LEBANON, New Hampshire—According to the Global Rescue Winter 2026 Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey, most travelers expect artificial intelligence to play a limited and carefully controlled role in travel planning in 2026, with human judgment, personal experience, and independent verification continuing to dominate decision-making.
Overall, 36 percent of travelers said they expected to use AI in some capacity when planning travel in 2026, whether to generate inspiration, narrow options, or, in rare cases, make decisions on their behalf. However, a clear majority remained cautious: 36 percent said they would not use AI for travel planning at all, while 25 percent said they planned to rely mostly on human recommendations.
“Travelers are interested in AI, but they are not ready to hand over control,” said Dan Richards, chief executive officer of The Global Rescue Companies and a member of the US Travel and Tourism Advisory Board at the U.S. Department of Commerce. “AI is viewed as a helpful assistant, not a trusted authority, particularly when safety, cost, and risk are involved.”
Additional Findings
Gender differences highlighted varying levels of comfort with AI. Men were more likely than women to use AI as a decision-support tool, with 25 percent of men saying AI would help narrow options before they made final decisions, compared to 19 percent of women. Women were more inclined to avoid AI altogether, with 36 percent saying they would not use AI for travel planning, slightly higher than men at 35 percent. Women were also more likely to rely mostly on human recommendations (26 percent) versus 23 percent of men.
Geographic differences showed distinct patterns in how travelers approach AI rather than differing levels of resistance. U.S. and non-U.S. travelers were equally likely to avoid AI altogether, with 37 percent in both groups saying they would not use AI for travel planning. However, non-U.S. respondents showed a stronger preference for human guidance, with 31 percent relying mostly on human recommendations compared to 22 percent of U.S. travelers. U.S. travelers were more inclined to use AI as a decision-support tool, with 24 percent saying AI would help narrow options before they make final decisions, more than double the 11% reported by non-US travelers.
Reluctance grew when AI suggested destinations travelers had never considered. Overall, 41 percent of respondents said they would be unlikely to travel to a destination recommended by AI. Another 30 percent said they would be somewhat likely, depending on cost and safety considerations, while 20 percent said they would consider an AI-recommended destination only after independent verification. Just 1 percent said they would be very likely to trust the recommendation outright.
“Trust and verification are essential,” Richards said. “AI may introduce travelers to new ideas, but it rarely closes the deal without human confirmation.”
Differing Levels of Caution
Women expressed slightly higher levels of skepticism than men, with 43 percent of respondents saying they would be unlikely to follow an AI destination recommendation, compared to 39 percent of men. Men were more willing to independently verify AI suggestions, with 29 percent saying they would consider a destination after verification, versus 18 percent of women.
U.S. and non-U.S. travelers showed similar levels of caution. Forty-two percent of U.S. travelers and 43% of non-U.S. travelers said they would be unlikely to travel to an AI-recommended destination. U.S. travelers were slightly more likely to independently verify recommendations, while non-U.S. travelers showed a marginally higher tendency to weigh cost and safety factors before deciding.
“AI will influence how travelers discover destinations, but it will not replace human judgment,” Richards said. “For travelers focused on safety and resilience, technology must support informed decisions, not substitute for them.”
