42

Japan Forum of Business and Society Annals, No.9. pp. 42-58, 2020

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on
Attitudes toward Corporate Brands
and Art Events
Yasushi Sonobe
Professor, Faculty of Sociology, Toyo University

Makiko Kawakita
Professor, Faculty of Business Administration, Nanzan University
Key words：corporate brand, art event, sponsorship, music, art’s spillover effects, perceived prestige,
attitude, cultural capital, covariance structure analysis, multi-group structural equation modeling【Abstract】
The purpose of this research is to clarify the mechanism by which corporate brands and art events
bring together the images of both and promote psychological changes among consumers. Study 1
identified a process through which the perceived prestige of corporate brands and art events
enhances the perceived prestige of sponsorship and, furthermore, improves attitudes toward brandand art event through attitudes toward sponsorship. Study 2 focused on opportunities to be in touchwith books, music, and art as moderation valuables of the cultural capital that the stakeholder has in
capturing the process. The analysis has found that although it is weak at the 0.1 level, the influenceof the perceived prestige of art event on the perceived prestige of sponsorship is stronger in thehigh cultural capital group than in the low cultural capital group. In contrast, attitudes toward
sponsorship exert a stronger influence on attitudes toward art event in the low cultural capitalgroup than in the high cultural capital group.

Guggenheim Museum and Foundation. It is

1.

Introduction

no secret that corporations and luxury brands
play an increasingly important role in funding

Firms have long sponsored art. Art can be di-artworks, artists, and institutions in all cor-

vided into highbrow and lowbrow art (Hol-ners of the art world (Forbes, 2015). Companies

brook, 1999). For example, the German fashion

support art in Japan too. They provide twobrand HUGO BOSS sponsors the Solomon R.

types of art support.

Reviewed Article (Received January 28th 2020/Accepted June 2nd 2020)

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

43

First, companies support high-prestige art.

from the art world. For example, in Japan,

In 2019, Toyota Motor Corporation sponsoredfrom the latter half of the 1980s to the begin-

the Vienna Premium Concert in six cities inning of the 1990s, when support for art be-

Japan. The concert is composed of 30 mem-came mainstream, there was a backlash against

bers, including members of the Vienna State

its commercialization by corporations. Accord-

Opera and the Vienna Philharmonic, as welling to Kato (2018), there was a conflict be-

as artists active in Europe. It also features atween employees who did not like the idea offew elite chamber orchestras with world-classusing the profit they earned with their hard

performing technique (Toyota, 2018).

work to support art and those in the field of

Second, high-prestige companies support
artists who are expected to grow in the fu-

art and culture who believed that their “excellent art” should be understood by anyone.

ture. Shiseido, a cosmetics manufacture, oper-

Due to the conflict between economy andates the Shiseido Gallery, which is said to be

culture and firms’ worsening performance, ac-

the oldest existing art gallery in Japan. In thecording to a survey conducted by Keidanren

1990s, the gallery shifted its emphasis to con-( Japan Business Federation) and One Percent

temporary art and began a dynamic programClub among their corporate members, the ra-aimed at introducing the expression of thattio of expenditure on art support to the firms’

era, noted for combining vanguard contempo-

total expenditure on contribution to society

raneity with a sense of simple purity (Shiseido

decreased from 20.8% (30.2 billion yen; N=367)

Gallery website).

in 1995 to 10.7% (18.6 billion yen; N=360) in 2013

Holbrook (1999) pointed out that the cultural(One Percent Club, Keidanren, 2010; 2014)（1）.

hierarchy including art is polarized and that

However, in recent years, firms tend to be

there is a hierarchical relationship such as

again expecting to improve their image by

highbrow and lowbrow art and entertain-

achieving prestige by means of support for

ment. The former tends to be elegant and toart or corporate patronage of art (One Percent

be practiced by non-profit organizations. The

Club, Keidanren, 2018). In 2016, “the proportion

latter can be vulgar and be practiced by for-of support for culture/art” came second in a

profit organizations (Yamada, 2008). When sup-list of 14 items at 17.2% (35.2 billion yen; N=343)

port for art is seen from the perspective of(One Percent Club, Keidanren, 2017)（2）. Accord-

marketing, art is often included in the sub-ing to the Association for Corporate Support

jects of sponsorship as well as sports and en-for the Arts of Japan (2019), music (36.9%,

tertainment. Sponsorship refers to investment

N=519) and visual arts (23.8%, N=334) attract

into causes and events, which are carried out

significant support from Japanese firms. The

in order to support the goals of any firm or

aim of corporate patronage of art is to im-marketing agency (Gardner and Shuman, 1988).

prove the firm’s image and to build a relation-

When the promotional aspect of highbrow

ship with customers (Association for Corporate

art becomes too explicit, it can invite criticism

Support of the Arts, 2019).

44

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

Firms, because they are profit-pursuingtionships.

bodies, have to be accountable to the stakeholders such as shareholders and need to ex-2.

A review of preceding studies

plain why support for art is necessary. However, excessive reliance on support of art for

Research on corporate art support can be di-marketing and sales could invite a backlash

vided into three areas: Patronage (mécénat) as

from people in the field of art. Consequently,

corporate philanthropy, sponsorship in adver-

there is a need to explain why support of art

tising, and image transfer of art in consumer

is provided as part of firms’ activities. Howev-

behavior. We will review each of these.

er, practitioners have not been able to show
their outcome in concrete figures as business

2-1. Mécénat

results.

