Journal of Youth Studies

ISSN: 1367-6261 (Print) 1469-9680 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjys20

Work values and beliefs of Generation X and

Generation Y

Harvey J. Krahn & Nancy L. Galambos

To cite this article: Harvey J. Krahn & Nancy L. Galambos (2014) Work values and
beliefs of Generation X and Generation Y, Journal of Youth Studies, 17:1, 92-112, DOI:
10.1080/13676261.2013.815701

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.815701

Published online: 16 Jul 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3855

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 8 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjys20

Download by: [RMIT University Library] Date: 29 March 2016, At: 22:13
 Journal of Youth Studies, 2014
Vol. 17, No. 1, 92
112, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.815701

Work values and beliefs of Generation X and Generation Y

Harvey J. Krahna* and Nancy L. Galambosb
a
Department of Sociology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada; bDepartment of
Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
(Received 30 October 2012; final version received 15 May 2013)

This study examined cohort differences and intraindividual change in the intrinsic
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

and extrinsic work values and job entitlement beliefs of Canadian high school
seniors (classes of 1985 and 1996, representing Generation X and Generation
Y, respectively) surveyed at age 18 and again at age 25. The 1996 cohort placed
more value on extrinsic work rewards (at age 25) and reported stronger job
entitlement beliefs. Intrinsic work values increased in both cohorts during early
adulthood, whereas extrinsic work values increased only in the 1996 cohort. Job
entitlement beliefs decreased on average but less so in the 1996 cohort and in
women. Predictors of intraindividual change depended on the outcome but
included gender, academic experiences at age 18 (grades and post-secondary
aspirations), post-high school labour market (unemployment) and educational
experiences (obtaining a university degree), and adult statuses at age 25 (full-time
worker, parent).
Keywords: generation; attitudes; young adulthood

Introduction
Media and popularised social science accounts of how work values and beliefs of
young adults today differ from those of previous generations appear frequently,
despite a scarcity of well-constructed cohort-comparison studies (Twenge et al.
2010). Such conclusions about social change are often based on cross-sectional
studies in which differences in values and beliefs across age groups are taken as
evidence of cohort or generational differences. However, cross-sectional designs
confound cohort or generational effects with age differences (Schaie and Caskie
2005), an important concern, given evidence of considerable intraindividual change
in work values as teenagers become young adults, acquire further education, gain
labour market experience, and move into adult roles (Johnson 2001a, 2001b; Johnson
and Elder 2002).
Time-lag studies comparing samples of young people of the same age surveyed in
different decades are an improvement for drawing conclusions about cohort
differences, but better still is the use of a longitudinal sequential design involving
two or more longitudinal studies with two or more cohorts (Schaie and Caskie 2005).
The current study uses a longitudinal sequence design to compare work values and
beliefs at ages 18 and 25 in two cohorts of young Canadians who completed high
school a decade apart. The graduating class of 1985 can be seen as an exemplar of

*Corresponding author. Email: harvey.krahn@ualberta.ca

# 2013 Taylor & Francis
 Journal of Youth Studies 93

Generation X as described by many in the media and popular social science (e.g.
Coupland 1991; Halstead 1999), while the class of 1996 could perhaps be
characterised as representative of Generation Y, a cohort with supposedly different
attitudes and behaviours according to similar commentators (e.g. Howe and Strauss
2000; Montana and Lenaghan 1999; Schneider and Stevenson 1999).
Longitudinal research has demonstrated that young peoples work values, the
perceived importance of various job characteristics, help shape their career choices
and outcomes (Johnson and Mortimer 2011), and also influence later marital status
and parenthood (Johnson 2005). The same body of research reveals that work values
change substantially as young people complete their educations (Johnson and Elder
2002), experience the labour market (Johnson and Monserud 2010), and take on new
roles (Jin and Rounds 2012). Previous research has shown that intrinsic and extrinsic
work values (preferences for interesting work with opportunities to use skills and
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

make decisions, or for material rewards like pay, benefits and job security,
respectively) tend to have dissimilar origins and outcomes (Johnson et al. 2007;
Johnson and Mortimer 2011). Hence, in this comparison of two cohorts of youth, we
also focus on both intrinsic and extrinsic work values. We also examine job
entitlement (i.e. the belief that hard work in school entitles one to a good job), a
subject that has received very little research attention despite many media and
popular social science accounts of how young people today apparently expect and
demand more than did their counterparts in the past.
More difficult labour market conditions and rising levels of post-secondary
enrollment figure prominently in a number of generational change narratives (e.g.
Arnett 2000; Coupland 1991). Hence, we focus explicitly on young peoples labour
market and post-secondary experiences in our analyses of how work values change
from ages 18 to 25 and how they differ across cohorts. Previous research has
highlighted how gender, family socioeconomic status (SES), high school perfor-
mance, and transitions into adult roles (e.g. marriage, parenthood) shape the work
values of adolescents, so we also incorporate these factors into our analyses. Thus,
our two-cohort study is shaped by a life course perspective (Elder 1994; Mayer 2009)
that takes into account the ongoing interplay among social origins, social and
cultural contexts, and individual experiences and agency during the early adult years.
When modelling the effects of labour market experiences and educational attainment
on change in work values and beliefs, we also rely on value reinforcement theory
(Johnson 2001a), which predicts that people bring their values into alignment with
their current (or anticipated) work rewards.

Work values: cohort/generational differences?

Karl Mannheim ([1927] 1952) argued that a series of adjacent birth cohorts could be
called a generation if, during the formative years (childhood and adolescence), they
encountered sufficiently large-scale social and economic change (i.e. dynamic
destabilization) to develop a shared understanding of their cohorts common
destiny. More recently, Eyerman and Turner (1998) defined a generation as birth
cohorts with a collective memory emerging from a highly unique shared habitus
(Bourdieu 1990) and culture. Thus, from this theoretical perspective, generations are
not simply 25 year sets of birth cohorts (i.e. children, parents, grandparents). Nor
should we assign a generational label to a set of adjacent birth cohorts on the basis of
 94 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

relatively small attitudinal or behavioural differences. In contrast, as an example, the

children of the Great Depression (Elder 1974) would be considered a unique
generation.
Given rapid economic growth, expanding educational opportunities, widespread
upward social mobility, and significant cultural change in western societies in the
post-war decades, baby boomers (about 20 very large cohorts born between 1946
and 1965) are also often considered a generation (Foot and Stoffman 2001; Owram
1996). As our review below of economic and social change in the 1970s and 1980s
suggests, the post baby-boom cohorts might warrant a label like Generation X. We
also note below that some commentators refer to children born in the 80s and 90s as
Generation Y, although it is not clear to us that this set of birth cohorts is, in fact, a
unique generation. Because the Generation X and Y labels are ubiquitous, however,
we use them to identify the two cohorts we examine in this paper
the graduating
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

classes of 1985 and 1996.

Generation X
Major recessions at the beginning of both the 1980s and the 1990s led to several
extended periods of very high youth unemployment in Canada, the US, and Western
Europe. Both decades were characterised by industrial restructuring, organisational
downsizing, contractions in government hiring, and rising rates of part-time and
temporary employment, all of which particularly affected youth. Despite their
growing participation in post-secondary education, transitions from school to work
for the post-baby boomers became more complex, prolonged, and difficult (Andres
and Wyn 2010; Krahn, Howard, and Galambos 2012; Furlong and Cartmel 1997;
Marquardt 1998; Shanahan 2000). Some media commentators called the 1966 to
1980 birth cohorts the lost or scarred generation. The label that stuck
Generation
X
came from a best-selling novel (Coupland 1991).
The mismatch between high career expectations (based on their parents success)
and limited labour market opportunities for Generation X could certainly have led to
lower work commitment and to more value placed on extrinsic rather than intrinsic
work rewards (the scenario painted by Coupland and most media accounts).
Barnard, Cosgrave, and Welsh (1998, 199) reached a different conclusion, claiming
that this generation is not at all disaffected, even though its members are less
committed to traditional institutions. In fact, . . . what they want most from work [is]
challenge, collaboration, task variety, and greater impact. In short, according to this
popularised social science account, members of Generation X appear to be primarily
intrinsically, not extrinsically, motivated. A recent meta-analysis of longitudinal
studies of intraindividual change in work values does not directly address this issue,
but concludes that, compared to Baby Boomers, Generation X exhibited lower rank-
order stability in work values during early adulthood (Jin and Rounds 2012).

