IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v42y2024i6p883-893.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizational injustice and employee affective health: The moderating effects of labor market conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Sarnecki, Abiola
  • Diehl, Marjo-Riitta
  • Richter, Ansgar

Abstract

Existing research confirms that both organizational injustice and unfavorable labor market conditions negatively influence employee health. This article draws on relative gratification theory and cognitive appraisal theory to investigate the interplay of these two work-related stressors. The findings of a meta-analysis of 97 samples from 24 countries shows that when unemployment is high and there is a large informal economy, organizational injustice has a weaker effect on employee affective health than when unemployment is low. The findings suggest that relative gratification can function as a coping mechanism when employees are challenged with multiple work-related stressors. In so doing, this study extends the present understanding of the effects of relative gratification, thereby highlighting the broad scope of social comparisons in organizational justice research. It illustrates how micro- and macro-level stressors interact to influence employee health and confirms the importance of context in organizational justice research.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarnecki, Abiola & Diehl, Marjo-Riitta & Richter, Ansgar, 2024. "Organizational injustice and employee affective health: The moderating effects of labor market conditions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 883-893.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:42:y:2024:i:6:p:883-893
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2023.08.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237323001081
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2023.08.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:42:y:2024:i:6:p:883-893. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.