In Japan, art support from the private sector

Support for art can be seen as a type ofbegan around the 17th century, when the Edosponsorship. For companies, sponsorship has

period started. Wealthy merchants developed

the effect of advertising to consumers. Therevarious cultures such as Ukiyo-e, Kabuki, andare many studies on sponsorship, particularly

crafts, which in turn spread as townsman cul-in reference to sports. In the field of sports,

ture. For example, the Mitsui family (later Mit-

criticism against firms’ support for sports in

sui Zaibatsu) were not only rich merchants but

the form of sponsorships is rare. On the otheralso patrons of art (Tsuji, 2005; Hayashi, 2004).

hand, using support of art as a marketing tool

When the isolation policy ended and the Meiji

leads to skepticism. Is it bad for art organiza-

era began, Japan adopted Western culture.

tions that firms use the support of art in mar-

The wealthy merchants formed a conglomer-

keting? We think that even the supported

ate, and their founders enthusiastically intro-

arts are likely to incur the same positive ef-

duced their art collections into Japan.

fects as firms do.

According to Hayashi (2004), Kojiro Matsu-

The purpose of this research is to clarify

kata eagerly collected French art and laid thethe mechanism by which corporate brands

foundation for later Western art collections.

and art events bring together the images of

Magosaburo Ohara introduced Western paint-

both and promote psychological changes

ings to Japan with the support of the painteramong consumers. In particular, we aim to

Torajiro Kojima and established the Ohara

examine the perceived prestige effects ofMuseum of Art, which is still a regional re-sponsorship for arts on consumer attitudes tosource (Hayashi, 2004) . During this period,

corporate brands and art events. In addition,

many companies tried to establish their own

we also examine how the degree to which

corporate brands by promoting culture. Since

consumers themselves were exposed to cul-

the Meiji era, Shiseido, a major cosmetics

tural influences, such as a tradition of music

manufacturer, has regarded culture as an as-

and art in the family, affects these causal rela-set. It owns a gallery with many in-house art-

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

ists to disseminate its culture.

45

search results, 7 peer-reviewed papers includ-

According to Kawashima (2012), different

ed “art and sponsorship” in the title, whereas

businesses became involved with art and cul-“sports and sponsorship” occurred in 37 paper

ture after World War II, particularly during

titles.

the 1970s and 1980s, a period of economic de-Therefore, we argue that sponsorship re-velopment, with the gross national productsearch is far less relevant to art than sports.

growing at more than 10% annually. For ex-

Several studies have examined the impact ofample, the Saison Group, a retail business,sponsorship on consumer perception (d’Astous

property development, and finance conglom-

and Bitz, 1995; Colbert et al., 2005; Carrillat anderate, promoted culture through museums

d’Astous, 2012; Woisetschläger and Michaelis,

and publishing companies as the driver of2012). However, much of the research is about

consumption, emphasizing lifestyle as the ba-

sports sponsorship.

sis of the spirit of the times in department
stores (Kawashima, 2012).

Colbert et al. (2005) divided art sponsorship
into several types and produced fictional arti-

Since the 1970s, various corporate founda-cles by type. Then, they presented them totions that support art have been established.

consumers and investigated the extent toWith the establishment of the Association forwhich they liked the articles. Colbert et al.

Corporate Support of the Arts in 1990, mécé-(2005) used the following variables for art

nat and social contributions became popular.

sponsorship programs: three types of spon-

Kawashima (2012) characterizes art support

sors (government ministries，Crown corporation,by companies in Japan as follows. In the ab-

private companies), nature of sponsorship (phil-sence of an official cultural policy and experts

anthropic or commercial), perceived congruence

to manage art, Japanese companies provide

between the sponsor and the sponsored e-their own art support. In the process, corpo-

vent, the form of the cultural events (high art

rate involvement with the arts and culture in

versus popular art and performing arts versus

Japan has broken fresh ground, taking a route

heritage arts). For an overall evaluation of the

between commercial sponsorship and corpo-

sponsorship program, they adopted percep-

rate philanthropy (Kawashima, 2012).

tion as the dependent variable. The analysis
revealed significant differences depending on

2-2. Sponsorshipthe type of sponsorship.

Little research has been done on sponsorship

Despite sponsorship studies with an adver-and philanthropy in the arts sector, particu-

tising perspective, very few have focused onlarly with regard to consumer behavior (Wal-the consumer’s perception. Colbert et al. (2005)

liser, 2003; Colbert, d’Astous and Parmentier,deal with art but focus on cultural policy.

2005). In fact, the authors have investigated

Therefore, their concept of consumer percep-

the research trends since 2000 using EBSCO,

tion is not exact and includes the attitude thata paper search service. According to theresults from perception. However, perception

46

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

and attitude are different concepts in the con-ous means such as the other brand, people,

text of consumer behavior.

places, and things (one of the aspects of “things”
being events) (Keller, 2003). Support for art is

2-3. Image transfer of brand and art

included in events, and firms can extend theAccording to the American Marketing Asso-brand association of the firm by enlisting the

ciation, a brand is a name, term, design, sym-

help of the art event that the firm supports.

bol, or any other feature that identifies one

Some of the images attached to the brandseller’s good or service as distinct from thoseare based on prestige (Park, Milberg, and Law-of other sellers (MASB: Marketing Accountabili-son, 1991). According to Vigneron and Johnson

ty Standards Board, 2019). A brand is a general(1999) perceived prestige is seen as a signal ofconcept used to describe products, but it canstatus and wealth in the brand, and the high-be applied to a certain organization or grouper the price is, the more valuable the brandlike a corporate brand.

becomes, satisfying emotional needs. Luxury

The functions of a corporate brand include

brands that deal with automobiles, cosmetics,

conveying the corporation’s value, providing

and fashion have a strong tendency to per-the means to differentiate the product fromceive prestige.

the competitors’ products, and improving the

Prestige can also be perceived from art re-

stakeholders’ evaluation of and loyalty toward

lated to a product purchase or consumption.

the organization (Balmer and Gray, 2003). Cor-

According to Hagtvedt and Patrick (2008), art

porate brands include company names suchis considered to have spillover effects. Spill-as Toyota Motor Corporation, departments

over effects have been found regarding musicthat produce high-end brands such as Lexus,

in the store (Gorn, 1982) or a fragrance (Span-and group companies such as Daihatsu, which

genberg, Crowley, and Henderson, 1996) whenmainly manufactures light cars at Toyota Mo-

purchasing a product, and they can be applied

tor Corporation’s subsidiaries.

to visual art (Hagtvedt and Patrick, 2008).

