Product Design
Development Smoke Studies - 4009 Special Observation of Human Smoking Patterns
Abstract
Report on seven-month brand switching study to determine if changes recorded in smokers' profiles upon changing brands are permanent; to collect data on changes in response to physical properties of cigarette; to correlate data with smokers' subjective response (no correlation found); and to determine if cigarette delivery is a factor in number of cigarettes smoked. Findings: 1) Smokers in general are capable of taking very large puff volumes. Puffs of 60 cc are common, and one smoker exceeded 130 cc. 2) Smokers can vary their puffs over a wide range. 75-86% increase from low to high are not unusual. 3) Some smokers are very consistent in their average puff volume on a given brand while others show continued variation. 4) Trend to larger puff volumes on Merit Ultra Lights. Concludes that smokers have different smoking averages, but similarities are noted within a given brand or brands with similar properties; and that smokers have a great capacity to vary puff volume profile.
User-Contributed Notes
Fields
- Rank
- 1
- Author
- Gauvin, P.
- Goodman, B.
- Kelley, M.F. (PM Researcher)Research Professional
- Recipient
- Mulherin, B.
- Osdene, T.S.
- Ryan, F.
- Spielberg, H.
- Stimler, J.
- Thomson, R.
- Tindall, J.
- Wakeham, H.
- Wickham, E.
- Claflin, W.
- Daylor, F.
- Dunn, W.L.
- Dwyer, W.
- Ennis, D.
- Fagan. R
- Farone, W.
- Gunst, K.
- *Kassman, A (use Kassman, Allen, Ph.D.)1997
- Meyer, L.
- Hypothesis
- CompensationIncorporating knowledge of compensation and effects of human smoking behavior into cigarette design.
- Design changes over timeChanges in cigarette design over the past half century.
- Inhalation ProfileAre cigarettes designed to cater to individual inhalation profiles?
- Low-yield cigarettesModification of low yield products to assure that adequate levels of nicotine delivery are maintained, and effects of yield changes on toxicity and dependence.
- Measuring human smoking behaviorMeasuring the effects of changes in human smoking behavior on intake of nicotine and smoke constituents.
- Smoking psychology and behavior
- Elasticity and Product Control
- Keyword
- Puff volume (Puff amount)
- Cost savings (Cost reduction)
- Smoker behavior (Human smoking behavior)Puff parameters, daily intake, etc.
- Inhalation (Smoke inhalation)
- Design Component
- Pressure drop (PD, Resistance to draw (RTD), Flow rate or Draft)
- Technology/Method
- Smoker profile recorder
- Human smoker simulator
- Subject
- Pressure Drop (Design)
- Smoke Delivery/Transport (Measures)
- Compensation (Measures)
- Puff Parameters (Measures)
- Test/Smoking Behavior (Testing)
- Test/Consumer Preference (Testing)
- Low Yield Cigarettes (Products)
- Tar (Measures)
- Smoke Nicotine (Measures)
- Smoke Delivery/Transport (Measures)
- Brand
- Cambridge (PM)
- Marlboro (PM)
- Merit (PM)
- Philip Morris
- Virginia Slims (PM)
Document Images
THIS REPDitT IS CONFIDENTIAL TO THE BUSINESS OF THE
COIPANYs IT SHOULD BE CAREFSit.f-M7tN0LED0 IS NOT
TRANS FFRABLE TO 11NOT1iFR I ND i r I DUAL, ADO IS NOT TO
BE PHOTOCOPIED.
It Its rsport has s.rv.d Its parpose and Is no
longer n..ded, pl.a" rrturn it tmMdlat.ly to
the CMtral Ftle at tAM R.searcA Canter for
record kNping purpos.s and d.struetioa.
Accession Number: 84-020
Copy Number: 4-n
Issued To: :;,f
PHILIP MORRIS U.S.A.
RESEARCH
CENTER 1~~ -,
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA ~ rr-. n
~02
Development Smoke Studies - 4009
TYPE REPORT: Q ANNUAL 0 SEMIANNUAL 0 COMPLETION ~ SPECIAL
DATE: January 27 ; 1984 PERIOD COVERED:
REPORT TITLE: Observations of Human Smoking Patterns
Matt Kelley
Ba:rbro J~oodm
APPROVED BY Y~-<-~~X- ffi .
Paul Gauvin
DISTRIBUTION:
Dr. H. Wakeham Dr.
Dr. R. Fagan Dr.
Dr. W. Dunn, Jr. Mr.
Dr. T. Osdene Mr.
Dr. W. Farone Mr.
Mr. L. Meyer Mr.
Mr. ~RES sMr
Dr. PPJrTF
Mr. 3
nkryM~
E~
Mr. F~~~~OV~ L BY:
`~'
W. Dwyer
D. Ennis
H. Spielberg
E. Wickham
J. Stimler
J. Tindall
R an
ISiBUTJON
VANAGER OF CIGARcTfE DEVELOPMEIVT
.a
KEYWORDS: Smoker Profile Recorder, Human Smoker Simulator,
Smoking Profile and Smoker Parameters, Tar, Nicotine Delivery,
Puff Volume, Duration, Flow Rate, Cigarette Consumption
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVES
STUDY PROCEDURE
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
A. Smoker Parameter Changes
Graph la, Puff by Puff Volumes
Graph lb,
Graph 2,
Table 1, Physical and Analytical Data
Graph 3, Individual Average Puff Volumes
B. Quantity of Cigarettes Smoked
Graph 4, Average Number of Cigarettes Per Day
C. Deliveries to the Smoker
Graph 5, Average Puff Volumes
Graph 6, Average Number of Puffs per Cigarette
Graph 7, Total Volume Per Cigarette
Graph 8, TPM Deliveries Per Cigarette
Graph 9, Nicotine Deliveries Per Cigarette
Graph 10, TPM Deliveries Per Day
Graph 11, Nicotine Deliveries Per Day
Subjective Evaluations
Graph 12, Subjective Ratings, 10 Panelists
5
5
8
8
8
9
10
11
13
14
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
, Virginia Slims Lts:~:Smoker' 28
, Cambridge 100 Smoker 29
1003638934 .
ABSTRACT
Twelve smokers were tested during a seven-month brand switching
study. Recorded data was taken' every two weeks from the smokers
smoking their regular brand for two months, followed by three months of
smoking Merit Ultra 'Lights, and then switching back to their regular
brand for the final two months. Four objectives were outlined for this
study; 1. Determine if changes recorded in smokers' profiles upon
changing brands are permanent, 2. To collect additional data on smoker
profile changes in response to cigarette physical properties and
deliveries, 3. To collect subjective data and examine for correlation
with smoker response changes, 4. Determine if cigarette delivery is a
properties. Results in this study indicate that cigarette length is
the dominant effect on the number of cigarettes smoked. If the lengths
are different, more of the shorter cigarettes will be smoked regardless
of delivery. The perception of the panelist's own brand could be
changed by having the panelists substitute the Merit Ultra Lights
cigarette for their own brand over an extended period of time. All of
the data collected in this study has been stored in the computer for
use in the development of the Simulator Modeling Program.
subsequent deliveries of cigarettes are affected significantly by
smoker profile changes in response to the cigarette's physical
The recorded smoker data shows that individual smokers have very
different smoking profiles. Each person shows a more constant smoking
profile while smoking a given brand or a brand with similar properties
.than they do when smoking brands with different properties. The
factor in the number of cigarettes smoked.