Generation Y
Youth unemployment rates were not as high in the late 1990s and early 2000s as they
were in the two previous decades, but industrial restructuring and corporate and
government downsizing continued, as did growth in part-time and temporary, often
low-skill jobs (Kalleberg 2009; Vosko 2005). Even more than the Generation X
 Journal of Youth Studies 95

cohorts, birth cohorts of the 1980s and 1990s bought into the belief that post-
secondary education was required for labour market success (Reynolds et al. 2006;
Schneider and Stevenson 1999). Hence, post-secondary enrollments continued to rise
in both the US and Canada (Davies and Guppy 2006; Goldrick-Rab 2006), even
though opportunities for the rewarding jobs young people hoped to obtain did not
expand accordingly.
Some observers were concerned about the long-term societal effects of large
numbers of youth whose high ambitions were not aligned with reality and who
frequently chose educational pathways unlikely to lead to satisfactory adult
employment (Reynolds et al. 2006; Schneider and Stevenson 1999). While a recent
US study (Reynolds and Baird 2010) suggests that unmet post-secondary educa-
tional aspirations may not have the negative mental health consequences some
predicted, a Norwegian study does show negative mental health effects of unmet
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

occupational aspirations (Gjerustad and van Soest 2012). Other commentators have
described high school and college students demanding and feeling entitled to
immediate rewards, while failing to work hard to obtain them (Coates and Morrison
2011, 112
114; Twenge 2006). These two lines of argument suggest that members of
more recent birth cohorts (Generation Y) might believe more strongly than members
of Generation X that if they have worked hard in school they should be entitled to a
good job.
Howe and Strauss (2000) describe teenagers in the late 1990s as highly motivated,
eager to work in teams, and socially concerned. Yet they say little about specific work
values beyond observing that jobs with fringe benefits and opportunities for
promotion are most desired. This sounds like Generation Y is more extrinsically
than intrinsically motivated. However, Bibby, Russell, and Rolheiser (2009, 196)
present 2008 data showing that three-quarters or more of Canadian teenagers agreed
that finding a job with interesting work and that provided a feeling of accomplish-
ment (intrinsic work values) was very important. Fewer (about two-thirds) agreed
that jobs that paid well and offered chances for advancement (extrinsic work values)
were very important. In other words, they were somewhat more intrinsically
motivated. In contrast to both accounts, Twenges (2006) assessment is much less
positive and optimistic, characterising this generation as having very high expecta-
tions and a strong sense of entitlement.

Time-lag studies of cohort differences in work values

Differing opinions about the work values of Generation X and Generation Y can be
investigated through time-lag studies that directly compare cohorts/generations.
Twenge et al. (2010) used data collected from US high school seniors in 1976, 1991,
and 2006 to compare the work values of Baby Boomers, Generation X, and
Generation Me (Twenges label for Generation Y). Generation Me reported margin-
ally lower intrinsic work values than did both Generation X and the Baby Boomers.
Generation X placed the most emphasis on the material rewards of work (extrinsic
work values), followed by Generation Me and, then, the Baby Boom generation. In
short, few generational differences were observed in intrinsic work values, but higher
extrinsic work values were found in Generation X.
Although they did not explicitly compare generations, Wray-Lake et al. (2011)
examined the work values of 30 cohorts (1976
2005) of US high school seniors,
 96 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

using annual Monitoring the Future survey data. Compared to high school seniors of
the 1980s, more recent cohorts (the 1990s and early 2000s) placed less value on job
security, and somewhat less emphasis on other extrinsic work rewards (i.e. pay,
promotions, status). Intrinsic work values also tended to be lower in more recent
cohorts. Thus, Wray-Lake et al.s (2011) findings suggest higher intrinsic and
extrinsic work values in Generation X compared to Generation Y.
Turning to Canadian data, Bibby, Russell, and Rolheiser (2009) reported that
similar proportions of teenagers in 1984 and 2008 agreed on the importance of work
that was interesting, provided a feeling of accomplishment, offered chances for
advancement, and paid well. However, 50% of the 2008 cohort, compared to only
32% of the 1984 cohort, agreed that decision-making opportunities were very
important. In short, the general findings from these three time-lag studies do not
lead to a clear conclusion about differences between Generation X and Y in extrinsic
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

and intrinsic work values.

Lowe and Krahn (2000) compared the work aspirations and attitudes of two
cohorts of Canadian high school seniors (classes of 1985 and 1996). They found little
evidence of cohort differences in work values and beliefs, but speculated that larger
differences might be found if the same participants were surveyed after they acquired
experience in the post-secondary educational system and the labour market. The
current paper responds to that suggestion by examining work values and job
entitlement beliefs of members of these same two cohorts at both ages 18 and 25.
Below, we review research that shows the importance of taking intraindividual change
in work values during early adulthood into account when comparing generations.

Work values: intraindividual change

Using longitudinal data from five sequential cohorts (1976
80) of high school
seniors surveyed in the University of Michigans annual Monitoring the Future
survey, Johnson (2001a) explored how work values shifted in the decade after high
school, between ages 18 and 31
32. She concluded that job values change
substantially during the young adult years (311) but that they tend to stabilise
with age. In general, extrinsic work values declined considerably, but intrinsic values
changed relatively little. Two other longitudinal studies examining change between
ages 18 and 22, one Dutch (Van Der Velde, Feij, and van Emmerik 1998) and the
other American (Cotton, Bynum, and Madhere 1997), also showed extrinsic work
values declining with age. Intrinsic work values showed an increase, but only in
middle-class youth in the US study. A recent meta-analysis of longitudinal studies
(Jin and Rounds 2012) revealed considerable instability in work values during early
adulthood, but did not show significant changes in either intrinsic or extrinsic work
values between ages 18 and 22 and between ages 22 and 26. Thus, beyond agreement
that work values change during the post-high school years, there is no consensus
about the direction of change in intrinsic and extrinsic work values.