Whether it is about a corporate brand or a
product brand, consumers perceive brand2-4. Review summery

knowledge. According to Keller (2003), con-

In this section, we organize existing research

sumer brand knowledge can be defined inon corporate art support into three areas:

terms of the personal meaning of a brandmécénat, sponsorship, and image transfer ofstored in the consumer’s memory, that is, allbrand and art. Subsection 2.1 (Mécénat) show

descriptive and evaluative brand-related infor-

the Japanese private sector provides art sup-mation. Brand knowledge is not limited toport.

knowledge about the brand itself, but it canAround the 17th century, when mécénat be-also include information from secondary

gan in earnest in Japan, it was the wealthy in-sources outside the firm. Secondary sources

dividuals who mainly supported the arts, butthat enhance brand knowledge include vari-in the latter half of the 20th century, major

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

47

corporations achieved economic growth andpsychological effect the perceived prestige

became the center of art support. Kawashima

has on customers.

(2012) pointed out that corporate art support

has taken root in Japanese society, with a3.

Frameworkvague difference between mécénat as philanthropy and sponsorship to enhance brand val-

As mentioned earlier, prestige is included inue.

brand image (Park, Milberg and Lawson, 1991),

Reviewing the research on sponsorship, weand is especially perceived in luxury brands

found a few recent studies on art support,(Vigneron and Johnson, 1999). This is primarily

most of them on sports. In addition, somerelated to product brands, but it can also be

studies focus on consumer perception, but

applied to corporate brands. On the otherthey have some limitations, such as confusion

hand, spillover effects cause people to per-regarding psychological causal relationships

ceive prestige from art (Hagtvedt and Patrick,between consumers, perception, and attitude,2008). When a company sponsors an arts e-

typical in consumer behavior research.

vent, the sponsorship itself can have a percep-

In this research, we focus on the fact thatboth corporate brands and art events havetual prestige due to the combination of thecorporate brand and the arts event.

prestige, which has a psychological effect on

An example is the Vienna Premium Con-the consumers who perceive it. Brands cancert sponsored by Toyota Motor and Shiseido

form images from a variety of secondary fac-

Gallery, introduced at the beginning of thistors, including art events. Thus, we assume

article. In addition, an apparel company spon-

the following. Art is associated with prestige,sored the “UNIQLO Free Friday Night” pro-which can be transferred to corporate brands

gram. The program began in 2013 with freethrough sponsorship. On the other hand, cor-admission to the Museum of Modern Art

porate brands, especially high-end brands,(MoMA) every Friday afternoon and evening

have prestige themselves, which can be trans-(UNIQLO, 2019) . Combining these examples

ferred to art events supported by companies.

with the above theory, we propose the follow-

Most sponsorship research is about sports,

ing hypothesis.

so there is a lack of focus on prestige, whichis inherent in both corporate brands and art

H1aPerceived prestige of a corporate

events. Research on the prestige of corporate

brand would exert a positive influence onbrands and art events can be found in theperceived prestige of sponsorship.

area of spillover effects. Therefore, we will

H1bbuild a model in the next section to examine

would exert a positive influence on per-how consumers perceive the prestige of cor-

ceived prestige of sponsorship.

Perceived prestige of an art event

porate brands and art events through thesponsorship that companies provide and what

One of the outcome indicators of spillover ef-

48

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

fects is attitude. Attitude is defined as thesorship. In other words, assuming that per-learned belief, senses, and tendency in a re-ceived prestige, which is one of the factors ofsponse (Sternthal and Craig, 1982), and is related

spillover effects, affects attitudes as outcome

to the evaluation an individual makes about

indicators of these effects, we propose the fol-whether he/she likes it, or the behavior in ques-

lowing hypotheses:tion (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977; Ajzen, 1991). Concrete indicators include like/dislike, desirabili-

H2ty, goodness, and so on (Osgood, Suci, andwould exert a positive influence on atti-

Tannenbaum, 1957; Simonin and Ruth, 1998).

tudes toward sponsorship.

Hagtvedt and Patrick (2008) have demon-

H3aPerceived prestige of a sponsorship

Attitudes toward sponsorshipstrated that art has spillover effects on con-would exert a positive influence on atti-

sumer goods. They conducted a questionnairetudes toward a corporate brand.

survey with consumers by presenting themH3bwith products that had works of art printed

would exert a positive influence on atti-

on them on a smaller scale. The result has

tudes toward an art event.

Attitudes toward sponsorshipshown that a work of art displayed on a product enhanced its perceived prestige and im-

On the other hand, we can assume that con-proved the attitude toward the product (Hagt-

sumers’ cultural capital would exert its influ-

vedt and Patrick, 2008). In addition, Lee, Chen,ence as a moderator on the relationship be-

and Wang (2014) have shown that in a luxury

tween the concepts described above. Accord-

brand, perceived prestige is enhanced foring to Bourdieu (1986), cultural capital is madeproducts with artwork than those without it.

up of the following three states: first, the em-

These findings suggest that when a firm

bodied state as the permanent nature of the

supports the activities of art organizations as

mind and body; second, the objectified statea sponsor, it is likely that the consumer wouldsuch as paintings, books, dictionaries, tools,

perceive prestige in the sponsorship, which

and machines, and; third, the institutionalized

combines both firms and activities of art orga-

state.

nizations. Additionally, as the artistic prestige

To improve one’s embodied state, the fami-that is attached to a product improves thely environment in which one grows up, in oth-consumer’s product attitude (Hagtvedt and Pat-er words, the degree to which one is sur-rick, 2008), we predict that the prestige ofrounded by authentic culture (books, music, artsponsorship would exert an influence on theand other cultural expressions), is important

attitude toward sponsorship. Furthermore, at-(Flemmen, Jarness, and Rosenlund, 2017). This

titudes toward sponsorship would exert somesuggests that contact with culture while

influence on attitudes toward the corporate

growing up would further enhance the pro-brand as well as on the art event in which

cesses from the prestige of art to the prestige

there is a collaboration in the form of a spon-of sponsorship, to the attitude toward spon-