Through a long series of smoker-studies conducted in the Smoker
Simulator Program, smokers have consistently shown differences in their
smoker profile when smoking cigarettes having differen-t physical
properties. The fact that smokers smoke different cigarettes with
different profiles is accepted by most people familiar with smoker
responses; however, the cigarette properties, physical or analytical,
which prompt the changes in profile are topics of discussion. Whether
or not the change is permanent while smoking that particular brand, can
., ~
also be argued. The purpose of this study was to provide data to
answer these questions. The type of study required, i.e. over a long
time period, also afforded an opportunity to obtain accurate
-.~ .
information on deliveries to smokers by different brands, number of
cigarettes smoked of a particular brand, and subjective evaluations.
what changes are made by switching, then to determine
the changes recorded in smokers' profiles upon changing brands are
permanent or if the smokers shift back to a base smoker profile.
2. To collect additional data on smoker parameter change in response
to physical properties and delivery differences in cigarette brands.
3. To collect subjective data and examine any correlation with smoker
4)
10
1^ °
61
rT-oL,-- o
response changes.
To determine if cigarette delivery is a factor in the number
3
This'study was planned to coincide with the introduction of a new
.. _.. ; '. .
°PAi,cigarette, Merit Ultra Lights. It was hypothesised that a new brand
. ~
'
~ _ ..
.. . i .. .. ....,l~. "...
might induce smokers with firmly established regular brands._to switch
. . .' .... .. ~' .. .-.... ..; ... .. . ,....~' i " .. . ' .} - f .».~. _
or sample with serious consideration to switching. With that timing we
could possibly obtain a larger group to participate in our test.
.~_
Ballots were delivered at 'R & D with the daily cigarettes for an
indication of initial -interest. in participation in the study.
Approximately thirty people returned the questionnaire, and sample
packs were given to those people. 'After smoking the samples and after
a personal interview in which the test procedures were reviewed, twelve
smokers remained interested in taking part in the long-term switching
Before initiating the collection of study data, each smoker was
trained on the use of the Smoker Profile Recorder and reviewed on the
test procedures. Smoker involvement in the study included four duties:
smoking on the recorder, saving butts from the recorded smokings,
completing subjective ballots, and assisting in collecting accurate
data on the number of cigarettes smoked during each of the three test
periods. During the first test period, data was obtained on the
smokers' profiles on their regular brands. This consisted of four test
smokings on the recorder (3 cigarettes per test day) at regular
intervals (approximately 2 wks.) over a two month period. Each smoker
was then switched to Merit Ultra Lights 85 regular or menthol for-three
months for the second test phase.
4
Six,sets of three test smokings were recorded on the Merit Ultra Lights
starting on the switching day and then at two-week intervals. For the
third phase smokers were switched back to their regular brand for two
months with recorded testing on the switching day and at two week
intervals thereafter for a total of four testings.
.: A .. .~ r a.. . . f'~F.'. .. .,
=~ Throughout the seven months smokers were supplied with daily
cigarettes of the brand under testing, so that only those cigarettes
being tested were smoked.,-A tally was. maintained on the number of
cigarettes furnished and the approximate number each smoker indicated
that they gave to others. This information provided a reasonable count
on the number of cigarettes per day of each brand smoked.._
The sex of the twelve smokers and
1. Male Cambridge 100 Regular
2. Female . Cambridge 100 Regular
3. Female Merit .85 Regular
4.
5.
Male .~,Merit 85
Female Merit 85
6. Male
7. Male
8.
9.
Female
Female
10. Female
11. Female
:Merit 85
Merit
100
Merit 100
Merit 100
Merit 100
Virginia
Regular
Menthol
Menthol
Regular
Regular
Regular
Menthol
Slims Lights
12. Male Marlboro 85 Regular
their regular brands were:
Menthol
N
0
CJ
~
Ca
CO
.W
This numerical order of the smokers will be the same throughout the CO
report.
5
IV. DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
-A. SMOKER'PARAMETER CHANGES
, , ` a~ ~ }.