Work values of young adults: gender, family, educational, and occupational influences
Early studies of gender differences in the work values of youth emphasised mens
preference for jobs offering extrinsic rewards in contrast to jobs with social and
altruistic rewards typically preferred by women (e.g. Bridges 1989; Lyson 1984).
 Journal of Youth Studies 97

Since then the occupational aspirations of young women rose (Andres et al. 1999;
Shu and Marini 1998) as did their post-secondary enrollments (Cho 2007; Jacobs
1996). Consequently, gender differences in work values have also changed. A study of
US high school seniors graduating between 1976 and 1980 showed higher extrinsic
work values among men and higher intrinsic, social, and altruistic work values
among women (Johnson 2001a, 2002). In the mid-1990s, young women appeared to
be more intrinsically oriented than young men, but there was no gender difference in
extrinsic work values (Johnson and Mortimer 2011). Johnson (2001a) observed few
gender differences in intraindividual change in work values in early adulthood.
Johnson (2001b) also concluded that, to the extent they existed, gender differences in
value change were likely the result of the types of jobs women held.
Researchers working in the status attainment tradition have shown how social
origins, in particular family SES, affect the educational and occupational aspirations
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

of adolescents, leading to educational choices and career outcomes that reproduce

patterns of social inequality (e.g. Looker and Pineo 1983; Sewell, Haller, and Portes
1969). A parallel body of research has demonstrated how family SES shapes
adolescents work values. Lindsay and Knox (1984) reported higher intrinsic and
lower extrinsic work values among US high school seniors (1972) from higher SES
families. Johnson (2002) observed similar results for 1976
80 high school seniors

lower extrinsic work values among 18-year-olds from higher SES families, but greater
value placed on jobs that allowed decision-making (i.e. intrinsic work values). She
also observed that high school seniors in academic programmes and those with
higher grades were more interested in jobs that would allow them to make decisions,
and less interested in jobs that offered employment security. In a more recent cohort
(1991 high school seniors), Johnson and Mortimer (2011) observed that youth from
more advantaged families reported lower extrinsic work values (at age 21
22).
Johnson (2002) reported that family SES did not affect trajectories of work value
change through the 20s, even though SES was related to baseline (age 18) work
values. School and work experiences played only small roles in shaping trajectories
(1330). In a paper using the same data but covering a shorter period (age 18 to 26),
Johnson and Elder (2002) highlighted a selection effect
young people who
eventually obtained post-secondary credentials were already different at age 18,
valuing influence at work (an aspect of intrinsic work values) more highly and
placing lower value on job security (an aspect of extrinsic work values). Participation
in the post-secondary system enhanced initial differences in work values, as value
reinforcement theory would predict. Johnson (2001a) also reported that the intrinsic
work values of 32-year-olds were reinforced by jobs with greater intrinsic rewards, an
outcome predicted by value reinforcement theory. However, the same effect was not
observed for extrinsic work values and rewards.
Analyzing data from the Minnesota Youth Development Study, Johnson (2005)
showed that young people with higher extrinsic work values were more likely to be
married at age 18 and parents by age 26
27. The opposite was the case for intrinsic
work values at age 18. She also reported that marriage led to reduced value placed on
intrinsic rewards by women and men, and on extrinsic rewards by women. For men,
parenthood led to greater value placed on extrinsic word rewards. In combination,
these studies strongly suggest that studies of differences in work values across
cohorts/generations should consider not only how gender, family SES, and post-high
school employment and educational experiences can influence work values and
 98 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

change in work values during early adulthood, but also how movement into adult
statuses (e.g. marriage, parenthood) may play a role.

Research questions
Popularised social science accounts of generational differences in young peoples
values and behaviours, as well as the few time-lag studies that have systematically
examined cohort differences in work values, are inconsistent in their conclusions.
This lack of consensus may result from a focus primarily on teenagers, despite the
strong evidence of considerable intraindividual change in work values in the post-
high school years. Consequently, although we do not put forward directional
hypotheses, our primary research question asks whether members of the class of 1985
(Generation X) or the class of 1996 (Generation Y) report stronger or weaker
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

(intrinsic and extrinsic) work values and job entitlement beliefs, taking into account
change between ages 18 and 25 within each cohort.
Previous research has shown that gender and family SES shape the work values of
North American teenagers. It also demonstrates that employment and educational
experiences during early adulthood can lead to adjustments in young peoples work
values, as can marriage and parenthood. Again, the findings are not sufficiently
consistent with respect to both predictors and direction of change to allow specific
hypotheses. Hence, our second and third research questions ask about the extent and
direction of intraindividual change in work values and beliefs between ages 18 and 25
for both cohorts, and about key predictors of such change for each cohort, respectively.

Sampling and measurement

The class of 1985
In the spring of 1985, 983 high school seniors in both academic and career-focused
classes in six public high schools in Edmonton, Alberta (the provincial capital, with a
metropolitan population close to one million) completed questionnaires in class.
More than 90% provided contact information for planned follow-up surveys. Mail
surveys were completed in 1986, 1987, 1989, and 1992, with each successive follow-
up attempting to contact only those who had participated in the previous survey. By
1992, the cumulative response rate was 41% (n404). Male sample members, those
with less educated parents, and participants who had been less successful in high
school were more likely to have dropped out of the study by 1992. Further
information about this sample is reported elsewhere (Galambos, Barker, and Krahn
2006). As the second cohort (the Class of 1996) was only surveyed twice, at ages 18
and 25, only the 1985 and 1992 data from the first cohort (the Class of 1985) are
analyzed in this paper.

The class of 1996

In spring of 1996, 747 high school seniors in eight Edmonton public high schools
(five of the schools included in the 1985 study and three others, added to supplement
the sample) completed very similar questionnaires in class. Reflecting growing public
reluctance to participate in surveys (Curtin, Presser, and Singer 2005; Dillman,
 Journal of Youth Studies 99

Smyth, and Christian 2008), only 73% of this second cohort provided contact
information. In 2003, a telephone follow-up survey resulted in completed interviews
with 308 of the original study participants, now age 25 (41% of the total 1996
sample). Older high school graduates, immigrants, members of visible minority
groups, and disabled graduates were less likely to participate in the 2003 follow-up
(Krahn and Hudson 2006).

1992 and 2003 sample characteristics

Over half (56%) of participants in both cohorts were women (Table 1). Similar
proportions of the Class of 1985 (15%) and the Class of 1996 (18%) were non-White.
About three-quarters of both cohorts (71% and 78%, respectively) were enrolled in
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

academic programmes, but some grade inflation may have taken place, since 29% of
the second cohort, compared to only 12% of the first, reported Grade 12 grades as
80% or higher. Twenty-eight per cent of the Class of 1985 had at least one parent
who had completed a university degree, compared to 39% of the second cohort. At
age 18, only 19% of the first cohort aspired to five or more years of post-secondary
education, in sharp contrast to 57% of the Class of 1996.1 By age 25, 32% of the
Class of 1985 had acquired a university degree, compared to 37% of the Class of
1996. Thus, at least by age 25, the remarkably high educational aspirations of the
second cohort had not been met.

Table 1. Sample characteristics at age 25, Class of 1985 and Class of 1996.

Class of 1985 (n 403) Class of 1996 (n 308)

Gender: % female 56% 56%

Race, % non-White 15% 18%
SES: % with at least one parent with 28% 39%
university degree*
HS programme: % academic* 71% 78%
Grades in final year of high schools: # B60% 12% B65% 29%
60%
79% 76% 65%
79% 52%
80% 12% 80%19%
Post-secondary aspirations at age 18:* High school only 6% 1%
1
2 years 47% 14%
3
4 years 28% 28%
5years 19% 57%
Months unemployed between age 18 and 5.9 months 3.7 months
age 25 (average)*
College diploma by age 25* 36% 28%
University degree by age 25 32% 37%
Employed at age 25 (any job) 89% 87%
Full-time job at age 25 (% of all employed) 87% 87%
Managerial/professional job (% of all 43% 32%
employed)*
*p B0.05 for cohort difference: Chi-square test for%s; t-test for means.
# Significance test not calculated, given different categories for the Class of 1985 and the Class of 1996.
 100 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

The Class of 1985 experienced more unemployment during the seven years after
leaving high school. However, at age 25, equal proportions of both cohorts worked
full-time (30 hour per week or more). Members of the Class of 1985 were more likely
to have obtained a managerial or professional job by age 25 (43% compared to 32%
of the Class of 1996).
Almost one-third (31%) of the Class of 1996 was still enrolled in some kind of
educational programme (frequently part-time) at age 25, compared to only 11% of
the earlier cohort. Along with this tendency to stay in school longer, researchers
have documented delayed transitions into other traditional markers of adulthood
such as full-time employment, home ownership, marriage/cohabitation and
parenthood (e.g. Arnett 2004; Mitchell 2006; Shanahan 2000). Reflecting such
trends, only 25% of the second cohort was married or cohabiting at age 25,
compared to 42% of the Class of 1985. Similar proportions of both cohorts were
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

parents by age 25.