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

Figure 1

Framework

Perceived
Prestige ofCorporate
Brand

Attitude toward
Corporate Brand

H1a

H3a
H2

Perceived
Prestige ofSponsorship

H1b

49

AttitudetowardSponsorship

H4b

H3b

H4a

H4c

Perceived
Prestige of
Art Event

Attitudetoward Art
Event
CulturalCapitalsorship, and also from the attitude toward

next section describes the research and analy-

sponsorship to the attitude toward the art

sis carried out to test the proposed frame-

event. Based on these, we propose the follow-

work.

ing hypotheses:

4.
H4a

Research and analysis

Cultural capital would positively

enhance the influence exerted by the

4-1. Study 1

prestige of art on the perceived prestige

We conducted an Internet-based survey usingof sponsorship.

panel data held by My Voice Communications

H4b

Cultural capital would positively

Inc., a research company. First, we createdenhance the influence exerted by thetwo sponsorships by combining corporate

perceived prestige of sponsorship on thebrands (automobile manufacturers: Lexus/Dai-attitude toward sponsorship.

hatsu) and the art event supported by them

H4c

Cultural capital would positively(Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra/ Disney On Ice).

enhance the influence exerted by the atti-

Then, we presented these combinations to four

tude toward sponsorship on the attitudegroups that were divided evenly in terms of

toward an art event.

age and gender.
In order to test H1a, H1b, H2, H3a, and H3b,

Figure 1 shows the framework composed of

we asked the respondents to answer the

all hypotheses that we have proposed. The

questions about observed variables related to50

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

Table 1
Item

Factor analysis (perceived prestige and attitude)
Factors
F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

F6

Luxurious in Sponsorship
Prestigious in SponsorshipHigh class in Sponsorship

.98
.96
.94

.01
.01
.03

-.01
.00
.02

.00
.00
-.02

.00
.01
.01

-.05
-.01
.00

Luxurious in Art Event
Prestigious in Art EventHigh class in Art Event

.05
-.01
.01

.84
.96
.94

.00
-.02
.02

.02
.01
.01

-.03
.03
.00

.04
.00
-.03

Positive to Corporate Brand
Favorable to Corporate Brand
Good to Corporate Brand

.01
.01
-.01

-.02
-.03
.05

.96
.94
.90

.02
.02
-.01

-.02
-.01
.03

-.05
.02
.01

Positive to Art Event
Favorable to Art Event
Good to Art Event

.00
.02
.01

-.03
.03
.06

.02
.01
.01

.95
.93
.87

.01
-.01
.01

-.03
-.01
.03

Luxurious in Corporate Brand
Prestigious in Corporate Brand
High class in Corporate Brand

.01
.01
-.01

-.03
.05
-.01

-.07
.11
-.01

.03
-.02
-.01

.94
.76
.997

-.04
.07
-.01

Positive to Sponsorship
Favorable to SponsorshipGood to Sponsorship

.40
.25
.21

-.07
.00
.06

.02
-.01
.00

.11
-.01
.04

-.02
.01
.00

.52
.78
.70

9.92
55.13
55.13
.97

2.15
11.95
67.08
.95

1.41
7.84
74.92
.96

1.17
6.50
81.42
.96

.78
4.32
85.74
.97

.34
1.89
87.63
.95

Eigenvalue
Factor contribution ratio
Accumulation factor contribution ratio
Cronbach’s α

F1：Perceived Prestige of Sponsorship, F2：Perceived Prestige of Art Event, F3：Attitude toward Corporate Brand,
F4：Attitude toward Art Event, F5：Perceived Prestige of Corporate Brand, F6：Attitude toward Sponsorship, Factor
extraction method: principal factor method, rotation: Kaiser normalized Promax rotation; figures in bold: factor loading ofadopted factors

each latent variable. The items for perceived

ducted the main survey with 1,024 Japaneseprestige (luxurious, prestigious, and high class)consumers aged between 20 and 59 from May

we used are from Hagtvedt and Patrick (2008),

15 to 19, 2019. Data collection was kept open

and the items of attitude (positive and favor-

until the set number of valid responses wasable) are those of Osgood et al. (1957) and Si-

achieved. We used IBM SPSS Statistics tomonin and Ruth (1998). We asked the respon-produce descriptive statistics and to conduct

dents to use a five-point Likert scale: “1. Nota factor analysis. IBM SPSS Amos was usedapplicable at all”, “2. Not very applicable”, “3.

for covariance structure analysis and multi-

Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” and “5. Verygroup analysis.

applicable” (Please refer to the appendix for details of the questionnaire).

Williams, Onsman, and Brown (2010) describe two major classes of factor analysis: ex-

We collected the data as follows. We con-ploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirma-

ducted a pre-test with 160 Japanese consum-

tory factor analysis (CFA). EFA has been one

ers aged between 20 and 59 from April 23 toof the most widely used statistical procedures25, 2019. After analyzing the obtained data,in psychological research (Fabrigar, Wegener,

we revised some questionnaire items. We con-

MacCallum and Strahan 1999). It allows the re-

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

Figure 251

All samples
R2=.44

Perceived
Prestige ofCorporate
Brand

AttitudetowardCorporate
Brand.24***.20***.54***
R2=44

Perceived
Prestige ofSponsorship.25***

R2=.72.85***

AttitudetowardSponsorship.58***.55***.31***

Perceived
Prestige of
Art Event

Attitudetoward Art
Event

R2=.59N=1,024, Standardization factor,＊＊＊

p<.001searcher to explore the main dimensions toF2, α=.95 for F3, α=.96 for F4, α=.93 for F5,

generate a theory or model from a relatively

and α=.95 for F6.

large set of latent constructs, often represent-

We follow the broad consensus that .80 ≤α

ed by a set of items. However, the researcher< .90 is evaluated as good. Consequently, weuses CFA to test a proposed theory (Williams

conducted a covariance structure analysis

et al., 2010). Although the framework in thiswith all factors intact. Based on the proposed

study combines existing theories, we usedframework, we constructed an initial model.

