A hypothetical organization chart was adopted to examine the relative worth of five positions and pay differentials as a function of rater's sex, money ethic endorsement (belief that money is good), and job incumbent's sex. The study explored the "Matthew Effect," the tendency of people to be willing to pay more for the highest position and pay less for the lowest positions. Study participants included 95 nursing administrators and nurses and 110 advanced students in compensation, psychology, and business classes at a large regional state university. Forty-seven of the students were full-time employees and 34 of the students were part-time employees. Results showed that job incumbent's sex has no impact on pay allocations. Significant two-way interaction effects between subject's sex and money ethic endorsement were found. Further analyses showed that men with high money ethic endorsement allocated significantly more money to the highest position and significantly less money to the lowest positions than did those with low money ethic endorsement. Women's allocations of money, however, were not affected by their endorsement of the money ethic. Thus, men's allocation of position worth supports the Matthew Effect. (Contains 43 references.) (Author/KC)