Trust, Verify, and Think Like a Genealogist
Over the past six months, I have spent a considerable amount of time experimenting with various artificial intelligence tools. Some of these tools have become regular parts of my genealogy workflow, helping me transcribe records, summarize documents, create biographies, generate historical context, and even produce audio and video content.
Along the way, I’ve learned that AI can be both incredibly helpful and surprisingly misleading.
Recently, I asked ChatGPT what advice it would give to a genealogist who is just beginning to use AI tools. The response resonated with me because it reflected many of the lessons I’ve learned through trial and error.
The most important piece of advice was simple:
Treat AI as a research assistant, not as a source.
That one principle can help genealogists avoid many of the mistakes that AI can introduce into family history research.
Transcription Errors Are Easy to Spot
Most genealogists quickly learn that AI-generated transcriptions are not perfect.
A surname may be misread.
A date may be transcribed incorrectly.
A place name may be misunderstood.
Fortunately, these errors are often easy to identify because we can compare the transcription to the original document image.
When the transcription doesn’t match the record, we can make corrections.
The more challenging errors occur when AI goes beyond transcription.
The Problem of Assumptions
AI tools are designed to recognize patterns and make predictions. Sometimes those predictions are useful. Sometimes they are not.
For example, an AI-generated biography might state that an individual worked as a farmer because he was living in a farming community.
A video might imply that an ancestor traveled a particular migration route because that route was commonly used.
Neither statement may be supported by actual evidence.
The problem is that these assumptions often sound reasonable.
As genealogists, we are trained to distinguish between facts and conclusions. AI-generated content deserves the same level of scrutiny that we apply to online family trees, published genealogies, and county histories.
Whenever AI presents a conclusion, it is worth asking:
What evidence supports this statement?
If the answer cannot be traced back to a document, then the statement should be treated as a hypothesis rather than a fact.
Images Can Be Misleading
One lesson I learned while experimenting with AI-generated videos is that images can create misleading impressions.
A video discussing an ancestor’s life may display photographs of people, places, or buildings that are not actually connected to the individual being discussed.
In one case, a video discussing a Kentucky family displayed imagery associated with Indiana. The narration was accurate, but the images suggested something that the evidence did not support.
Viewers often remember images more readily than words.
Because of that, genealogists should be especially cautious when using AI-generated images, maps, and videos.
Unless an image can be tied to a documented source, it should be viewed as an illustration rather than evidence.
Maps Deserve Careful Review
Maps are another area where AI can unintentionally create confusion.
Modern maps may not reflect historical boundaries.
County lines changed.
States were created.
Roads appeared and disappeared.
Migration routes varied.
An AI-generated map may be visually appealing while still presenting an inaccurate picture of an ancestor’s journey.
As with any other genealogy source, maps should be verified before they are accepted as accurate representations of historical events.
Historical Context Is Not Evidence
One of AI’s greatest strengths is providing historical context.
For example, AI can explain:
- How settlers moved westward.
- What transportation options were available.
- What military units experienced during a war.
- What life was like in a particular community.
This context helps us better understand our ancestors.
However, context is not evidence.
The fact that many settlers traveled a particular route does not prove that our ancestor did.
The fact that many farmers grew wheat does not prove that our ancestor did.
Historical context can help us understand possibilities, but documents are still required to establish facts.
Use AI for What It Does Best
Despite these cautions, I remain enthusiastic about using AI in genealogy.
In my experience, AI is most valuable when it helps researchers:
- Organize evidence
- Summarize lengthy documents
- Build timelines
- Identify inconsistencies
- Develop research plans
- Compare competing theories
- Generate questions for further investigation
These tasks complement the work genealogists already do.
AI can help us think through a problem, but it cannot replace careful analysis of the records themselves.
Think Like a Genealogist
Experienced genealogists already know how to evaluate evidence.
We question family stories.
We verify published information.
We compare sources.
We recognize conflicts.
Those same skills are essential when working with AI.
The most successful use of AI in genealogy is not blind acceptance of its output.
Instead, it is a partnership in which the genealogist remains responsible for evaluating evidence and drawing conclusions.
AI can suggest possibilities.
It can help organize information.
It can even help us see patterns we might otherwise miss.
But the records remain the foundation of our research.
As I continue exploring AI tools, I’ve come to appreciate them as powerful assistants. They can save time, uncover clues, and help organize complex projects.
At the same time, they remind me of a lesson genealogists have always known: