Women's Collection from Marketing to Counter-Marketing
Human Smoking Behavior
Abstract
Catalogs internal industry studies, internal reports, draft and approved publications, memoranda, etc. from 1956-1982 related to "Human Smoking Behavior" in table form, sorted by date and including columns for "Document ID" (unique industry numerical identifiers); "Date; 'C' [significance of abbreviation is unknown]; Areas ("Compensation; Electrophysiological, Motivation/Quitting; General; Benefits/Smoker psychology; [and] Simulation"); [and] Conclusion/Comments". Includes cross-references to other related industry documents (see "Document Quotes" field for selected excerpts from this extensive "Hot Document").
User-Contributed Notes
- p. 17
Fields
- Quotes
Plans and objectives (1003293191, 10032933195): "To determine if quitting success is a function of delivery levels of cigarettes smoked prior to quitting." "Suggests that reducing delivery levels may provide a stepping stone to quitting, thus posing a risk to the industry."
Johnston memo to Daniel, "The relationship between average daily cigarette consumption and tar, nicotine and puff count (1003285395, 10032800428)": "The best predictor of consumption is race, but when data are correlated for race and sex, nicotine shows high correlation with average daily consumption." "Nicotine delivery is the strongest of the three variables in predicting cigarette consumption."
Dunn memo, "Plans and Objectives - 1981" (1003293130, 1003293137): "Smokers modify smoking behavior to maintain certain levels of nicotine in the blood. Changes in level may be more important than absolute levels - that the imput of nicotine form [sic] a cigarette creates a 'spike' which is the summation of the discrete puff-induced spikes."
Gullotta and Schultz, "Electrophysiological Studies - 1982 Annual Report" (1003179058, 1003179107): "Smokers can get CNS [Central nervous system] effects with ultra-low delivery cigarettes comparable to those obtained with high delivery cigarettes; "the data indicate the possibility that smokers might modify their smoking behavior in order to obtain some optimal CNS levels of nicotine."
Dunn review of St. Martin's Conference, "Motives and Inventives [sic] of Cigarette Smoking" (1003291964, 1003291981): "Suggests the real product being sold is nicotine, and the cigarette is but a 'dispenser for a dose unit of nicotine.'"
Charles memo to Osdene, "Why People Smoke" (1003155178): "DeNoble's work has shown that no withdrawal syndrome occurs following termination of chronic nicotine administration; PM [Philip Morris] cannot defend against tolerance, since 'tolerance to nicotine is a well-established fact.'"
Dunn Monthly Report (1003288354, 1003288356): "Have begun to identify hyperkinetic children who may 'eventually become cigarette smokers in their teenage years as they discover the advantage of self-stimulation via nicotine."
"It would be good to show that smoking is an advantage to at least one subgroup of the population. Needless to say, we will not propose giving cigarettes to children."
Dunn draft of Smoker Psychology Program review (1000046538, 1000046546): "Study the psychology of the smoker in search of information that can increase corporate profits."
"We provide a product that is the essential commodity in a frequently recurring habitual act." "Without the chemical compound, the cigarette market would collapse, P.M. [Philip Morris] would collapse, and we'd all lose our jobs and our consulting fees." "Is nicotine component X"...If so: What is the lower delivery limit below which the smoking act is not reinforced? Is the site of reinforcement in the CNS [Central nervous system]?" "Is the industry placing itself at risk by lowering delivery levels?" "Is cigarette smoke the vehicle of a dependency-producing drug? What are the fundamental differences between the habit of tobacco smoking and heroin injection?"
- Rank
- 1
- Type
- Report
- Company
- Philip Morris
- Named Person
- Charles
- Clafllin
- Cullotta
- Daniel
- Dunn, William L., Jr. (PM Smoker Psychology Principal Scientist 1970s-80s)
Principal scientist at PM during the 1970s and 1980s, nicknamed the "Nicotine Kid." Supervised Victor DeNoble, Paul Mele, Carolyn Levy and others. Led "smoker psychology" programs for PM.- Dunn, William L., Jr. (PM Smoker Psychology Principal Scientist 1970s-80s)
Principal scientist at PM during the 1970s and 1980s, nicknamed the "Nicotine Kid." Supervised Victor DeNoble, Paul Mele, Carolyn Levy and others. Led "smoker psychology" programs for PM.- Eichorn
- Emley
- FER
- Garwin
- Goldsmith
- Goodman
- Gullotta
- Hancock
- Harrow
- *Hauserman, Max (use Hausermann, Max) (PM Chemist)
Above Osdene and Farone. Hausermann (chemist) reported to senior VP Operations. Was VP Fabrique Tobac Reunine R&D. Fully knowledgable re INBIFO and Osdene programs.- Hayes
- HRRW
- Hutchinson
- Johnston
- Jones
- Kelley
- Keritsis
- Koslowski
- Levy
- Lieser
- Long
- Martin
- Matarazzo
- Meyer
- Miller
- Osmalov
- Owens
- RBS
- Ryan
- Schori
- Schultz
- Smith, P.
- TSO
- Udow
- Waldbillig
- WLD
- Clafllin
- Named Organization
- Board of Directors
- Fabriques de Tabac Reunies S.A.