EFA to examine the validity of the constitu-

This model consists of all observed variables:

ent concepts of data because they had not yet

Perceived Prestige of Corporate Brand, Per-

been confirmed.

ceived Prestige of Art, Perceived Prestige of

For the factor extraction, we applied theSponsorship, Attitude toward Sponsorship,

principal factor method and set the number of

Attitude toward Corporate Brand, and Atti-

factors to 6 based on preceding studies. This

tude toward Art Event. Then, we analyzed

found a correlation among factors. Conse-

this model.

quently, a Kaiser normalized Promax rotation

Following a procedure to achieve path coef-

was applied. The result shows that the eigen-ficients with significance of less than 5%, mostvalue was .31, the cumulative contribution ra-often applied in psychology, we adopted thetio was 87.62, and six factors were extracted

model shown in Figure 2. The goodness-of-fit(Table 1). The internal consistency of each fac-of the model was: χ2=797.93, p=.00, GFI=.92,

tor turned out to be: α=.97 for F1, α=.96 for

AGFI=.89, CFI=.97, RMR=.08, and RM-

52

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

SEA=.07. The confirmation of the square of

Table 2

Factor analysis (cultural capital)

the multiple correlation coefficient (i.e., the coef-

Item

Factorficient of determination) turned out to be:

Books

.57

R2=.44 for Perceived Prestige of Sponsorship,

Classical Music

.82

Art

.81

Eigenvalue

1.65

Factor contribution ratio

54.89

R 2 =.72 for Attitude toward Sponsorship,
R2=.42 for Attitude toward Corporate Brand,

Cronbach’s α

and R2=.59 for Attitude toward Art Event.

.77

As for the path coefficient, the influence of“1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very applica-

Perceived Prestige of Corporate Brand onble”, “3. Rather applicable” and “4. Very appli-

Perceived Prestige of Sponsorship was γ=.20

cable.”(standardized coefficient, hereafter the same) andWe conducted a factor analysis with thethe influence of Perceived Prestige of Art

principal factor method and Promax rotation

Event to Perceived Prestige of Sponsorshipwith responses to the three items of cultural

was γ=.58 (p<.001). Next, the influence of Per-

capital, and the analysis yielded one factor

ceived Prestige of Sponsorship on Attitude to-(Table 2). Its internal consistency was α=.77.

ward Sponsorship was γ=.85 (p<.001), which

We follow the broad consensus that .70 ≤ α

was strong. The influence of Attitude toward< .80 is acceptable. Consequently, in the cur-Sponsorship on Attitude toward Corporate

rent study, we used all observed variables for

Brand was γ=.54 (p<.001), and that of Atti-

the analysis.

tude toward Sponsorship on Attitude toward

We used the principal component analysis

Art Event was γ=.55 (p<.001). Therefore, H1a,to synthesize the three variables. The results

H1b, H2, H3a, and H3b were supported.

produced a mean of 0 with a variance of 1.
Accordingly, those participants whose figures

4-2. Study 2

were larger than 0 were classified as a highNext, in order to test H4a, H4b, and H4c, we

cultural capital group (N=461) and those withdivided the sample into two groups according

figures smaller than 0 were classified as a low

to the volume of cultural capital, and conduct-

cultural capital group (N=563). We tested theed amulti-group structural equation modeling.

hypotheses by applying multi-group structur-

As for the observed variables of cultural capi-

al equation modeling to these two groups. Intal, based on a scale used by Flemmen et al.

this analysis, the procedure to adopt paths(2017) to measure art in cultural capital, wewith less than 5% significance was used as in

adopted three items: books, classical music,

Study 1, and the model shown in Figure 3

and art. We asked the participants to respond

was adopted. The goodness-of-fit of the modelto the question “Did you have many opportu-

was χ2=1036.92, p=.00, GFI=.90, AGFI=.86,

nities to be in contact with the following in

CFI=.97, RMR=.08, RMSEA=.06 (Figure 3).

the family in which you grew up?” for each of

Let us now examine the path coefficientsthe three items on a four-point Likert scale ofrelated to the hypotheses. As for the influence

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

Figure 3

Multigroup analysis (cultural capital)

.21**
.29**

.25**
.23**
.72**
.68**

R2=.73R2=.64

AttitudetowardSponsorship

.45**
.59**

.60**
.51**

Perceived
Prestige in
Art Event

AttitudetowardCorporate
Brand

.55**
.49**

Prestige inSponsorship†

R2=.45
R2=.36

.22**
.26**

Perceived
Prestige in
Corporate
Brand

R2=41
R2=42

53

***

.37**
.14**

**

Attitudetoward Art
Event

R2=.64
R2=.51
Upper row: High Group (N=461), Lower row: Low Group (N=563), Non-standardization factor,＊＊＊
p<.001, ＊＊ p<.01, † p<.10

of Perceived Prestige of Art Event on Per-tal group, which suggests a larger influence

ceived Prestige of Sponsorship, it was γ =.60

for the low cultural capital group. The test

for the high cultural capital group and γ =.51

statistic for the difference between the twofor the low cultural capital group. The test

was D=|2.52| (p<.05). Therefore, H4c was re-statistic for the difference between the non-jected. In addition, although this was not con-standardization factors of both coefficientssidered a hypothesis, a significant difference

was D=|1.75| (p<.10). As a result, H4a is only

was found in the path from Perceived Pres-partially supported. As for the influence oftige of Art Event to Attitude toward Art

Perceived Prestige of Sponsorship on Attitude

Event, and the high cultural capital group

toward Sponsorship, it was γ=.72 for theshowed a larger value (γ=.37) than the low

high cultural capital group and γ=.68 for thecultural capital group (γ=.14). The test statis-

low cultural capital group. The test statistic

tic for the difference between the parameters

for the difference between the two was

was D=|5.46| (p<.001). No other path was sig-

D=|.88| (p>.10). Therefore, H4b was rejected.

nificantly influenced by the volume of cultural

Lastly, as for the influence of Attitude toward Sponsorship on Attitude toward Art
Event, it was γ=.45 for the high cultural capital group and γ=.59 for the low cultural capi-

capital.

