A new study suggests how family background shapes not only job outcomes but also the salary expectations job seekers bring with them from the start.
The researchers tracked how social class origins influence wage goal dynamics during the job search process. The team followed two groups of college-educated job seekers in China over three months, collecting weekly data on how they adjusted their wage expectations based on perceived progress.
Their central question: Do college graduates from lower-class backgrounds approach job hunting differently than their higher-class background peers and does that shape the job offers they ultimately accept?
“We wanted to find out why there are persistent wage gaps among college-educated job seekers from different social class backgrounds, even when their formal qualifications are similar,” says Professor Songqi Liu of Georgia State’s management department.
“Prior research focused largely on employer bias or job search effort but paid little attention to job seekers’ own wage goals and how those goals evolve during the search process. We saw wage goals and fluctuations over time as critical, yet understudied, self-regulatory mechanisms that could help explain how inequality emerges early in careers.”
The study found that job seekers from lower social class backgrounds (in terms of parental education and family income) consistently set lower wage goals compared to their higher-class peers. And these gaps weren’t just a matter of starting low. Students from less advantaged backgrounds were significantly more likely to revise their wage expectations downward when their job search wasn’t going well.
“One surprising finding was that students from lower social class backgrounds not only set lower wage goals on average; but they were also much more likely to adjust their wage goals up or down in response to how their job search was going week to week,” says Liu.
In contrast, students from higher-class families tended to keep their wage goals steady, even in the face of setbacks or successes. The researchers attribute this resilience to greater access to job search resources—like professional networks, career advice, and financial safety nets—and having less pressure to find a job that supports others.
The study also uncovered an important psychological difference: interdependent motivation. Job seekers from lower-class backgrounds were more likely to say they wanted a job to support their family or fulfill communal expectations. These motives made them more sensitive to perceived job search progress and more willing to compromise if things weren’t going well.
“Students from low-income backgrounds often face greater financial pressure and have fewer resources to sustain a prolonged job search, which makes securing employment quickly more salient than holding out for higher pay,” says Liu.
Meanwhile, those from higher-class backgrounds were more likely to cite personal growth or independence as reasons for seeking employment, which correlated with more stable salary goals.
The findings highlight a rarely examined driver of pay inequity: self-set salary expectations shaped by upbringing. While wage gaps are often blamed on external discrimination or negotiation differences, this research suggests that internalized expectations may also contribute, especially early in a career.
“This research matters because early wage decisions can compound over time, shaping long-term earnings trajectories and reinforcing intergenerational inequality,” says Liu.
“By showing how social class influences wage goal setting and adjustment, the study identifies a psychological and behavioral pathway through which inequality persists, even among equally educated individuals.”
For universities and career services, the takeaway is clear: preparing students for the job market should include coaching on realistic and aspirational wage setting, not just resume writing and interview skills.
The researchers urge institutions to create support systems that level the playing field, not just by opening access to higher education, but by ensuring all graduates, regardless of background, are equipped to value their worth in the marketplace.
“Education opens the door,” says Georgia State’s Liu. “But without the right guidance and support, not everyone walks through with the same confidence or ends up on the same path.”
The research appears in the Journal of Applied Psychology.
The study was developed by researchers from institutions including the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Texas A&M University, University of Minnesota, and Georgia State’s Robinson College of Business.
Source: University of Georgia