A smoker's profile is defined as the volume, duration, maximum and
average flow rate of each puff, the interval between puffs, and the
~,
number of puffs taken on the cigarette. The puff by puff volumes from
an individual cigarette, as shown in graphs la and 1b, present
.cigarettes provides useable numerical and graphical data (Graph 2).
:.difficult sets of data on which to make comparisons; ,,:however, using
.,.the weighted statistical average from the profiles of several
:, ... . -
most affect how smokers smoke a cigarette. Note that the physical and
.~ _; ,:.. - . _ . .
analytical properties of the Merit Ultra Lights and the Cambridge 100
The data in table 1 show the specific cigarette properties that
:Ultra Lights.
. are very similar with the exception of RTD. The properties of the four
., .. _
other regular brand cigarettes differ extensively from those of Merit
As indicated in the procedure section, each smoker smoked three
:.cigarettes on each recording day. A total of four recording tests were
.made in Phase 1 on the original regular brand, six recordings in Phase
-2 on Merit Ultra Lights, and four recordings in Phase 3 on the final
,-reguLar brand.
6
Changes in some of the parameters that comprise a profile are
easier to detect than others. Puff volume, which reflects changes in
duration and maximum flow rate, was used in graph 3 to show changes as
a result of switching to a different cigarette. Each point represents
the average puff volume taken on a recording day. The average puff
. .... ... .~ . . _ _ . ., . .. . _ , ~ . ., .. _
volume for each phase is also given, as indicated by the symbol X.
These averages for the three phases were used to calculate the percent
..;,. ~. . 7
change in volume when switching from one brand to another.
~ ~a,- ... , .. ..'~`~~ . ..a...._. ., ~.,., . -. . ~. . .!. ~. .~f.~ .. ~.._. .. r.;~ : _ . _ . .
With reference to graph 3, smokers 1 and 2 were switched from
-Cambridge 100 to Merit Ultra Lights 85 and back to Cambridge. These
cigarettes differed primarily in RTD. With that being the primary
physical difference, these smokers made essentially no change in the
.._, ..._~_~ ..iF,:i' .. _ . .~._ .
average puff volume taken on the two different brands. Smokers 3-12,
,who were Merit, Virginia Slims, and Marlboro smokers, experienced
significant changes in product properties when switching cigarette
..... .J.V-
brands. All tenshowed significant increases in their puff volumes on
D~7 the Merit Ultra Lights compared to the regular brand. Some, but not
all, of the increase was due to the low RTD and high dilution of the
-Merit Ultra Lights. Increases of 15% to 30% were commorn, and one
smoker --recorded a 48% increase. These volume increases are
~Istatistically significant. On switching back to the regular brand from
1Merit Ultra Lights, some smokers did not revert completely to their
original volume level; however, the volumes on the original and final
smoking of their regular brands were not statistically different.
7
An examination of the individual's data in graph 3 reveals some
interesting information about smokers:
1. Smokers on this panel and smokers in general are capable of taking
very large puff volumes.
puff profiles between replications are no smaller when the panelists
smoke test cigarettes exclusively than they have been in previous tests
where panelists smoke their regular brand between recordings.
4. The trend to larger puff volumes on the Merit Ultra Lights is
given brand while others show continued variation. The differences in
Puffs of 60cc are common, and one smoker
2. Smokers can vary their puffs over a wide range. ' 75-96% increase
from low to high are not unusual; (Smokers 4,5,7, and 10).
w .. .... .. ~_....._ .. ....._ . . ... . .
3. Some smokers are very consistent in their average puff volume on a
exceeded 130cc.
evident even on the smokers' recording large variations in puff
volumes.
CONCLUSIONS
od3~-: ~~
Smokers do have different smoking averages. Similarities are noted in
smokers' average puff volumes while smoking a given brand or a brand
with similar properties. Smokers have a great capacity to vary their
puff volume profile even within the narrow range of properties of
commercial cigarettes. The first three recordings on a new brand were
not significantly different from later recordings on that brand.