54

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

The current study’s academic and practical

5.

Discussion

contributions are as follows. In terms of academic contribution, the study has captured a

The preceding analyses yielded the following

psychological effect of art sponsorship on the

results. Study 1 identified a process throughperceived prestige and attitude in the field of

which the perceived prestige of corporate

sponsorship studies, which is dominated bybrands and art events enhances the perceived

sports. Although the spillover effects of theprestige of sponsorship and furthermore, im-perceived prestige of art events have been

proves attitudes toward brand and art event

discussed in other studies, the discussion was

through attitudes toward sponsorship.

limited to experiments on artwork attached

Study 2 focused on opportunities to be into the product’s package or the product itself.

touch with books, music, and art as modera-

In contrast, the current study focused ontion valuables of the cultural capital that the

how art events supported by firms influence

stakeholder has in capturing the process. The

the evaluation of corporate brands or the art

analysis has found that although it is weak at

events themselves. Furthermore, no study

the 0.1 level, the influence of the perceived

has identified the process through which theprestige of art event on the perceived pres-perceived prestige of art event and corporate

tige of sponsorship is stronger in the high cul-brand improves attitudes toward art and to-tural capital group than in the low cultural

ward the corporate brand, through sponsor-

capital group. In addition, the perceived pres-ship.

tige of art event exerts a direct influence on

The practical contribution has two catego-

the attitude toward art events, which is stron-

ries: firms that support art and art organiza-

ger in the high cultural capital group than intions that receive support. First, the contribu-

the low cultural capital group.

tion to firms is as follows. The current study

In contrast, attitudes toward sponsorshipsuggests that a firm can improve attitudes to-exert a stronger influence on attitudes toward

ward its own brand through sponsorship byart event in the low cultural capital groupfocusing on the perceived prestige of corpo-

than in the high cultural capital group. Whilerate brands and art events.

the high cultural capital group places more

In addition, the study suggests that theemphasis on the perceived prestige of art

perceived prestige of art events exerts aevent, the low cultural capital group empha-

stronger influence on the perceived prestige

sizes the attitude toward sponsorship. In oth-of sponsorships than on the perceived pres-er words, this research suggests that a hightige of corporate brands. This shows thatlevel of cultural capital strengthens the influ-

firms can improve attitudes toward their own

ence of the perceived prestige of art event,brand by supporting art events and benefit-

but weakens the influence of the attitude to-ing from the prestige attached to them. Theseward sponsorship.

findings should be suggestive for firms that

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events

55

are accountable to stakeholders, such as share-

study have not shed enough light on the rela-holders, in regard to their activities to support

tionship between the combinations of corpo-

art.

rate brands and the support of art.

Next, the contribution to art organizations

Initially, we planned to compare the differ-is as follows. As mentioned at the beginning,ences between high and low art as company

art organizations are concerned that firms

support destinations. However, when the ma-

would take advantage of their activities tonipulation check was performed, the evalua-promote their corporate brand. However, thetions of the subjects were not complete. Fur-current study found that support for an art

ther testing is necessary to match firms andevent brings with it non-financial benefits toart events considering the degree of prestige.

the art organization: attitude toward art e-

We would like to address these challenges

vents improves with firms’ support to art or-

separately in the future.

ganizations.
Additionally, the study found the influence（1） We calculated each absolute measure by multiplying the total expenditure for social philan-of cultural capital on variables related to art

thropic activities by the percentage of spending
on culture and art. However, these amounts ofonly. Perceived prestige has a stronger effectmoney are approximate values because the num-in the high cultural capital group than in theber of response samples for the former and for

low cultural capital group. However, the influ-

the spending ratio by field are different. According to a survey conducted in 1995, the total ex-ence of attitudes toward sponsorship on atti-

penditure for social philanthropic activities weretudes toward art events is stronger in the low

145.4 billion yen (N=367), and the number of re-cultural capital group than in the high cultur-

spondents in the expenditure ratio by field was
not disclosed (One Percent Club, Keidanren, 2010).

al capital group. This suggests the impor-

According to a 2013 survey, expenditure on social

tance, for both firms and art organizations

philanthropic activities was 173.5 billion yenthat engage with low cultural capital groups,(N=360), and the number of respondents in the
expenditure ratio by field was 350 companies (Oneof promoting sponsorships through appropriate communication programs, such as a campaign to build familiarity with their sponsorships, rather than pursuing perceived prestige.
While the current study has made the contributions described above, there are somechallenges left. While the samples we use inthis study are standardized for gender andage, the total number of observations is 1,024,
which is not very large. This implies the needto take even more accurate measurements using a larger sample. Also, the analyses in thePercent Club, Keidanren, 2014).
（2）

As in Note (1), these amounts of money are approximate values because the number of response
samples for the former and for the spending ratio
by field are different. Spending on social philanthropic activities was 204.9 billion yen (N=343),
and the number of respondents in the expenditure ratio by field was 336 companies.
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI under Grant Number JP 17K03903 and Nanzan University Pache Research Subsidy I-A-2 for the 2020
academic year.

〈References〉
Ajzen I. (1991) ‘The theory of planned behavior’, Orga-

56

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

nizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 50, No. 2, pp. 179-211.

proach’, Journal of Marketing, Volume 46, Issue 1,
pp. 94-101.