Measurement of dependent variables

Two of our dependent variable measures are modifications of questions asked of a
national sample of Canadian adults in 1973 (Burstein et al. 1975). Using a five-point
scale (1 not important at all; 5 very important), participants were asked at ages
18 and 25 how important three intrinsic (feeling of accomplishment, make most
decisions yourself, interesting work) and three extrinsic (pays well, little chance of
being laid off, good chances for promotion) work rewards would be, if they were
looking for a full-time job. Inter-item reliability was reasonable for the three-item
indices created from responses to these six questions, for the Class of 1985 at age 18
(Intrinsic Alpha 0.56; Extrinsic Alpha 0.60) and age 25 (0.64 and 0.53,
respectively) and for the Class of 1996 at age 18 (Intrinsic Alpha 0.66; Extrinsic
Alpha 0.61) and age 25 (0.51 and 0.63).
Our third dependent variable is a two-item index of beliefs about job entitlement,
a labour market focused version of the general psychological concept of entitlement
(Harvey and Martinko 2009). Job entitlement would be considered a non-
exploitative (i.e. based on perceptions of fairness) rather than an exploitative (i.e.
based on a desire for special treatment) form of entitlement (Lessard et al. 2011).
Members of both cohorts were asked to respond on a five-point scale (1 strongly
disagree; 5 strongly agree) to two statements: If someone has worked hard in
school, they are entitled to a good job; and Everyone has the right to the kind of job
that their education and training has prepared them for. Both statements are
modifications of questions included in Derbers (1978) study of unemployment and
the entitled worker. Again, inter-item reliability was satisfactory, for the Class of
1985 at age 18 (Alpha 0.59) and age 25 (0.76) and for the Class of 1996 at age 18
(0.60) and age 25 (0.57).

Results
Cohort, gender, and age differences in work values and beliefs
At age 18, both cohorts placed high value on intrinsic and extrinsic work rewards
(average scores greater than 4 on a 1
5 scale). They also typically agreed (average
 Journal of Youth Studies 101

scores of almost 4 on a 1
5 scale) that young people who work hard in school are
entitled to a good job. To explore how work values and beliefs changed between ages
18 and 25 as a function of cohort and gender, we conducted a 2 22 (age
cohort gender) repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), with age the
within-subjects factor for each dependent variable. All two- and three-way
interactions were tested.
The ANOVA for intrinsic work values revealed a significant age effect, F (1, 706)
38.50, pB.001, with intrinsic work values increasing between ages 18 and age 25
(Figure 1). The absence of significant two- or three-way interactions indicated similar
increases for both cohorts and for women and men. The only other significant effect
was for gender, F (1, 706)9.95, p B.01; women scored higher than men on intrinsic
work values (averaged across age and cohort).
The ANOVA for extrinsic work values (Figure 2) showed a different pattern.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

There was no significant effect of age, nor of gender, but there was a significant
between-subjects effect of cohort, F (1, 704) 11.31, p B.01, indicating that the value
placed on extrinsic work rewards, averaged across both ages and genders, was higher
in the 1996 than the 1985 cohort. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction
between cohort and age, F (1, 704)4.78, p B.05. Figure 2 shows an increase
between ages 18 and 25 in extrinsic work values in the 1996 cohort but not in the
1985 cohort.
The results for job entitlement were more complicated (Figure 3). A significant
effect of age indicated a drop in job entitlement by age 25, F (1, 700) 93.72,
p B.001. There was also a significant cohort effect, F (1, 700) 11.97, p B.01, with
the 1996 cohort showing stronger beliefs in job entitlement (averaged across age
and gender) relative to the 1985 cohort. And there was a significant gender effect,
with women having stronger beliefs in job entitlement (averaged across age and
cohort) than did men, F (1, 700) 34.57, p B.001. Additionally, a two-way
interaction between age and cohort, F (1, 700) 5.86, p B.05, revealed a more
dramatic decrease in job entitlement for the 1985 than the 1996 cohort. Finally, a
two-way interaction between age and gender, F (1, 700) 8.16, p B.01, indicated
that beliefs in job entitlement decreased more dramatically for men compared to
women.

Figure 1. Intrinsic work values, ages 18 and 25, by cohort.

 102 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

Figure 2. Extrinsic work values, ages 18 and 25, by cohort.

Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Predictors of intraindividual change in work values and beliefs

Table 2 presents bivariate correlation coefficients for all independent and dependent
variables. Three hierarchical regression analyses introduced temporally-ordered
blocks of variables to examine predictors of intraindividual change from age 18 to
25 in intrinsic work values, extrinsic work values, and job entitlement (Table 3). For
each dependent variable, Block 1 contained a single predictor, the age 18 score on the
same variable. Thus, our dependent variable essentially represents change in the
respective work value or belief (Cohen et al. 2003a). Block 2 introduced three
background variables: gender; cohort; and family SES (parents education).
Academic experiences assessed at age 18 (high school programme, Grade 12 grades,
and post-secondary aspirations) were added in Block 3, while Block 4 incorporated
labour market and educational experiences in early adulthood (months unemployed
between ages 18 and 25, and whether a college diploma or a university degree were
obtained by age 25). Block 5 tested the additional contributions of four adult statuses
at age 25 (employed full-time, still a student, married or cohabiting, and
parenthood). Following convention (Cohen et al. 2003a), we do not flag significant
coefficients for individual variables within a block unless the complete block explains
a significant amount of variance.

Figure 3. Job entitlement beliefs, ages 18 and 25, by cohort by gender.

 Table 2. Intercorrelations among study variables.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Variable 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

1. Gender 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.16* 0.05 0.14* 0.09* 0.14* 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.13* 0.22*
2. Cohort 0.11* 0.07 0.09* 0.44* 0.13* 0.08* 0.05 0.01 0.25* 0.18* 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.16* 0.05 0.14*
3. Parent(s) 0.18* 0.15* 0.30* 0.07 0.15* 0.30* 0.03 0.08* 0.07 0.09* 0.09* 0.05 0.08* 0.12* 0.07* 0.07
education
4. High school 0.09* 0.37* 0.12* 0.04 0.27* 0.00 0.08* 0.10* 0.14* 0.06 0.11* 0.02 0.04 0.07* 0.02
programme
5. Grade 12 grades 0.22* 0.06 0.12* 0.38* 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.10* 0.06 0.07 0.09* 0.19* 0.05 0.10*

Journal of Youth Studies

6. PS asp grade 12 0.12* 0.27* 0.46* 0.02 0.17* 0.13* 0.14* 0.09* 0.16* 0.06 0.09* 0.05 0.10*
7. Months 0.06 0.12* 0.24* 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.12* 0.08* 0.02 0.00 0.09*
unemployed
8. College diploma 0.49* 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.05 0.10* 0.06 0.00 0.07
9. University degree 0.02 0.04 0.12* 0.22* 0.09* 0.19* 0.03 0.11* 0.06 0.10*
10. Employed at 25 0.19* 0.01 0.14* 0.08* 0.11* 0.02 0.08* 0.01 0.12*
11. Student at 25 0.10* 0.01 0.01 0.08* 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.04
12. Married at 25 0.36* 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01
13. Parent at 25 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.12* 0.02 0.07*
14. Intrinsic age 18 0.25* 0.21* 0.13* 0.08* 0.03
15. Intrinsic age 25 0.15* 0.28* 0.06 0.09*
16. Extrinsic age 18 0.36* 0.19* 0.06
17. Extrinsic age 25 0.15* 0.29*
18. Job Entitle 0.31*
age 18
19. Job Entitle
age 25

Note: N703
710. Gender (female 1); Cohort (1996 1); Parent(s) education (university 1); High school programme (academic 1); PS asp (Post-secondary
aspirations; yes 1); Months unemployed (ages 18
25); College diploma by age 25 (yes 1); University degree by age 25 (yes 1); Employed full-time at 25 (yes 1);
Student at 25 (yes 1); Married/cohabiting at 25 (yes 1); Parent at 25 (yes 1).
*p B0.05.

