MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Tale of Two Sponsors: Comparing Channels of Sponsorship Effectiveness Using a Local Charity-linked Event

2021· article· en· W4205516992 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvent Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvent (particle physics)Leverage (statistics)AdvertisingMarketingBusinessPath analysis (statistics)Corporate social responsibilityStructural equation modelingPerceptionPsychologySocial psychologyPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study uses a local, charity-linked running event that attracts attendants with different motivations to participate and attitudes toward corporate social responsibility (CSR) to examine the effectiveness of sponsorship decisions for two primary, concurrent sponsors. Using a structural equation model for each sponsor, we find that the importance attached to various channels that influence sponsorship effectiveness to be sponsor specific. For the luxury automobile sponsor in our study, an attendant's motivation to participate is the only statistically significant and direct path to intention to purchase. Furthermore, although CSR also links to fit, the fit has no direct path to intention to purchase. This finding could potentially indicate that participants view the luxury automobile sponsorship as a positive expression of CSR, rather than through the event's lens. This finding implies that the luxury automobile dealer's sponsorship gains are not dependent on the event but the cause's support. In contrast, the sponsorship gains for the sports retailer are dependent on the event, where event satisfaction, event leverage, and event fit all have indirect paths to intention to purchase. Additionally, motivation to participate and the importance of CSR operates through different, indirect paths to intention to purchase for the sports retailer. Although motivation to participate positively impacts event satisfaction and event satisfaction positively influences intention to purchase, CSR's importance operates through fit, which positively impacts intention to purchase. Our results for the sports retailer indicate an increased fit with the event enhances the sponsor's perceptions as socially responsible and enhances the intentions to purchase the sponsor's goods. Furthermore, a well-liked event increases the likelihood a participant will purchase the sports retailer's products.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it