―― and Fishbein, M. (1977) ‘Attitude-behavior rela-Hagtvedt, H. and Patrick, V.M. (2008) ‘Art Infusion:

tions: A theoretical analysis and review of empiri-

The Influence of Visual Art on the Perception

cal research’, Psychological Bulletin, Volume 84,

and Evaluation of Consumer Products’, Journal of

No. 5, pp. 888-918.

Marketing Research, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp. 379-

Association for Corporate Support of the Arts (2019)
Mécénat Report 2019, Association for Corporate
Support of the Arts, Available at https://www.

389.
Hayashi, Y. (2004) Evolving Arts Management, LeylinePublishing (in Japanese).

mécénat.or.jp/ja/wp-content/uploads/MécénatRe

Holbrook, M.B. (1999) ‘Popular Appeal versus Expert

port2019.pdf, Accessed May 1st 2020 (in Japanese).

Judgments of Motion Pictures’, Journal of Con-

Balmer, J.M.T. and Gray, E.R. (2003) ‘Corporate brands:
what are they? What of them?’, European Journalof Marketing, Volume 37, Issue 7-8, pp. 972-997.
Bourdieu, P. (1986) ‘The Forms of Capital’, in J. Rich-

sumer Research, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp. 144-155.
Kato, T. (2018）The Investment Effect of Art and Culture: Mécénat and Creative Economy, Suiyo-sya (inJapanese).

ardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for

Kawashima, N. (2012) ‘Corporate support for the Arts

the Sociology of Education, NY: Greenwood, pp.

in Japan: Beyond Emulation of the Western Mod-

241-258.

els’, International Journal of Cultural Policy, Vol-

Carrillat, F.A. and d’Astous, A. (2012) ‘The spon-ume 18, Issue 3, pp. 1-13.

sorship-advertising interface: is less better for

Keller, K.L. (2003) ‘Brand Synthesis: The Multidimen-

sponsors?’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol-

sionality of Brand Knowledge’, Journal of Consum-

ume 46, No. 3/4, pp. 562-574.

er Research, Volume 29, Issue 4, pp. 595-600.

Colbert, F., d’Astous, A. and Parmentier, M.A. (2005)

Kries, M., Arts Sponsorship at HUGO BOSS: A Long-‘Consumer Perceptions of Private versus Publicstanding Tradition, Available at https://group.

Sponsorship of the Arts’, International Journal ofhugoboss.com/en/sponsorship/arts-sponsorship,

Arts Management, Volume 8, No. 1, pp. 48-59.

Accessed April 21st 2020.

d’Astous, A. and Bitz, P. (1995) ‘Consumer Evaluations

Kyodo Tokyo, Disney On Ice, Available at https://of Sponsorship Programmes’, European Journal of

www.kyodotokyo.com/doi, Accessed May 2nd 2020

Marketing, Volume 29, No. 12, pp. 6-22.

(in Japanese).

Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C. and

Lee, H.C., Chen, W.W. and Wang, C.W. (2015) ‘The Role

Strahan, E.J. (1999) ‘Evaluating the Use of Explor-of Visual Art in Enhancing Perceived Prestige ofatory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research’,

Luxury Brands’, Marketing Letter, Volume 26, Is-

Psychological Methods, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp. 272-

sue 4, pp. 593-606.

299.

Levine, L.W. (1988) Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emer-

Flemmen, M.P., Jerness, V. and Rosenlund, L. (2017)

gence of Cultural Hierarchy in America, Boston:‘Social Space and Cultural Class Divisions: The

Harvard University Press, Tsuneyama, N. (Tr.),

Forms of Capital and Contemporary Lifestyle Differentiation’, British Journal of Sociology, Volume
69, Issue 1, pp. 124-153.
Forbes, A. (2015) ‘Three Basel Projects Show a New
Era of Corporate Patronage’, Artsy, Available at(2005) Keio University Press (in Japanese).
MASB: Marketing Accountability Standards Board(2019) Common Language Marketing Dictionary,
Available at https://marketing-dictionary.org/,
Accessed December 5th 2019.

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-new-

One Percent Club, Keidanren (2010) Survey Results ofera-of-corporate-art-sponsorship, Accessed April

Social Contribution Activities in Fiscal 2009,

21st 2020.
Gardner, M.P. and Shuman, P. (1988) ‘Sponsorships andSmall Businesses’, Journal of Small Business Management, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp. 44-52.

Available at http://www.keidanren.or.jp/policy/
2010/095kekka.pdf, Accessed December 5th 2019
(in Japanese).
―― (2014) Survey Results of Social Contribution Activ-

Gorn, G.J. (1982) ‘The Effects of Music in Advertisingities in Fiscal 2013, Available at http://www.

on Choice Behavior: A Classical Conditioning Ap-

keidanren.or.jp/policy/2014/082_honbun.pdf, Ac-

The Prestige Effects of Sponsorship on Attitudes toward Corporate Brands and Art Events
cessed December 5th 2019 (in Japanese).

57

tember 13th (Fri), worldwide, 2020 September―― (2017）Survey Results of Social Contribution Ac-

13 th, Available at https://www.uniqlo.com/jp/

tivities in Fiscal 2016, Available at https://www.

corp/pressrelease/2019/09/momautgp_2020_

keidanren.or.jp/policy/2017/091_honbun.pdf, Ac-

moma_2020draw_yo.html, Accessed May 6th 2020thcessed December 5 2019 (in Japanese).

(in Japanese).

―― (2018) Survey Results of Social Contribution Activ-

Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (1999) ‘A Review and aities in Fiscal 2017, Available at http://www.

Conceptual Framework of Prestige-Seeking Con-keidanren.or.jp/policy/2018/097_honbun.pdf, Ac-

sumer Behavior’, Academy of Marketing Science

cessed December 5th 2019 (in Japanese).

Review, Volume 1, pp. 1-15.

Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J. and Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957)

Walliser, B. (2003) ‘An International Review of Spon-The Measurement of Meaning, University of Illi-sorship Research: Extension and Update’, Interna-nois Press, Urbana.

tional Journal of Advertising, Volume 22, pp. 5-40.

