Tobacco Documents Online

-4- have been many ~Zas (o.K. FI,LT~, Ead=ra, Dawn. lye*. Silva Thins, V£rSLu~ 514.,,- and Max) aZr~oush not &11 of the brands have sur,~-ived their laun~. Zn add£t~oa r~re are br~,,~s ~ere the marke~inl image has bean Ziven some fmaalo eZmnants, e.g. ~I/qD& (B.A.T)8neluoc) and Lou~ Jo~s (American Tobacco Co. it4.). The a4ve:tisiJ~ copy for the 1at:e: brand is spac~811y alu~d av smokers of boeh seines. The=e has 818o bean • ~8mpa~n by Dutch cigmr mmz~acture:s to persuade mn to smo~ c£g~ts. Generally speaking brands aimed a: fmnale smoiunrs have rJnded to have ce:1:ain chazacter~s~ics in common, e.S- K~D4 had to mee~ carta;- des£Kn pre=qqu£si:es, namely a light r~s:Ln~ 1or u~cot~e ciKa=a:ee vith a raM11 circun~erence (23-25 urn). Advert£sLu~ tin8 :~:ed at young women in the 20-28 age group: at the time of K]~'s launch ;- Germany $1Z of a11 feaaLe smokers wa:e unde: 35. C£sarec:es aimed s~ w~mn have ~ende~ ~o be longer as well as sl/m~r chart more t=adi~io~sl brands and £: £s no~m~orr.hy rJ~ the 120 :m 1ong sei~ant of 1].5. :m~r~e: ~clu4es some brands a~n~d 8pe~ificaIl? ~=houKh de~a£1ed t~ctrp:eCaC£on o£ urbViq da~:a is no: possible th~s repc~ i~ seems uorr.h munl:~.~ 1:hal: the Ip:est majorLey of ~ome= clea=ly 4o ~pt 8mo~t the b=ands a/mad spec4~£cslly :~ them as ~:e £ollov~g sJles ~LKures for these ~tla~vely t~n11 est~bl£sbed tmamds suggest: (3). Of r.ou:sa, if ~m ~lr~ ~ga~e~tes T~temded for ~, :ban ~be d~spm:£:y £s evan 8=eu~ve: than is suggested by t~e data g£van in Table 3. There ~s also • ~elate4 c~Ka~tte Adam, a~md at male smokers. ~r~ r~ BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

~pl~r'~,, ¢,..rl BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

muuc zmAz s .,SD ,saOzns Karimt Share Brand 1972 1973 1974 (Z) (Z) (Z) F,~ (Germany) 0.9 1.1 1.3 8£1va Thins (U.S.A.) 0.9 0.8 0.8. ]~ve (O.S.&.) 0.3 0.3 0.3 Note: Only brands a~ned spec~f£cally at women have been ~cludeA 4~ Table 3 and 4a~a for some couat=£es is not aTa£1able " e.s. Soul~.b Afr£ca. T. tt~'l~J of brands which are not Irpec:~:Lcally ~ at Imme~ the £0110vinK statemeut about ~omen's reaction to =or concepts has been at~buted to J. BoyLe, Group Vice Frestdent 0£ Fbilip Hoz~r£8. 'The i~Lies have led every majoT e£ga=ette creed 4~ the past 15 7eazs. Our studies 8hov that they vere rJ~e £irst r~ eab~&ce king site ci88rettes, mentbol, charcoal and recessed filters". Tt~ :arkeCinK of dLiJ.m~rent brands for ~-Le and femaZe smokers is supported by studies of male and £emale mnoha~8 from vhLch it has been coucluded that there -~e • number o£ d£££erences in smok-~Uli hab£ts beer•an the sexes. Hot unexpectedly those "~volved in rJ~se studies have related chase dJJJ~fe~enau t:o • u~le v~io~v of p~cbolol~ul, peychoaz~ly££cal and I~emtt:i(: ¢b•r•cter£sci~J and some of r.hese r~eo=ies v~11 be :ev~evexl L: late: 8ectLon8 o~ r.b~Ls report. Since 1972 most o£ eha ~ bebumiomral eL~ud£es "car:~ed out at Group L & D. Cen:re bsve ~olved pameZs o~ equal numbers of male and BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION ¢.,.m ¢,..r'!

\ BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION / OO

-6- female smokers. ~tb~f~ rJ~ :es~lts £:om each exper~nent a:8, st:ictly 8ptL~4, only applictble to the psnsl used, ~evetthelas: in eve~ expe~iuum: same' 4~fersnces l~ve been noted in smok~u8 beh~viour be~=~ the sexes. Zt is therdore c~usidered app:opr~ate to :8v4ev the evi~leace that ~I~ smok~K behavLour of fI~sla mokmr8 is d~.~fezsmt £:om r~u~t of halt For this taller the follo~J~ sources of i~foz~atLon have been used: =epo~ts published ~th/~ the B.&.T Group, published pspe=s in the litez&cu=t and vaz~us unpublbhad erudite at Group i. & D. C4mttt. Th:oushout tb~s tev£sv 4t may be assumed that, unless specificslly St:t"a, the 8ur~o: is u~mrare of any evidence ~ ~ Qonttary direction to that quote~ in support of the va:ious hypothsjes be4~s cousiKe:ed. the othez han~, in the ~terests of brevity, s~ulies ~ch t~ve i~concl~s£ve :es~lts have, ~n the mien, not been quoted. 2. DXSCUSS~ , as ~e discussion is o=~an~sed as follovs: 2.1 Gen~z~l Cons~4e:at£ons 2.2 S:o~a# Behav~ou: 2.3 Product l~e~e~ance Sr~4ies 2.4 Qu:LctL~ ~b£ts 2.1 Gene=al Cons£derat£ons 4~£e= from vo~n in a m~b~r of ~sys i~sclud:1.nS bLocbea:i.ca3., physiolos£caZ, psycJu:!oSlcal, mo~pholoK£cal, persona/, social and cul~tral chs=acta:istics, the £uadsman~sl distinctio~ be~K, of cou:sa, lanet£c and it is possible th~t d3~erences in &11 of these d~m~slm~s v~1I •ffect s:ol~ beha~i~u~. ]For exJmpZe it has been cXais~d (4) that BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION m r,x.#

