Ahrefs Highlights 25 AI Search Researchers to Follow

Ahrefs has published a guide to 25 people it identifies as sources of original research on AI search. The article, “The 25 Best AEO/GEO Experts to Follow in 2026,” presents research as a way to answer questions about the field and keep up with changes. It offers marketers a starting point for choosing whose work to follow.

The guide focuses on individuals who publish research, rather than simply offering opinions about AI search. Its summary does not name the researchers or explain how they were selected. Readers interested in following specific people will therefore need to consult the full article for the list and any context Ahrefs provides about their work.

For a marketing team, a list of researchers can be a useful way to organize further reading. Following an individual also gives readers a way to find subsequent publications from that person. The value of any individual study, however, still needs to be assessed on its own merits rather than assumed from its inclusion on a list.

When reviewing research, marketers can begin by identifying the question being investigated and checking how the author attempted to answer it. Details such as the test setup, the period examined and any stated limitations help establish what a finding does—and does not—support. Those details also help readers judge whether the work is relevant to their own questions.

It is useful to distinguish an observed result from an author’s interpretation or recommendation. Where several researchers address a similar question, comparing their methods and findings can help readers understand whether they are examining the same conditions. If a study leaves an important question unanswered, that gap can be recorded for future review rather than treated as a settled conclusion.

What this means for marketers

Use the Ahrefs guide as a starting point for finding research to read, not as a substitute for evaluating the research itself. Keep a short record of relevant publications, their methods and their limitations, then revisit conclusions as new work becomes available. For decisions affecting a campaign, consider how closely a study’s conditions match the question your team is trying to answer.