Wide Salary Ranges May Undermine Pay Transparency Goals

Pay transparency has become one of the defining workplace trends of recent years, with lawmakers and employers increasingly embracing salary disclosure as a tool to promote fairness, strengthen employer brands, and help candidates make more informed career decisions. But while few dispute the value of transparency, new research suggests that how organizations present salary information may be just as important as whether they disclose it at all.

A new study from Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations finds that broad salary ranges in job postings may unintentionally discourage women from applying for positions and influence how they negotiate compensation, potentially undermining one of the primary goals of pay transparency laws.

The findings arrive as pay transparency requirements continue to expand across the United States. As of 2026, 18 states and Washington, D.C., require employers to include salary ranges in job advertisements, and many organizations outside those jurisdictions have voluntarily adopted similar practices.

Specialty Credential: Talent Acquisition

Unintended Consequences

The Cornell study, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, examined how the width of disclosed pay ranges affects application decisions and salary negotiations. Across four separate studies — including analyses of real-world job postings, surveys, field experiments with job seekers, and experimental interventions — the researchers identified a consistent pattern.

“Across our four studies, we consistently found that women show a stronger preference for jobs with narrower salary ranges compared to men, and that this preference is associated with less assertive negotiation behaviors,” said Alice Lee, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Cornell and the study’s lead author. “In other words, the way these laws are being implemented may be perpetuating the very pay gaps they were designed to close.”

The research suggests that women are more likely than men to view wide salary ranges as introducing uncertainty about their likely compensation. Rather than seeing a broad range as an opportunity to negotiate toward the top end, many women appear to interpret it as greater risk.

Lee noted that “women exhibit a stronger preference for jobs with narrower pay ranges than men, largely driven by women’s higher risk aversion.” That preference has meaningful downstream consequences because applicants who selected positions with narrower salary bands also tended to negotiate less aggressively.

The implications extend well beyond an employee’s first paycheck. “This matters because starting salaries have compounding consequences,” Lee said. “Raises, bonuses, and future opportunities are often tied to your initial salary, so a lower starting point doesn’t just affect your first paycheck. It ripples through your career.”

The researchers found that applicants who preferred narrower salary ranges were consistently more satisfied with midpoint salary offers, were less likely to negotiate, and, when they did negotiate, requested smaller increases than applicants drawn to broader ranges.

Context Matters

The study also identified a practical solution. When researchers supplemented salary ranges with additional information explaining the organization’s typical starting salary and the factors used to determine final compensation, the gender differences largely disappeared.

“We found that when job ads included some additional context about the typical starting salary and how final offers are determined, it mitigated women’s stronger preference for narrower pay ranges,” Lee said. “When that information was provided, we no longer observed the gender gap in application decisions, and it also eliminated the gap in negotiation behaviors.”

That finding suggests employers can improve candidate confidence without abandoning salary transparency or dramatically changing compensation practices.

“Pay transparency laws represent meaningful progress, but transparency alone isn’t enough,” Lee said. “How employers present pay information matters just as much as whether they disclose it.”

Resource: State and Local Updates

Practical Takeaways for HR

For HR and talent acquisition leaders, the research underscores the importance of viewing salary disclosure as part of a broader candidate experience rather than simply a compliance exercise.

Thomas Carnahan, senior manager of people insights at Berkshire, said organizations should recognize that posting a pay range is only the beginning of effective communication.

“Posting a salary range may increase openness, but a range that is too broad can still leave candidates unsure about what they are likely to earn,” Carnahan said. “That uncertainty may influence applicant behavior in ways employers do not intend.”

Broad salary bands may attract applicants who are comfortable with ambiguity while discouraging equally qualified candidates who prefer greater predictability, he said.

Rather than focusing solely on meeting legal disclosure requirements, organizations may benefit from providing candidates with additional context around compensation decisions.

Carnahan recommended several practical steps, including explaining the organization’s typical starting salary within the posted range, describing the factors used to determine where offers fall within the band, avoiding unnecessarily broad salary ranges, and ensuring recruiters and hiring managers can clearly explain compensation decisions during the hiring process.

He also encouraged HR leaders to evaluate the candidate experience by examining whether compensation disclosures influence who applies, who self-selects out of opportunities, and how negotiations unfold.