For more than five decades, the various disciplines related to occupational health have seen the emergence of numerous theoretical models intended to explain the influence of the work environment on health. Existing synthesis (e.g. Cox, Griffiths, & Rial-González, 2000; Neboit & Vézina, 2002) frequently classify these models according to their affiliation to interactional or transactional theories. However, this conceptual distinction does not permit to distinguish between them more precisely. In addition, the focus is often on the more widely-used models (e.g. Karasek & Theorell, 1990; Siegrist, 1996), while others of equal conceptual richness are overlooked. Those points justify the present review focusing on models linking work environment, stress and occupational health. This review has two goals. The first is to examine the models from a historical point of view. It highlights the roots and growing richness of each school of thought. The second objective is to present a metatheoretical framework for characterizing the models so as to enable their comparison. Documentary research was carried out on databases related to various occupational health disciplines. For inclusion, the models had to satisfy specific criteria, which are presented in the article. 17 models were selected and linked to six research streams. These models are characterized by the mediating and moderating variables they use, classified in several categories (three for the mediators: perception, appraisal, short-term reactions, and five for the moderators: socio-demographic, individual and work characteristics, social support at work and extra-organizational environment). It emerges that over half the models include perceptual processes as a mediator, whereas appraisal processes appear in only three. As for the moderators, individual and socio-demographic characteristics are most widely used by researchers. Regarding the moderating effect of characteristics related to the work environment, this is less frequent but still involved in over half of them. Finally, the article discusses the implications and limits of this conceptual framework.
