Consumers express, convey, and interact with others through their self-image, and they use symbolic meanings as evaluative criteria when inferring social class, personality, and other attributes. It is generally recognized that products are accepted as symbols and are evaluated, purchased, and used based on their symbolic characteristics. Previous studies have shown that demographic and socioeconomic characteristics such as age, gender, and social class influence product symbolism. However, since these studies have been neither effective nor comprehensive in considering the many diverse determinants, the conceptual model of this study was constructed as a causal relationship model among four constructs argued to influence product symbolism based on a review of prior research: advertising expression methods, product/brand familiarity, product evaluation characteristics, and product symbolism. An empirical survey using questionnaires was conducted among middle school, high school, and university students. The target product category was sporting goods, and the analysis was based on data from 750 respondents. Hypotheses related to product symbolism were tested through path-structural analysis using the LISRELWIN 8.12 statistical program. Additionally, validity and reliability were examined prior to reviewing the structural relationships among constructs. The overall model fit results were as follows: χ²=218.312 (p=.00), GFI=.971, NFI=.962, RMR=.0337. The overall model fit was good, and hypotheses were tested using this model. First, advertising expression methods had a significant direct effect on product symbolism. Among the four constructs, product evaluation characteristics had the most significant influence on product symbolism. Second, advertising expression methods had significant direct effects on product/brand familiarity and product evaluation characteristics, and advertising expression methods had a significant positive indirect effect on product symbolism through product/brand familiarity and product evaluation characteristics. Third, between product/brand familiarity and product evaluation characteristics, only product evaluation characteristics had a significant positive direct effect on product symbolism. Brand familiarity had a significant positive direct effect on product evaluation characteristics. Consistent with prior research, this study also found that product symbolism is influenced by product/brand familiarity, product evaluation characteristics, and advertising expression methods. Based on these findings, the following implications can be offered to marketing managers and advertising practitioners. Advertisements should be presented through effective advertising strategies that can convey the actual symbols associated with the product to the target audience. Advertising strategies that influence product symbolism should be pursued through advertising expression methods that emphasize product/brand familiarity and product evaluation characteristics. Limitations of this study include the failure to consider moderating variables and the non-execution of second-order confirmatory factor analysis. Future research on product symbolism should consider these issues.