehensive federal law currently mandates AI disclosures to patients in healthcare settings. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Food and Drug Administration issued guidance on AI in clinical decision-making in January 2025, but the guidance does not impose disclosure requirements on senior living providers, which are regulated more similarly to hospitality than healthcare.
Multiple states have moved ahead with AI-specific consumer protection statutes. Colorado enacted the first risk-based AI law, mandating that developers of AI systems prevent algorithmic discrimination. California lawmakers targeted AI transparency with consumer protections focused on how generative AI is deployed. Illinois approved legislation regulating how AI algorithms process consumer data and avoid bias, the report notes.
ATI Advisory Managing Director Will Sellheim said vendors should disclose their use of AI but face a tension between transparency and protecting competitive advantages. “They walk a delicate line as they don’t want to give too much detail on what they view to be competitively advantageous,” Sellheim told Senior Housing News.
The demographic divide on AI skepticism extends beyond older adults. Pew’s data found that people under 30 reported the highest levels of AI skepticism across all age groups. An AARP Technology Trends survey in 2026 found that 41% of people aged 70 to 79 and 37% over 80 currently use or are interested in AI—figures that suggest operator adoption is outpacing resident comfort and familiarity.
Reading Between the Lines
The trust dynamics documented in the Pew data matter for admission and retention conversations, particularly as senior living operators deploy AI chatbots and cost calculators to reach family caregivers making placement decisions. When a prospect tours a facility and discovers AI-powered monitoring or communication systems without prior disclosure, the perception gap can undermine the relationship before it begins.
Operators who proactively explain AI implementations—detailing what the technology does, what human oversight remains in place, and how data is protected—position themselves to capture families navigating decision journeys that increasingly include research on how facilities use technology. The alternative is reactive disclosure after a resident or family raises concerns, which shifts the conversation from education to reassurance.
Voluntary transparency standards would allow operators to differentiate on trust rather than wait for state-level mandates to force disclosure. The sector’s position between healthcare’s clinical accountability and hospitality’s service expectations creates space for self-regulation that addresses resident skepticism before it becomes a regulatory compliance issue.