° taan~a'~~. BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION m

vomen metabol£se nicotine In • d~farent ~ay to men, and ~Ls b£ochemi~tl d~f~rence may be of crucial tmport~ace in det~ 8mok£n8 beh~v£our. Lik85~ee there ~re am differ~ss tJa braiJa activity (am measured by ele~troencephaloKraphte tmebn£qu~s) whicJa my be related to retaking beh~iour (5). Norpbolos£~81 ~acter£st£c8 u~Kht also be impotent a.B. many dzuss are e~£ect£ve on • unit we£Kht basis. The d~£erences in ~ae o~har djmansLons ~ro hszd~r to maasuze objectlvel~, and even harder to z~n~ste to smok£ng behsvlour. Thus, psy~holoKical d:l.f£e.x'~ces kt'ween ~ ~ ~ have been gt~dled by numerous workers us~aK r~b8 questlonna~e approach msd cli££erences in I1 out o£ the 16 ~actors in the 16 Persona~£ty Factor Qu~sti~anaire o~ Cat~eI1 (6) have been dem0nstraced u bed~ s£Kn~cant at • level of p • .001. It is rJaoush~ r~at some o£ Uaese d£~germa~e8 ~e c~astltutLon81 while otJaers art c~LL~J~81. The £ac~o~8 £or vl~Lch d~£e~ee8 were ~ound art 1Lst~d in Table A, but 8s expected rJaert is not • 8igni~£cant dJ~£er~nce £or ~s~o~ B (lnte£1i~ence). TABLE 4 nn~7~zs zx ~ ~uaLrr~ racToes (~). Fac~or~ (~dven~v.rouo) , (~mdar-.edaded) L (S~spLcious) (l~aSt.nacive) 0 Zn~eeu.re) Q1 CL~ree-'~ (Conc~ol:Le~L) (':e~e) Score k gomon 18.~9 23.1& 24.28 17.30 28.5O 25.&3 17.83 24.78 16.70 l&.~6 22.15 2~.Z7 21.93 20.$3 19.91 23.~3 20.13 17.61 23.54 22.78 22.2I 26.78 * D~sc:~pC£on applies to ~ve pole o£ ~8e~or: £or.a £ulle~ dese.r~pCion o~ tJ~tse £~r~s see r~e~n~t (6) BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION m ¢..j"l O m m

r',o BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION

-8- Zn t~sc belu~£our ~s Lu~luencod by personAl£ty one ~ld expect cha~ the d~£erences noted by C~cteiI vould ~fecc varyLug aspects of behmv£our a~d Chece £s evidence tbac Ch~s is indeed £hm case. An example t~ken from studies •C Group K. & D. Caners £11ustr•~ss rJ~J dffftre~ce. 348 employees of B.A.T •t SouchsmpCon took p~rt Ms psychomotor cost, the Gibson SpLral Kase. The p~c£ormmnce of vomau (~roup average) 1ms Lnfer£or co chac of men, s~d ch~s £s almost co~Calnly the result of pe~moual£cy d£f£erenees b•Ctmen the sexes (7). 2.2 .,s~o. ~ nehsviour Kevle~s of Ohm. Z£cer•curo suKKesc Chat ~le chars are more light 8 and hsavy smokLcs mnoug man, w0mm tend co be class£££sd as amdi~ smokers (8). There have also been reporcs ~hac ~mian uho becmu heavy smokers yore somevhac unusual: they ~e "adveBCurc~s types v£ch m qumsc £oc pov~c and social racoKn~C£on" (9). &~oCh~c repocc cla£mad Co h~ve made the uamcpe~ced d£scovery of an increased frequency of mau~oCic C~a~Cs in mn smokers, ~rlch the su4~ssc£on Chat man smoke as • t~ib•l cusco~ ~eu ~ smoke •s • symptom of ~,,se~uricy (~0). This may be so buc £c £s ~orch poLnct~j out thaC ~om~n in 8,-~e=•1 m~e mo~e neuroc£c c~m men (6). Turning from t~tse psycholog£cal consLder•C~on8 co cba more specLf£c • cu of ss~k~8 motivation, • numbe~ o~ quuc~£ros have bee= devised in ~eee~c 7~s~s to measure vs~i~s aspects of msokLu~ mo~£vsCLo~, ~.e. Chose of Tomki~s (11), ~..~mm~ll (12, 13), ibsmm~11 (14) m~ Em~ (15). Usz,f~o~Cus~a.Cely some of Chase quuC~es brave c~L~ be m~pl4e~ to male smk~rs, but ~usse11, ~bosa quasCiouomkt is basic~lly • rmh o£ question8 £ram ~srLier questionnaires, kss rmporced d~£ecencms in BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION M

• ...°. . ..-.-_" . • • - ° ..al~ BAT Co LTD - MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION