Originally published here.

The sense of being paid appropriately for the work that we do repre-sents a basic element of distributive justice (Homans, 1974). Theorypredicts—and empirical evidence confirms—that perceived underre-ward is related to elevated levels of unpleasant affective outcomes(Adams, 1965; Austin & Walster, 1974; Cook & Hegtvedt, 1983;Hegtvedt, 1990; Hegtvedt & Killian, 1999; Markovsky, 1985; Walster,Walster, & Bercheid, 1978). Our study begins by first confirming thispattern: In a large national sample of workers, perceived underreward isassociated with higher levels of psychological distress—as measured bya well-known index of depressive symptoms (Mirowsky & Ross, 2003;Radloff, 1977).

Then, the objective of this article shifts its focus to thepotential moderating factors, asking: (a) Does the relationship betweenunderreward and depression differ across levels of job authority? (b)Does the moderating effect of authority further depend on other formsof status in the workplace? (c) How is gender influential for shaping theobserved patterns related to these two research questions?Our article contributes to social–psychological knowledge on distrib-utive justice by discovering situational factors that function as condi-tional effects—that is, the demonstration of moderating contingencies(Hegtvedt, Clay-Warner, & Johnson, 2003).

We draw inspiration fromHegtvedt and Parris (2014), who asserted the following in their com-prehensive review: “Research on ‘moderating factors’ has madeinroads, but falls short of the types of structural situations involvingdifferences in power, status, and legitimacy ...” (p. 120). In his call for2Work and Occupations 0(0) greater theoretical integration, Turner (2007) suggests specific moder-ating factors: “How does justice intersect with power and status dynam-ics, as well as expectation states associated with power and status?”(p. 290). We address these concerns by evaluating the ways that job-related authority and other kinds of statuses in the workplace intersectwith gender to shape the link between underreward and depression.Identifying the factors that modify the relationship between under-reward and depression is important for several reasons.

First, surveysindicate that more than 4 in 10 American workers report feeling under-paid (Jacobe, 2008; Saad, 2010). Second, underreward is a potentialstressor that can harm personal and organizational well-being (Ford,2014; Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Robbins, Ford, & Tetrick, 2012;Schunck, Sauer, & Valet, 2015; Wheaton, 1999). Third, because womenand men tend to work in different work conditions and positions, theymay be differentially vulnerable to the strains associated with under-reward.

Bringing gender into the picture offers insight into the ques-tions described earlier because the social meanings and interactionalconsequences of job authority—and status more broadly—are knownto be gendered (Kanter, 1977; Pudrovska, 2013; Pudrovska & Karraker,2014; Ridgeway, 2001; Schieman & Reid, 2008). For example, all elsebeing equal, female managers are more often evaluated as less likableand less competent than male managers (Correll & Ridgeway, 2003;Heilman, Wallen, Fuchs, & Tamkins, 2004). Considering workers’gender may elucidate the ways that job authority and other workplacestatuses interact to influence the connection between perceived under-reward and levels of depressive symptoms.

You can read the complete article here.