Book club participation remains a minority activity among U.S. adults, although millions take part and many existing members value the experience highly. The latest Pew Research Center survey found that 7% of U.S. adults participated in a book club during the 12 months ending in October 2025. Other surveys describe the composition of participating groups, the shift toward virtual meetings during 2020, and the practical decisions that help clubs keep reading together.
Table of contents
- How many adults participate
- Who participates and what clubs look like
- How meeting patterns changed in 2020
- Virtual, outdoor, and hybrid formats
- Book access and reading logistics
- What clubs read and how members feel
How many adults participate
Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel measured book-club participation among U.S. adults on October 6–16, 2025. In that population survey, 7% said they had participated in a book club during the previous 12 months, while 92% said they had not. The source is the 2025 Pew Research Center American Trends Panel Wave 181 survey topline.
The same October 2025 results show a difference by sex: 10% of U.S. women reported participation, compared with 5% of U.S. men. These are population estimates for U.S. adults, not the share of people who identify as avid readers or the share of people already connected to a club. Pew’s results therefore provide the clearest comparison point for overall adult participation.
BookBrowse published a different kind of figure in 2025. Its estimate placed U.S. book-club participation at about 13 million adults, using a 5% adult participation rate from a 2022 arts-participation survey and the 2020 Census adult population. That number is an estimate based on earlier inputs, not a direct 2025 headcount. BookBrowse also reported that the 2022 survey found roughly 5% of U.S. adults in book clubs or reading groups. The estimate and its method are described in How Many People Are in a Book Club in the US?.
BookBrowse’s own 2025 survey of roughly 1,000 book-club respondents gives a view of perceived direction rather than population prevalence. Among those respondents, 57.28% believed participation was increasing and 12.22% believed it was decreasing. Because the respondents were recruited around book clubs, these percentages should be read as the views of people connected to the activity, not as a national adult estimate.
Who participates and what clubs look like
The Penguin Random House Reader Lounge survey focused on avid readers who had joined a club during the prior year. It was an opt-in, non-nationally representative panel, so its results describe that surveyed reader group rather than U.S. adults generally. Within it, 86% said they were currently in one or two book clubs, while 14% were in three or more. The survey period was identified as June, but its publication year was not stated in the supplied source. See From The Reader Lounge: A Dive into Avid Readers and Book Clubs.
The same survey shows how clubs can be organized. Among surveyed avid readers, 61% participated with their closest friends and family. Social-media book clubs accounted for 17%, and online book clubs also accounted for 17%. Library-led clubs reached 12%, while bookstore-led clubs reached 9%. These categories can overlap because one person may participate in more than one club or format.
BookBrowse’s October 14–27, 2020 survey included 3,417 current book-club respondents. It found that 95% identified as female and 5% as male; 71% were age 65 or older; and 95% identified as white or Caucasian. The survey also found that 24% led a book-discussion group. These figures describe that self-selected, book-club-focused sample, mostly in the United States, during the COVID-19 period. They are not a demographic profile of every U.S. club member.
How meeting patterns changed in 2020
BookBrowse’s October 2020 results capture clubs while the pandemic was disrupting ordinary gatherings. Three-quarters of current respondents said their group was meeting, while one-quarter said it was not meeting. In the U.S. results, 76% said their group was meeting and 24% said it was not meeting because of the pandemic.
Among groups that were meeting, 77% met about as frequently as in the prior year, using October 2020 compared with 2019 as the reference period. Another 6% met more frequently and 14% met less frequently. A small 3% of currently meeting groups had started during 2020.
Attendance did not move uniformly. One-quarter of respondents in currently meeting groups reported a lower attendance rate than in the prior year. Among groups meeting in person, 7% said attendance had improved. Among groups meeting virtually, 14% said attendance had improved. These findings suggest that a change of venue could help some clubs maintain participation, while the results do not establish why attendance changed.
| Book club measure | Share reported | Period or comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Current groups meeting | 75% | October 2020 |
| Groups meeting at about the same frequency | 77% | October 2020 versus 2019 |
| Groups meeting more frequently | 6% | October 2020 versus 2019 |
| Groups meeting less frequently | 14% | October 2020 versus 2019 |
| Current groups started during 2020 | 3% | October 2020 |
The underlying source is Book Clubs in Lockdown, a BookBrowse survey conducted October 14–27, 2020. Its percentages refer to respondents and groups in that survey, not to the national adult population.
Virtual, outdoor, and hybrid formats
Among currently meeting BookBrowse groups in October 2020, 65% usually met virtually and 17% usually met outdoors. Of the groups meeting remotely, 96% used Zoom. In groups that met both in 2019 and in October 2020, 82% of respondents said the group was meeting somewhere different.
The survey also recorded expectations about what would remain after the pandemic. Among respondents in groups that met virtually, 32% expected to retain a virtual element. More specific answers included 16% expecting a hybrid arrangement, 13% expecting some meetings in person and others virtually, and 3% expecting all future meetings to remain virtual. These categories describe expectations recorded in October 2020, not a forecast of later national behavior.
New groups were especially connected with remote formats at that point: two-thirds of the BookBrowse groups formed in 2020 were meeting virtually. The figure helps explain why online access mattered during the period, but it should not be used as a current estimate of virtual book-club participation.
Book access and reading logistics
Access to copies is a recurring operational issue for clubs. In the BookBrowse data for 2019, at least 84% of book groups had some members who borrowed books from a library. Library support differed by group type: 5% of private groups used library “book club in a bag” kits, compared with 51% of library groups.
Reading access also changed during 2020. About one-fifth of BookBrowse respondents said club members bought books that they previously would have borrowed. About 33% said many members switched to borrowing electronic copies when print copies were unavailable.
Planning ahead was common. About 40% of groups chose their reading at least four months in advance, and about 20% planned a full year of reading. Among groups planning at least four months ahead, 20% never changed their schedule and 74% rarely changed it. The figures indicate that long-range selection often went with schedule stability in this survey, but they do not measure the cause of that stability.
Book availability was also a selection consideration in the Penguin Random House avid-reader survey: 51% ranked book availability or accessibility among their top considerations. Because that panel was opt-in and focused on avid readers who had recently joined a club, the result describes those surveyed readers rather than all book clubs.
What clubs read and how members feel
Among BookBrowse respondents whose groups chose books no more than six months ahead, 28% said they were reading more racial-justice books in 2020 than in the prior year. The comparable shares were 15% for more current-events books, 17% for more books offering escape from current events, and 16% for more uplifting books. The comparison was 2020 with 2019, and the percentages describe respondents in the specified planning group.
Satisfaction was high among groups that were meeting in October 2020. BookBrowse reported that 61% of respondents whose groups were meeting were very happy with their club, while 27% were somewhat happy. The survey also found that 52% of respondents in groups usually meeting in person said their club was more important to them than in the prior year. Among respondents in usually virtual groups, 47% said it was more important.
The social setting around meetings was also measurable before the pandemic. In 2019, 91% of private BookBrowse clubs normally included food at meetings, and 26% normally served a full meal. Those figures describe private clubs in the BookBrowse sample and are not estimates for all U.S. book clubs.
Taken together, the statistics show several layers of participation: a relatively small share of U.S. adults reported joining a club in the latest population survey, while club-focused surveys show substantial commitment among people already participating. Membership can involve friends, family, libraries, bookstores, social-media groups, online communities, or combinations of these formats. The available figures also show why participation statistics need a clear date, geography, sample definition, and distinction between direct survey results and estimates.