Park, C.W., Milberg, S. and Lawson, R. (1991) ‘Evalua-Williams, B., Onsman, A. and Brown, T. (2010) ‘Explor-tion of Brand Extensions: The Role of Productatory Factor Analysis: A five-Step Guide for Nov-

Feature Similarity and Brand Concept Consisten-ices’, Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care,cy’, Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp. 185-193.

Volume 8, Issue 3, pp. 1-13.
Woisetschläger, D.M. and Michaelis, M. (2012) ‘Sponsor-

Simonin, B.L. and Ruth, J.A. (1998) ‘Is a Company

ship Congruence and Brand Image: A Pre-post

Known by the Company It Keeps? Assessing the

Event Analysis’, European Journal of Marketing,

Spillover Effects of Brand Alliances on Consumer
Brand Attitudes’, Journal of Marketing Research,
Volume 35, No. 1, pp. 30-42.
Shiseido Gallery, Introducing the Shiseido Gallery,

Volume 46, No. 3/4, pp. 509-523.
Yamada, S. (2008) Introduction to Arts Marketing: Designing Strategies for the Art Market, Suiyo-sya (inJapanese).

Available at https://gallery.shiseido.com/en/, Accessed May 6th 2020.
Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P.W.
(1996) ‘Improving the Store Environment: Do Olfactory Cues Affect Evaluations and Behaviors?’,

Appendix: Survey questionnaire
1. Please tell us your gender.
Proportion: Male 50%, Female 50%
2. Please tell us your age.

Journal of Marketing, Volume 60, Issue 2, pp. 67-

Proportion: 20s 25.0%, 30s 25.0%, 40s 25.0%, 50s

80.

25.0%

Sternthal, B. and Craig, C.S. (1982) Consumer behavior:
An Information Processing Perspective, PrenticeHall, New Jersey.

・Combination of corporate brands and art supportedby them (equal allocation by age and gender)
A Lexus×Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra “Cham-

Suntory Group (2018) Vienna Philharmonic Week inJapan 2018 Daiwa House Special Franz Welser-

ber Music Special”（N=256）
B L exus×Feld Entertainment “Disney On Ice”

Mest Conductor Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra,（N=256）

Available at https://www.suntory.co.jp/news/CD aihatsu×Feld Entertainment “Disney On Ice”

article/sh0264.html, Accessed May 2 nd 2020 (in（N=256）

Japanese).

D D aihatsu×Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra“Chamber Music Special”（N=256）

Toyota (2018) Vienna Premium Concert, Available athttps://www.toyota.co.jp/jpn/sustainability/

3. Did you have many opportunities to be in contact

social_contribution/society_and_culture/domestic/

with the following in the family in which you grew

tomas/pdf/wpc_pamphlet.pdf, Accessed April 21stup?

2020 (in Japanese).
Tsuji, N. (2005) History of Art in Japan, University ofTokyo Press (in Japanese).
UNIQLO (2019) “UTGP 2020 + MoMA” will be heldin cooperation with MoMA, The theme for 2020 is“DRAW YOUR WORLD”, Starting today, Sep-

Items: Books, Classical music, Art (painting, sculpture, etc.)
Choices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very applicable”, “3. Rather applicable” and “4. Very applicable.”
4. We would like to ask you about the brand called58

投稿論文 /Reviewed Article

Lexus/Daihatsu (show one or the other, the same

Toy Story, Frozen, and Princess Classics and om-

applies below). Please give one answer for each ofnibus works such as All Stars Carnival.

these brands.

・Please give one answer for each of these activities.

Items: Luxurious, Prestigious, High class

Items: Luxurious, Prestigious, High classChoices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very ap-

Choices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very ap-

plicable”, “3. Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” andplicable”, “3. Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” and“5. Very applicable.”
5. N ext, I would like to ask about the Vienna Philhar-“5. Very applicable.”
6. Lexus / Daihatsu sponsors the Vienna Philharmonic

monic Orchestra “Chamber Music Special” / Feld

Orchestra “Chamber Music Special” / Feld Enter-Entertainment “Disney On Ice.” See the explanation

tainment “Disney On Ice.” Please give one answer

below.

for each of these sponsorships.

・Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra “Chamber MusicSpecial”*

Items: Luxurious, Prestigious, High class, Positive,
Favorable, GoodFounded in 1842, and with a history of 177

Choices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very ap-

years, the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra culti-

plicable”, “3. Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” andvates tradition in the musical capital of Vienna,“5. Very applicable.”which has produced famous composers and per-7. I would like to ask you again about Lexus/Daihatsu.

formers, and as a world-class orchestra, its unique

Please give one answer for each of these brands.

and rich sound attracts the world’s audience. For

Items: Positive, Favorable, Good

this performance in Tokyo, members of the Vien-

Choices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very ap-

na Philharmonic Orchestra, who are familiar withplicable”, “3. Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” andoperas at the Vienna State Opera, will deliver“chamber music specials” in which they “sing” operas with various instrumental arrangements.
・Feld Entertainment “Disney On Ice”**“5. Very applicable.”
8. We would like to ask you again about the Vienna
Philharmonic Orchestra “Chamber Music Special” /Feld Entertainment “Disney On Ice.” Please give

Disney On Ice is a musical on ice that has been

one answer for each of these activities.

loved by generations of generations as one of theItems: Positive, Favorable, Good

world’s leading live entertainment provided by

Choices: “1. Not applicable at all”, “2. Not very ap-

Feld Entertainment. In Japan, since Happy Birth-

plicable”, “3. Neither”, “4. Rather applicable” andday Donald was released in 1986, we deliver mov-

“5. Very applicable.”ie stories such as Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast,**We wrote this text by referring to Suntory Group (2018), which actually invited the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra“Chamber Musical Special.”**We wrote this text by modifying the explanation of“Disney On Ice”on the website of Kyodo Tokyo. For eachcitation source, see the references.