Tobacco Documents Online

• ,For Reference NOt to be taken from this room

.[ Accession No. 73-044 Issued To. , PHILIP MORRIS U,S,A, RESEARCH CENTER CHARGE NO. & TITLE: 1600 - Smoker Psychology TYPE REPORTI C)ANNUAL DATE: March, 1973 REPORT TITLE: 0SEMIANNUAL OCOMPLETION ~)SPECIAL PER IOD COVERED .' ,..~ - .~.., SMOKING BEHAVIOR: ;, REAL WORLD OBSERVATIONS .. ~W, Dunn ~T Schor~ APPROVED BY ~ P. A. Eichorn DISTRIBUTION: ~R. Seligman '~ . ~H. Wakeh ~,.R. Graham^~,c~7~xZ~., ~H Spielberg am~,~ R. F agan~ ~ '~D. Clark ~F. Resnik~ '~L. Meyer~ ~?F. Ryan ~R. Thomson ~W. Claflin ,~L. Watts ~ T. Osdene 'YM. Johnston ~ '~J Tindall~ KEYWORDS : Tar Intake Quota, Nicotine Intake Quota, SEX, I, Changes in Co,nsum,p~ion

In 1968 a group of 2,509 filter smokers across the nation volunteered to save their cigarette butts, over a seven-day period in connection With a Study of cigarette smoking behavior (Dunn, 1968) It was found that foreknowledge of the smoker's characteristics and of hi~':c~osen ciqaret~e_ will provide a fair prediction of his smoking behavior. The study also documented ~,~ ~.~ -nd --- the magnitude of the variability In smoking ~ehavior a con- f firmed the suspicion that the smoker's own statement o how ~..c~.L..~,-.,', ." , . . . many cigarettes he smoked daily was at best a gross estimate of actual intake. ;:~2~,../~:~,~..: The present investigation wa~ designed to determine whether • . these same smokers original data were could be related to characteristics of the smokers and/or to ' changes in the cigarettes ~hey smoked. had'~,h.~;~ged their smoking behavior since the ~: coll;'~Ct~d;';~nd"if so, whether these changes

Procedure " - 2 - METHODS An a~tempt was made to contact all 2,509 participants in the original study by mail and by telephone (see Appendix A) Those smokers who were eligible, that is, those whom we could still co~t~ac~, who still smoked, and who smoked cigarettes which .we were able to analyze, we asked to participate in the current investigation. .Of 1,355 smokers who were eligible, a total of ~CC~. 1,235 agreed to participate. The smoker who agreed to participate was required to save his cigarettebu~tts for a period of 7 days (see Appendix B.) ' ~°~: " ~or this purp,o,,se, he was provided with aluminum foil pouches .... " • ~,,;~v;~ •-Each dayhe was to put his butts i:n a different pouch and ..... ..... record on~ the pouch label the estimated ~umb,er of inadvertan~ly omi~t~ed butts. At the end of 7 days he was instructed t~ pu~ all 7 po:uche@ in a. box wh,ich we had pro:vided and send them~ to ~ US " - " .... Thee day before the smoker was scheduled ~o commence salving his bu~ts,he was telephoned to insure that all ~he materials which we had sent him had arrived and also: to make sure he knew " wha:t h,e was supposed to do (App:enddx C). So as not to b,e oveR- whelme.d by incoming data, we had h,alf of the smokers commence the test o.n Septem~ber 27, 1972, and the other hallf o,ne week I a~er, Befo.re the testing: began, we ran~ smo.kin,g machine tests on thee vario.us cigarettes which o.ur partiicip,ants wo,uldi be smoki~ng. ~or e.ach~ cigarette, a determination was made. as to the amount

of residual nicotin,e which remained in the cigarette filter in relationship to the amount of tar which passed through the fi I ter. When the cigarette butts arrived from the study partici- pan,ts, we simply analyzed for the to~al amoun,t of residual nicotine in the filters. Since we already had determined the relationship between; nicotine residual and' tar passing through the filter, w.e then calculated how much tar per day th,e smokers had actually taken into their mouths ~: This measure we call ta intake. (See Appendix D for more complete analytic procedures At the same time, we recorded the num,ber of cig.arettes smoked, and amo___~un_t of rod _consumed. " :~ ..' . ." • ....... . ..... A'gter the smokers -cigarette butts were received, we sent him a finall questionn,aire (Appendix E). Upon receipt of the fin~al question,naire, the partic:ilpants were sent a check for $7 along with a,letter o.f thanks (Appendix H). Of the 1,235 smokers who agreed to participate, a total: of 1,136 completed th,e test and w'ere paid. "i " . RESULTS The Tar Intake l~nde.x I, SEX.-I and SEX-Ill were pmemiised on the validity and reliabillity of the tar in,take in,dex. The index was obtained By mea:n~s of a formula in which the nico.tine residiual on the plug w.as ~he singl!e variable., miilven thee brand smo,ked. The fixed value in the formula for each brand: wa:s deteRmiined by laboratory smoking o,f the brands which were being smoked by the SEX-I and SEX III sub,iects, l~he determin,atio.n o,f the

---

E:: 0 ~9~L'O00t

Change in Tar Delivery !

Inspection of Table 2 reveals the, smokers in the do,wn tar group have increased their cigarette consumption, rate (number smoked per, day) while those in the up tar group have decreased their consumption rate; thee former group increased by .77 cigarettes per day whil!e the latter group diecreased by .34 per day. ~ . , ...... . The significant tar x n:iicotine interactiion for change in, rodl consumed makes any dliscussion of the main effects of tar largest increase ,~i,.:;::,~;.~:,.~,~.~i~,.~L,~.,-.- ~-~-~ i Predli~ctin~ Changes in S.mokin~ Behavior Mu;l~tip:l~e regression analyses were empl, oyed to. see how well changes in s~okin~g behavior could be predicted from various independent variables, in this manner, we tried to predict changes in l) number smoked, and 2) rod consu'm~ed. These analyses are summarized in Tabl~e 4. on nicotine inconsequential. The interaction, itself is con- ~ .... sequential how:ever. Strangely enough, those in the up nicotine/ up tar group showed ~he largest increase in the amount of rod; consumed white the down~ nicotine/down, tar group ~h~.wed~ the next

ooooo~o~oo~L~ • ;