103
 104 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

Intrinsic work values at age 18 accounted for a significant portion of the variance
(7%) in the same measure at age 25 (Table 3, column 1), although the relatively small
coefficient (b 0.25) reflects considerable instability in values in early adulthood.
Block 2 predictors did not explain any additional variance, but the Block 3 results
showed that higher post-secondary aspirations in Grade 12 were associated with a
significant increase in intrinsic work values by age 25 (b 0.12). Block 4 added 2% to
the explained variance; less unemployment in early adulthood (b0.08) and
acquisition of a university degree by age 25 (b0.15) were associated with increased
value placed on intrinsic rewards. The set of adult statuses at age 25 in Block 5 did
not explain a significant portion of the remaining variance. A total of 12% of the
variance in age 25 intrinsic work values was explained by the full set of predictors.2
Compared to intrinsic work values, extrinsic work values at age 18 accounted for
a larger proportion of the variance (13%) in the same measure at age 25 (Table 3,
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

column 2), signifying somewhat higher stability across early adulthood. Two of the
three background variables in Block 2 had significant effects. The Class of 1996

Table 3. Hierarchical regression analyses predicting intrinsic and extrinsic work values and
job entitlement beliefs at age 25.

Intrinsic Extrinsic Entitlement

Predictor DR2 b DR2 b DR2 b

Block 1 0.07* 0.13* 0.10*

Age 18 work value/belief 0.25* 0.36* 0.31*
Block 2 0.00 0.03* 0.05*
Gender (female 1) 0.02 0.01 0.18*
Cohort (1996 1) 0.06 0.15* 0.13*
Parent(s) university educated (yes 1) 0.02 0.11* 0.07
Block 3 0.02* 0.03* 0.02*
High school programme (academic 1) 0.05 0.02 0.02
Grade 12 grades 0.03 0.11* 0.07*
Post-secondary aspirations in grade 12 0.12* 0.12* 0.14*
Block 4 0.02* 0.00 0.01*
Months unemployed ages 18
25 0.08* 0.05 0.09*
College diploma by age 25 (yes 1) 0.04 0.02 0.02
University degree by age 25 (yes 1) 0.15* 0.00 0.04
Block 5 0.01 0.02* 0.01
Employed full-time at 25 (yes 1) 0.09 0.10* 0.06
Student at 25 (yes 1) 0.08 0.05 0.02
Married/cohabiting at 25 (yes 1) 0.01 0.01 0.05
Parent at 25 (yes 1) 0.01 0.10* 0.05
Block 6 0.01*
Cohort Employed full-time at 25

0.15
Cohort Student at 25

0.11
Cohort Married/cohabiting at 25

0.12*
Cohort Parent at 25

0.03
Total R2 0.12* 0.21* 0.20*
N 710 708 704
*p B0.05.
 Journal of Youth Studies 105

placed higher value on extrinsic work rewards at age 25, compared to the 1985
cohort (b 0.15). At age 25, participants from higher SES families considered
extrinsic work rewards to be less important (b 0.11). Employment and education
experiences in early adulthood (Block 4) did not explain a significant portion of the
variance in age 25 extrinsic work values, but adult statuses (Block 5) did (2%).
Specifically, participants who were employed full-time at age 25 (b0.10) and those
who were parents at age 25 (b0.10) valued extrinsic work rewards more highly. The
full set of predictors explained 21% of the variance in age 25 extrinsic work values.
Job entitlement beliefs at age 18 explained 10% of the variance in the same beliefs
at age 25 (column 3). Predictors in Block 2 explained another 5%, revealing that
women, more than men (b0.18), and members of the 1996 cohort, compared to the
1985 cohort (b 0.13), were more likely to agree at age 25 that working hard in
school entitled them to a good job. Another 2% of the variance was explained by
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Grade 12 predictors; those with higher grades (b 0.07) and higher post-
secondary aspirations (b 0.14) expressed weaker job entitlement beliefs at age
25. Early adult experiences (Block 4) also predicted change in job entitlement beliefs,
explaining an additional 1% of variance. Those who were unemployed for more
months between ages 18 and 25 (b 0.09) had stronger entitlement beliefs by age 25.
Block 5 (adult statuses at age 25) did not explain additional variance. Twenty per
cent of the variance in job entitlement at age 25 was explained by the full set of
predictors.

Tests for interactions with cohort

A systematic set of analyses was run to explore whether predictors of change in work
values and beliefs differed by cohort. After centring non-dichotomous predictor
variables (Cohen et al. 2003a), interaction terms were created as cross-products of
cohort with each binary or centred predictor. A gender cohort interaction term was
not included, as the previous repeated measures ANOVA revealed no such
interaction in explaining work values and beliefs. For each dependent variable, the
Block 1 and Block 2 predictors were entered as per the regression analyses reported
above. Block 3, however, tested the interaction of parents education and cohort.
This interaction term was non-significant in each of the three regression analyses, so
it was not included in further analyses. Next, the original Block 1, 2, and 3 predictors
were entered, with Block 4 testing interactions of cohort with high school
programme, Grade 12 grades, and Grade 12 post-secondary aspirations. This set
of three interaction terms did not explain a significant portion of variance in any of
the three regression equations so, again, the constituent interaction terms were
dropped from the analysis.
Interactions between cohort and both the original Block 4 and Block 5 predictors
were tested in a similar fashion. These blocks of interaction terms significantly
increased the explained variance in only one equation. Specifically, an additional 1%
of the variance in age 25 job entitlement beliefs (column 3) was explained by the
interaction terms involving cohort and age 25 statuses. Only one interaction in this
block was significant; members of the Class of 1996 who were married or cohabiting
at age 25 were most likely to agree that working hard in school entitled them to a
good job (b0.12). The overall pattern of non-significant interactions suggests that
 106 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

predictors of age 25 intrinsic and extrinsic work values, and job entitlement beliefs,
did not differ by cohort.

Discussion
Our primary research question asked whether members of the class of 1985
(Generation X) or the class of 1996 (Generation Y) report stronger or weaker
(intrinsic and extrinsic) work values and job entitlement beliefs, taking into account
intraindividual change between ages 18 and 25 within each cohort. Our longitudinal
sequential study highlighted several significant cohort differences. Compared to the
Class of 1985, the Class of 1996 placed increasing value on extrinsic work rewards
between ages 18 and 25, reported stronger job entitlement beliefs (averaged across
age), and showed less pronounced decline in job entitlement beliefs between ages 18
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

and 25. The two cohorts did not differ in intrinsic work values. In a time-lag study
based on the age 18 data only, Lowe and Krahn (2000) found few cohort differences,
and speculated that larger differences might be observed later in the transition to
adulthood during which new challenges, opportunities, and experiences are reflected
in a diversity of developmental pathways (Arnett 2004; Cohen et al. 2003b). The
current study supports the idea that cohort differences may be accentuated as they
play out in the several years after high school graduation. Previous time-lag studies
(Bibby, Russell, and Rolheiser 2009; Twenge 2010; Wray-Lake et al. 2011) have
focused largely on teens or high school seniors, and have not followed their samples
into early adulthood, a prime period for intraindividual change in work values.
There are no previous multi-cohort studies to which we can compare our findings
of stronger job entitlement beliefs in the Class of 1996 compared to the Class of
1985, but they are generally consistent with Twenges (2010) argument that recent
cohorts of youth are becoming more entitled. The growing gap between the number
of highly-educated youth and the availability of well-paying, high-skill jobs
(Reynolds et al. 2006, Schneider and Stevenson 1999) could be responsible for
higher job entitlement beliefs in the Class of 1996. Recognising that getting a good
job was becoming more difficult, even with a university education, the Class of 1996
might also have placed more value on finding work with extrinsic work rewards that
earlier cohorts took for granted.
We use the concept cohort rather than generation in this discussion because
our cohort differences in extrinsic work values and job entitlement beliefs were
statistically significant but not particularly strong. The only other time-lag study that
explicitly contrasted work values across cohorts also found only small to moderate
generational differences in work values (Twenge 2010, 1133). Because of these small
effect sizes, we are confident in reporting cohort differences but reluctant to conclude
that they reflect the emergence of truly different generations as defined by Mannheim
([1927] 1952).
Our second research question asked about the extent and direction of
intraindividual change in work values and beliefs between ages 18 and 25 for both
cohorts. Members of both cohorts reported significantly higher intrinsic work values
at age 25 than at age 18. Extrinsic work values also rose significantly during early
adulthood for the 1996 cohort. In contrast, job entitlement beliefs declined
significantly between ages 18 and 25 in both cohorts. Thus, our study echoes
previous findings of intraindividual change in extrinsic work values during the
 Journal of Youth Studies 107

transition to adulthood (Johnson and Elder 2002) and also demonstrates significant
change in job entitlement beliefs.
The increase in intrinsic work values between ages 18 and 25 in our study is not
consistent, however, with findings of little change between ages 18 and 32 in 1976
80
US high school graduation cohorts (Johnson and Elder 2002), but parallels Cotton,
Bynum, and Madhere (1997) study showing an increase between ages 18 and 22 for
middle-class US high school seniors in the mid-1980s. Furthermore, whereas
extrinsic work values (including job security) rose by age 25 in our Class of 1996,
for the 1976
80 US cohorts, extrinsic work values (e.g. pay, promotions) declined
between ages 18 and 32, while value placed on job security declined and then
returned to its earlier level. Cotton, Bynum, and Madhere (1997) also observed a
decline in extrinsic work values between ages 18 and 22 in the mid-1980s in their US
study.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

It is unlikely that these dissimilarities are the result of Canada-US differences,

since high school and post-secondary education systems, labour markets, and youth
culture are generally quite similar in the two countries. But these inconsistencies may
reflect cohort differences, given that Johnson and Elder (2002) focused on 1976
80
graduates. By the 1980s and particularly the 1990s, much larger proportions of high
school graduates were continuing on to post-secondary education, a setting in which
intrinsic work values are maintained and enhanced (Johnson and Elder 2002). By
1996, a substantially restructured labour market, characterised by many more part-
time and temporary jobs, even for university graduates (Kalleberg 2009; Vosko 2005),
might have led young adults from the Class of 1996 to place more value on extrinsic
rewards by age 25, than when they left high school.
Our third research question asked about key predictors of work values and job
entitlement beliefs, in addition to cohort membership. Women placed more value on
intrinsic work rewards than did men in our study, replicating recent findings by
Johnson and Mortimer (2011) and strengthening the conclusion that over the past
few decades the career aspirations and work values of young women have shifted
dramatically. As well, young women in our study had stronger job entitlement beliefs
and these beliefs declined less by age 25 compared to men. Our findings are
congruent with other studies showing that young US women had more egalitarian
attitudes towards gender roles in the workplace than did young men (Fan and Marini
2000) and the fact that, in Canadian colleges and universities, women vastly out-
number men in health and education professional programmes that lead directly to
jobs in teaching, nursing, rehabilitation medicine, and related fields. Specific
occupational goals and training in programmes with enrollment quotas tied to
labour market demand could lead to stronger job entitlement beliefs.
Compared to gender, family SES was not a prominent predictor. Young people
from lower (compared to higher) SES families had stronger extrinsic work values at
age 18, and those values strengthened over the next seven years. But family SES was
not related to intrinsic work values at age 25. Johnson and Mortimer (2011) reported
similar findings, observing that [p]erhaps cultural change emphasising fulfilment at
work has made intrinsic job features more universally desirable across classes (1252).
Higher grades and post-secondary aspirations at age 18 were related to decreases
in extrinsic work values and job entitlement beliefs. Post-secondary aspirations at age
18 also predicted strengthening intrinsic work values by age 25. Although these
effects were weak, as a group they indicate the potential impact of young peoples
 108 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

identities as successful students in their senior year of high school on trajectories of

work values and job entitlement beliefs. Furthermore, acquisition of a university
degree was associated with an increase in intrinsic work values between ages 18 and
25. These findings are generally similar to Johnson and Elders (2002) results, and are
consistent with value reinforcement theory. Specifically, young people have aspira-
tions and make educational choices that reflect their values, and over time, those
values are reinforced by their post-secondary experiences.
Longer periods of unemployment in early adulthood were associated with
decreases in intrinsic work values and increasing commitment to job entitlement
beliefs by age 25. These are not surprising findings, as young adults encountering
labour market difficulties might downscale their employment ambitions (i.e. value
placed on intrinsic work rewards), while hanging on to the belief that hard work in
school entitled them to a good job. We might also expect them to place more value
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

on extrinsic work rewards (including job security); they did, but the positive
coefficient was not significant. What is surprising, in retrospect, is how little the
literature on work values of youth has focused on the effects of unemployment,
particularly given previous longitudinal research showing negative effects of
unemployment on mental health (Dooley, Prause, and Ham-Rowbottom 2000;
Schaufeli 1997). Further research on this topic is clearly needed.
With respect to measures of adult statuses, only two had significant net effects,
and only for extrinsic work values. Participants who were employed full-time and
who were parents by age 25 placed growing value on extrinsic work rewards, as they
might be expected to do as responsible (for children) adults. Value reinforcement
theory would predict a socialising effect of taking on full-time work and parenting
roles, in which the former leads to extrinsic work rewards and the latter requires
them. Although adult role statuses were not consistent predictors of work values and
beliefs at age 25, it is important to note that when the adult role statuses were entered
into our regression analyses, significant amounts of variance in the outcomes had
already been explained. Thus, our tests of the net significance of adult role statuses
are conservative.
Finally, our examination of interactions between cohort and all other predictors
of work values at age 25 revealed only one significant effect. Participants in the 1996
cohort, who were married or cohabiting held stronger job entitlement beliefs at age
25. Thus, there is little evidence that the predictors of change between ages 18 and 25
differed between our cohorts born eleven years apart.

Conclusions
Guided by a life course perspective, this paper may be the first to systematically
examine cohort differences in mean levels of and intraindividual change in work
values and job entitlement beliefs in early adulthood. We found significant cohort
differences involving extrinsic work values and job entitlement beliefs (but not
intrinsic work values) that likely reflect changing labour market conditions and post-
secondary enrollment patterns in North America. Unlike the few other studies that
have compared work values of youth in different cohorts by focusing only on
teenagers or high school seniors, we relied on both ages 18 and 25 data to reach more
confident conclusions about differences in the work values and beliefs of the Class of
1985 and the Class of 1996. Our results clearly show the importance of recognising
 Journal of Youth Studies 109

that work values change during early adulthood. They also imply that, with
increasing age, the differences we observed between cohorts could get larger or
smaller.
We began this paper with a discussion of Generation X and Generation Y,
employing these labels because of their widespread use in the media and popularised
social science. We concluded by discussing cohort differences in work values and job
entitlement beliefs. These differences are real, and interesting, but in relative terms
they are not large. Nor did we find evidence that predictors of value/belief change
between ages 18 and 25 differed across cohorts. Consequently, using Mannheims
([1927] 1952) conceptualisation, we are reluctant to conclude that these cohort
differences reflect the emergence of a new generation (i.e. Generation Y). This
caution might be of particular interest to employers who are frequently informed by
the media and popularised social science (e.g. Howe and Strauss 2000; Montana and
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Lenaghan 1999; Schneider and Stevenson 1999; Twenge et al. 2010) that they must
change the way they manage young people, because of their supposedly vastly
different work values and beliefs.

