人—职匹配理论是生涯发展的经典理论，该理论认为人与组织环境的匹配是预测工作意义感和工作满意度的核心要素。近期提出的工作心理理论相对于前者，则更多的考虑到个体在选择工作时受到的限制，即个体不一定能自由地选择与自己匹配的工作，因而认为克服环境限制获得体面工作才是更好的生涯发展的前因。这两个理论提出了不同的核心因素（人—职匹配与体面工作）预测生涯发展，究竟哪个因素更具有预测力？而环境限制很大程度是由社会阶层带来的，对于不同的社会阶层的人，他们的选择自由度也存在差异，那么对于不同阶层的人，这两个核心因素是否有不同的预测效应？本研究在验证工作心理理论在中国职业人群的适用性基础上，将人—职匹配和体面工作对生涯结果变量（工作满意度和工作意义感）的预测力进行比较，同时考查对于不同社会阶层群体，人—职匹配和体面工作对工作满意度和工作意义感的预测作用是否有明显差异。 本研究以全国592名职业人士为研究对象，使用主观社会阶层量表（SSS)、工作自决力量表（WVS）、生涯适应能力量表中国版（CAAS）、体面工作量表（DWS）、人—职匹配量表（P-E fit）、工作满意度量表和工作意义感量表（WMI）进行施测。 主要结论如下： 首先，工作心理理论模型在中国职业人群中具有良好的适用性。体面工作对社会阶层、工作自决力、生涯适应能力预测工作满意度和工作意义感的中介作用显著。生涯适应能力和工作自决力对社会经济地位预测体面工作的中介作用显著。工作自决力和生涯适应能力通过体面工作的满足，促进工作满意度和工作意义感。 其次，体面工作和人—匹配对工作满意度的预测作用无显著的差别。对意义感的预测，人—职匹配显著高于生涯适应能力。体面工作和人—职匹配均是预测工作满意度和工作意义感的有利因素，但人—职匹配对工作意义感的预测明显优于体面工作。 最后，人—职匹配和体面工作预测工作满意度和工作意义感的主效应显著，但是社会阶层不能在二者预测工作满意度和工作意义感的效应上起调节作用，即人—职匹配和体面工作对工作满意度和工作意义感的预测不具备阶层特殊性。

The theory of person-environment fit is a classical theory of career development. Compared with the former, the psychology work of theory proposed recently considers that individuals are not necessarily free to choose the job that matches them when they choose a job, so it is believed that overcoming environmental restrictions to obtain a decent work is the antecedent of good career development. These two theories put forward different core predictors (person-environment fit and decent work) of career development. Which factor is more predictive? Environmental constraints are largely brought about by social classes, and people of different social classes have different degrees of freedom of choice. Then, for people of different classes, do these two core factors have different predictive effects? In validation of this research work based on the applicability of the theory of mind in the Chinese population, for P-E fit and decent work for career outcome variables (work satisfaction and work meaning), comparing the predicted at the same time, the test for different social class groups, P-E fit and decent work for work satisfaction and work meaning predict whether effect have obvious difference. This study by 592 occupational person as the research object, using subjective social class scale(SSS), work volition scale(WVS), career adaptability scale Chinese version(CAAS), decent work scale(DWS), P-E fit scale(P-E fit), job satisfaction scale and work meaning inventory(WMI) were measured. The main conclusions are as follows: 1. The psychology work of theory has good applicability in Chinese occupational groups. Decent work has a significant mediating effect on social class, work volition, career adaptability, work satisfaction and work meaning. The mediating effects of career adaptability and work volition on socioeconomic status prediction of decent jobs were significant. Work volition and career adaptability promote work satisfaction and work meaning through decent work’s satisfaction. 2. There was no significant difference in the predictive effect of decent jobs and P-E fit on job satisfaction. For the prediction of sense of meaning, P-E fit is significantly higher than career adaptability. Both decent work and P-E fit were favorable factors for predicting work satisfaction and work meaning, but P-E fit was significantly better than decent job in predicting work meaning. 3. P-E fit and decent work predict the main effect of work satisfaction and work meaning is significant, but social class cannot play a moderating role in the effect of P-E fit and decent work on job satisfaction and work meaning, that is, the prediction of P-E fit and decent work on job satisfaction and work meaning does not have the particularity of class.