Categories
November 18, 2025
From Gen Z to Boomers, passive meter data uncovers how generations navigate AI and search differently in the new digital landscape.
The way consumers find information online is fundamentally changing, moving from static search results to dynamic, conversational interfaces. While traditional search engines still receive significantly more visits, Generative AI engines (like ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude) have seen explosive growth; an 80% year-over-year increase compared to a slight 0.5% decline for traditional search (according to a OneLittleWeb study, based on Semrush data).
This shift signals a new era of digital consumer behavior, one that is not a zero-sum game but a convergence toward a hybrid "research engine" model. This new landscape has given rise to Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), a new approach to digital visibility that focuses on optimizing content for AI-driven discovery engines rather than just traditional search.
The core difference is that success is no longer about getting a link to the top of a results page; it’s about being frequently mentioned within an AI’s summarized answer. This also creates a challenge for traditional attribution models; consumers might discover your brand through an AI, then conduct a separate search for your company or type your domain directly into their browser.
The data suggests a complex relationship: Gen AI engines are not replacing traditional search engines but are reshaping how users interact with information. This shift is rapidly creating new demands for brands and organizations to adapt to a changing consumer journey.
To adapt, businesses must master three core GEO strategies:
The goal is to help AI provide a correct, confident, and complete answer when a user asks a question about your brand because it's pulling from the clear, structured information you've provided. This new approach also means marketers must adapt their content, as the "long tail" of search queries is in the form of highly specific, conversational questions. These queries are, on average, longer than those of the search engines, so this requires thinking in terms of full questions and anticipating follow-up queries.
For market researchers, this represents a golden opportunity to identify unanswered questions; early adopters of GEO can benefit by answering very specific questions that haven't been addressed before.
The world of generative AI is still new, and many so-called "best practices" are simply being repeated without any real proof. The most reliable way to find what works is by running your own research.
Passive data meters offer a genuine way to understand how people actually use generative AI. For example, recent data suggests that consumers use traditional search and generative AI for different purposes; one is often for quick answers, while the other is for in-depth exploration. Observing these distinct user behaviors is the only way to accurately navigate this evolving landscape.
This kind of research also highlights a clear demographic divide. Younger users are adopting chatbots for conversational queries, while older generations continue to stick with traditional search. What does this behavioral divide mean for marketers? It reinforces the need to adopt a hybrid content strategy that caters to both user groups. Start by setting a baseline and defining your target questions, then experiment and iterate.
Ultimately, GEO is the next SEO. It's about shaping how AI engines understand and present your brand and products. Businesses that embrace this shift early on will likely see a significant boost in their visibility as search continues to evolve.
The key to navigating this new landscape isn't about pushing a product; it's about a commitment to robust research and a healthy dose of curiosity. By focusing on understanding the subtle, ever-changing dynamics of digital consumer behavior, marketers can build a truly effective strategy.
Comments
Comments are moderated to ensure respect towards the author and to prevent spam or self-promotion. Your comment may be edited, rejected, or approved based on these criteria. By commenting, you accept these terms and take responsibility for your contributions.
Disclaimer
The views, opinions, data, and methodologies expressed above are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect or represent the official policies, positions, or beliefs of Greenbook.
More from Enric Cid
In response to the Opinions for Good scandal, a new metric is proposed to better measure respondent quality and restore trust in market research data.
Sign Up for
Updates
Get content that matters, written by top insights industry experts, delivered right to your inbox.