Acknowledgements
This study was funded by grants to the first author by the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada, Alberta Advanced Eduation, and the University of Alberta.
Data were collected by the Population Research Laboratory, University of Alberta.

Notes
1. The question about years of post-secondary education desired was asked open-ended in
1996, compared to a forced-choice option with five response categories in 1985. The
change in wording may be partially responsible for the large cohort difference, although a
national survey in 2000 also revealed very high aspirations
61% of 15-year-olds hoped to
complete one or more university degrees (Krahn and Taylor 2005).
2. Although the R2 value presented for each of the regression analyses in Table 1 reflect the
final equations, following convention (Cohen et al. 2003a) the standardised partial
coefficients for each block of variables take into account only the other variables in that
and preceding blocks.

References
Andres, Lesley, and Johanna Wyn. 2010. The Making of a Generation: The Children of the
1970s in Adulthood. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Andres, Lesley, Paul Anisef, Harvey Krahn, Dianne Looker, and Victor Thiessen. 1999. The
Persistence of Social Structure: Cohort, Class and Gender Effects on the Occupational
Aspirations and Expectations of Canadian Youth. Journal of Youth Studies 2 (3): 261
282.
doi:10.1080/13676261.1999.10593042.
Arnett, Jeffrey J. 2000. High Hopes in a Grim World: Emerging Adults Views of Their
Futures and Generation X. Youth & Society 31 (3): 267
286. doi:10.1177/0044118X0003
1003001.
Arnett, Jeffrey J. 2004. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens Through
the Twenties. New York: Oxford University Press.
Barnard, Robert, Dave Cosgrave, and Jennifer Welsh. 1998. Chips and Pop: Decoding the
Nexus Generation. Toronto: Malcolm Lester Books.
 110 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

Bibby, Reginald, Sarah Russell, and Ron Rolheiser. 2009. The Emerging Millennials: How
Canadas Newest Generation is Responding to Change & Choice. Lethbridge: Project Canada
Books.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bridges, Judith S. 1989. Sex Differences in Occupational Values. Sex Roles 20 (3
4): 205
211.
doi:10.1007/BF00287992.
Burstein, M., N. Tienhaara, P. Hewson, and B. Warrander. 1975. Canadian Work Values:
Findings of a Work Ethic Survey and a Job Satisfaction Survey. Ottawa: Information Canada.
Cho, Donghun. 2007. The Role of High School Performance in Explaining Womens
Rising College Enrollment. Economics of Education Review 26 (4): 450
462. doi:10.1016/
j.econedurev.2006.03.001.
Coates, Ken S., and Bill Morrison. 2011. Campus Confidential: 100 Startling Things You Dont
Know about Canadian Universities. Toronto: James Lorimer.
Cohen, Jacob, Patricia Cohen, Stephen G. West, and Leona S. Aiken. 2003a. Applied
Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Cohen, Patricia, Stephanie Kasen, Henian Chen, Claudia Hartmark, and Kathy Gordon.
2003b. Variations in Patterns of Developmental Transitions in the Emerging Adulthood
Period. Developmental Psychology 39 (4): 657
669. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.4.657.
Cotton, Lynyonne, Dana R. Bynum, and Serge Madhere. 1997. Socialization Forces and the
Stability of Work Values from Late Adolescence to Early Adulthood. Psychological
Reports 80 (1): 115
124. doi:10.2466/pr0.1997.80.1.115.
Coupland, Douglas. 1991. Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture. New York: St.
Martins Press.
Curtin, Richard, Stanley Presser, and Eleanor Singer. 2005. Changes in Telephone Survey
Non-response Over the Past Quarter Century. Public Opinion Quarterly 69 (1): 87
98.
doi:10.1093/poq/nfi002.
Davies, Scott, and Neil Guppy. 2006. The Schooled Society: An Introduction to the Sociology of
Education. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.
Derber, Charles. 1978. Unemployment and the Entitled Worker: Job-entitlement and Radical
Political Attitudes Among the Youthful Unemployed. Social Problems 26 (1): 26
37.
doi:10.2307/800430.
Dillman, Don A., Jolene D. Smyth, and Leah M. Christian. 2008. Internet, Mail, and Mixed-
mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: Wiley.
Dooley, David, Joann Prause, and Kathleen A. Ham-Rowbottom. 2000. Underemployment
and Depression: Longitudinal Relationships. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 41 (4):
421
436. doi:10.2307/2676295.
Elder, Glen H., Jr. 1974. Children of the Great Depression: Social Change in Life Experience.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Elder, Glen H., Jr. 1994. Time, Human Agency, and Social Change: Perspectives on the Life
Course. Social Psychological Quarterly 57 (1): 4
15. doi:10.2307/2786971.
Eyerman, Ron, and Bryan S. Turner. 1998. Outline of a Theory of Generations. European
Journal of Social Theory 1 (1): 91
106. doi:10.1177/136843198001001007.
Fan, Pi-Ling, and Margaret Mooney Marini. 2000. Influences on Gender-role Attitudes
During the Transition to Adulthood. Social Science Research 29 (2): 258
283. doi:10.1006/
ssre.1999.0669.
Foot, David K., and Daniel Stoffman. 2001. Boom, Bust & Echo 2000: Profiting from the
Demographic Shift in the 21st Century. Toronto: Stoddard Publishing.
Furlong, Andy, and Fred Cartmel. 1997. Young People and Social Change: Individualization
and Risk in Late Modernity. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Galambos, Nancy L., Erin T. Barker, and Harvey J. Krahn. 2006. Depression, Self-esteem
and Anger in Emerging Adulthood: Seven-year Trajectories. Developmental Psychology
42 (2): 350
365. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.2.350.
Gjerustad, Cay, and Tilmann von Soest. 2012. Socio-economic Status and Mental Health

The Importance of Achieving Occupational Aspirations. Journal of Youth Studies 15 (7):
890
908. doi:10.1080/13676261.2012.693590.
 Journal of Youth Studies 111

Goldrick-Rab, Sara. 2006. Following Their Every Move: An Investigation of Social Class
Differences in College Pathways. Sociology of Education 79 (1): 67
79. doi:10.1177/
003804070607900104.
Halstead, Ted. 1999. A Politics for Generation X. The Atlantic Monthly, August: 33
42.
Harvey, Paul, and Mark J. Martinko. 2009. An Empirical Examination of the Role of
Attributions in Psychological Entitlement and Its Outcomes. Journal of Organizational
Behavior 30 (4): 459
476. doi:10.1002/job.549.
Howe, Neil, and William Strauss. 2000. Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. New
York: Vintage Books.
Jacobs, Jerry A. 1996. Gender Inequality and Higher Education. Annual Review of
Sociology 22 (1): 153
185. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.153.
Jin, Jing, and James Rounds. 2012. Stability and Change in Work Values: A Meta-analysis of
Longitudinal Studies. Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2): 326
339. doi:10.1016/
j.jvb.2011.10.007.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick. 2001a. Job Values in the Young Adult Transition: Change and
Stability with Age. Social Psychological Quarterly 64 (4): 297
317. doi:10.2307/3090156.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick. 2001b. Changes in Job Values During the Transition to
Adulthood. Work and Occupations 28 (3): 315
345. doi:10.1177/0730888401028003004.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick. 2002. Social Origins, Adolescent Experiences, and Work
Value Trajectories During the Transition to Adulthood. Social Forces 80 (4): 1307
1340.
doi:10.1353/sof.2002.0028.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick. 2005. Family Roles and Work Values: Processes of Selection
and Change. Journal of Marriage and Family 67: 352
369. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.
00121.x.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick, and Glen H. Elder, Jr. 2002. Educational Pathways and Work
Value Trajectories. Sociological Perspectives 45 (2): 113
138. doi:10.1525/sop.2002.45.2.
113.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick, and Maria A. Monserud. 2010. Judgments About Work and
the Features of Young Adults Jobs. Work and Occupations 37 (2): 194
224. doi:10.1177/
0730888410365973.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick, and Jeylan T. Mortimer. 2011. Origins and Outcomes of
Judgments About Work. Social Forces 89 (4): 1239
1260. doi:10.1093/sf/89.4.1239.
Johnson, Monica Kirkpatrick, Jeylan T. Mortimer, Jennifer C. Lee, and Michael J. Stern.
2007. Judgements About Work: Dimensionality Revisited. Work and Occupations 34 (3):
290
317. doi:10.1177/0730888407303182.
Kalleberg, Arne. 2009. Precarious Work, Insecure Workers: Employment Relations in
Transition. American Sociological Review 74 (1): 1
22. doi:10.1177/000312240907400101.
Krahn, Harvey, and Alison Taylor. 2005. Resilient Teenagers: Explaining the High
Educational Aspirations of Visible Minority Youth in Canada. Journal of International
Migration and Integration, 6 (3/4): 405
434.
Krahn, Harvey, and Julie Hudson. 2006. Pathways of Alberta Youth Through the Post-
secondary System into the Labour Market, 1996
2003. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research
Networks, Pathways to the Labour Market Series.
Krahn, Harvey J., Andrea L. Howard, and Nancy L. Galambos. 2012. Exploring or
Floundering: The Meaning of Employment and Educational Fluctuations in Emerging
Adulthood. Youth & Society, doi:10.1177/0044118X12459061.
Lessard, Jared, Ellen Greenberger, Chuansheng Chen, and Susan Farruggia. 2011. Are Youths
Feelings of Entitlement Always Bad?: Evidence for a Distinction Between Exploitive and
Non-exploitive Dimensions of Entitlement. Journal of Adolescence 34 (3): 521
529.
doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.05.014.
Lindsay, Paul, and William E. Knox. 1984. Continuity and Change in Work Values Among
Young Adults: A Longitudinal Study. American Journal of Sociology 89 (4): 918
931.
doi:10.1086/227950.
Looker, E. Dianne, and Peter C. Pineo. 1983. Social Psychological Variables and Their
Relevance to the Status Attainment of Teenagers. American Journal of Sociology 88 (6):
1195
1219. doi:10.1086/227800.
 112 H.J. Krahn and N.L. Galambos

Lowe, Graham S., and Harvey J. Krahn. 2000. Work Aspirations and Attitudes in an Era of
Labour Market Restructuring: A Comparison of Two Canadian Cohorts. Work, Employ-
ment & Society, 14 (1):1
22. doi:10.1177/09500170022118248.
Lyson, Thomas A. 1984. Sex Differences in the Choice of a Male or Female Career Line: An
Analysis of Background Characteristics and Work Values. Work and Occupations 11 (2):
131
146. doi:10.1177/0730888484011002001.
Mannheim, Karl. [1927] 1952. On the Problem of Generations. In Essays on the Sociology of
Knowledge, edited by Paul Kecskemeti, 276
322. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Marquardt, Richard. 1998. Enter at Your Own Risk: Canadian Youth and the Labour Market.
Toronto: Between the Lines.
Mayer, Karl Ulrich. 2009. New Directions in Life Course Research. Annual Review of
Sociology 35 (1): 413
433. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134619.
Mitchell, Barbara A. 2006. The Boomerang Age: Transitions to Adulthood in Families. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Montana, Patrick J., and Janet A. Lenaghan. 1999. What Motivates and Matters Most
to Generations X and Y. Journal of Career Planning & Employment 59 (4): 27
30.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 22:13 29 March 2016

Owram, Doug. 1996. Born at the Right Time: A History of the Baby Boom Generation.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Reynolds, John R., and Chardie L. Baird. 2010. Is there a Downside to Shooting for the
Stars? Unrealized Educational Expectations and Symptoms of Depression. American
Sociological Review 75 (1): 151
172. doi:10.1177/0003122409357064.
Reynolds, John, Michael Stewart, Ryan Macdonald, and Lacey Sischo. 2006. Have
Adolescents Become Too Ambitious? High School Seniors Educational and Occupational
Plans, 1976 to 2000. Social Problems 53 (2): 186
206. doi:10.1525/sp.2006.53.2.186.
Schaie, K. Warner, and Grace I. L. Caskie. 2005. Methodological Issues in Aging Research.
In Handbook of Research Methods in Developmental Science, edited by Douglas M. Teti,
21
39. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Schaufeli, Wilmar B. 1997. Youth Unemployment and Mental Health: Some Dutch
Findings. Journal of Adolescence 20 (3): 281
292. doi:10.1006/jado.1997.0085.
Schneider, Barbara, and David Stevenson. 1999. The Ambitious Generation: Americas
Teenagers, Motivated But Directionless. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sewell, William H., Archibald O. Haller, and Alejandro Portes. 1969. The Educational and
Early Occupational Attainment Process. American Sociological Review 34 (1): 82
92.
doi:10.2307/2092789.
Shanahan, Michael J. 2000. Pathways to Adulthood in Changing Societies: Variability and
Mechanisms in Life Course Perspective. Annual Review of Sociology 26 (1): 667
692.
doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.667.
Shu, Xiaoling, and Margaret Mooney Marini. 1998. Gender-related Change in Occupational
Aspirations. Sociology of Education 71 (1): 44
68. doi:10.2307/2673221.
Twenge, Jean M. 2006. Generation Me: Why Todays Young Americans are More Confident,
Assertive, Entitled
and More Miserable than Ever Before. New York: Free Press.
Twenge, Jean M. 2010. A Review of the Empirical Evidence on Generational Differences
in Work Attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology 25 (2): 201
210. doi:10.1007/s10869-
010-9165-6.
Twenge, Jean M., Stacy M. Campbell, Brian R. Hoffman, and Charles E. Lance. 2010.
Generational Differences in Work Values: Leisure and Extrinsic Work Values Increasing,
Social and Intrinsic Values Decreasing. Journal of Management 36 (5): 1117
1142.
doi:10.1177/0149206309352246.
van der Velde, Mandy E. G., Jan A. Feij, and Hetty van Emmerik. 1998. Change in Work
Values and Norms Among Dutch Young Adults: Ageing or Societal Trends? International
Journal of Behavioral Development 22 (1): 55
76. doi:10.1080/016502598384513.
Vosko, Leah, ed. 2005. Precarious Employment: Understanding Labour Market Insecurity in
Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Wray-Lake, Laura, Amy K. Syvertsen, Laine Bridell, D. Wayne Osgood, and Constance A.
Flanagan. 2011. Exploring the Changing Meaning of Work for American High School
Seniors from 1976 to 2005. Youth & Society 43 (3): 1110
1135. doi:10.1177/0044118X
10381367.