- Federal Trade Commission
- Federal Trade Commission (Enforcement agency for laws against deceptive advertising)
Enforces laws against false and deceptive advertising, including ads for tobacco products. Ensures proper display of health warnings in ads and on tobacco products;collects and reports to Congress information concerning cigarette and smokeless tobacco advertising, sales expenditures, and the tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide content of cigarettes.- FTR, Fabriques de Tabac Reunies, (PM R&D facility in Neuchatel, Switzerland)
Fabriques de Tabac Reunies, Philip Morris Research and Development facility in Nuechatel, Switzerland. Many of the documents generated by this facility are in German or French language.- Journal of Motor Behavior
- Philip Morris Research and Development Department
- Special Smoking Panel
- Task Group Surrogate
- Virginia Journal of Science
- Behavioral Research Laboratory
- Fabriques de Tabac Reunies S.A.
- Operation/Project
- Project 1600 (The Behavioral Research Program)
- Project 2600
- Project Grow
grooved acetate filter - Project 2600
- Region
- Switzerland
- United States
- Brand
- Commander
- Marlboro (PM)
- Merit (PM)
- Pall Mall (ATC)
- Parliament (PM)
- Marlboro (PM)
- Keyword
- Total Particulate Matter (TPM)
- American Chemical Society Symposium
- BIRD-I
- Cambridge Pad
- American Chemical Society Symposium
Document Images
DOCUMENT ID DATE "C" AREAS
1003293267/3273 740115
1003293476/3493 740301
1003294977/4982 740724
1000356550/6576 740800
C
C
DESCRIPTION
WLD memo to TSO, "1974 Plans and Objectives."
[Dup. 1003293183/3185]
Smoking and Health Presentation to N.Y.
Personnel, "Some Unexpected Observations on
Tar and Nicotine and Smoke Behavior."
WLD memo, ,'Experimental Design for the First
Study of Patterns of Smoke Inhalation
(designated Inhalation I)."
Schori Special Report, "Does the Smoker
Compensate for Changes in Delivery in Order
to Regulate Intake (TNT-4)."
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
H_~pothesis: i) puffing patterns vary as a
function of changes in delivery; 2) dose
control continues even after the puff of
smoke is drawn into the mouth.
Smoker responses to cigarettes with different
filter systems were different in terms of
flow, volume, count. Subjects smoking
various brands of cigarettes with a puff
recorder showed that smoke volume and tar
intake differed from FTC values. "Smokers
are taking in more than FTC ratings."
"The FTC standardized test should be
retained: (i) it gives low numbers; (2) it
permits comparisons between brands."
"People smoke to get nicotine; more nicotine
will compensate for less tar."
Premise: ". . that the smoking habit is
~ned by t~e reinforcing effects of the
pharmacologically active components of smoke.
A corollary to this premise is that the
smoker will regulate his smoke intake so as
to achieve his habitual quota of the
pharmacological action."
No evidence of regulatory behavior i.e.,
smokers failed to compensate for decreasing
availability of T + N by changing the number
of cisg@_@_moked or the amount of rod consumed.
States that the intake constancy hypothesis
must be viewed with skepticism.. Intake quota
mechanism is not operative for short-term
changes in cigarette delivery levels.
10872403
Areas~ C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
9089Z~O0sE
DOCUMENT ID
1003288114/8116
1003294036/4037
1003288110/8113
DATE "C" AREAS
740814 C
E
74090o/ C
741200
740916 C
P
1000258064
741126 C C
DESCRIPTION
WLD Monthly Report.
Quarterly Report.
WLD Quarterly Report.
HRRW letter to Hausermann.
[Dup. I001812881]~
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
Identifying the agent responsible for smoke
impact will enable manipulation of impact and
aid in development of full-flavored low-
delivery cigarette.
Smoke inhalation does not appear to influence
subject's control of alpha activity.
"The pharmacological effects of nicotine, or
better of smoke, together with the psycho-
physiological state of the smoker, form a
short-term regulated system in which the
quantity of nicotine involved, is settled by
the smoker at each puff, more or less
independently of the available quantity, as
expressed by the standard yield."
Smokers deprived performed better than
smokers or non-smokers. Smokers exhibited
fewer mood changes.
"No change was observed in rod honsumed or
number of cigarettes smoked as tar delivery
varied. Unless some other mechanism for
regulating intake can be uncovered, the
intake consistency hypothesis must be viewed
with skepticism."
Puff Six (Rvan). "Obviously a compensation
~s takinq place."
"It is true that a particular individual
appears to have some kind of a consistent
puff profile, but it is also true that
individuals change the duration and volume of
thier puffs when they make radical changes in
the type of cigarettes being smoked." PM is
not ready.to release these data.
10872403
Areas: C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
LO~gZIOOSZ
DOCUMENT ID
1003293177/3182
1003295335/5338
1003721133/1148
1000024914/4920
DATE
741127
"C" AREAS
750103 C
750205 C
750514 C C
C WLD memo to TSO,
E 1975."
P
DESCRIPTION
"Plans and Objectives for
Goodman memo to Meyer, "Marlboro-Marlboro
Lights Study."
Clafllin memo to RBS, "Effect of Flow Rate on
Smoke Component Deliveries."
WLD memo to RBS, "Observations on the
Relationship of Nicotine Change and Sales
Change in the Marlboro."
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
Study the effects of smoking on a subject's
ability to concentrate as measured by
maintenance of alpha brain wave dominance; 2)
to study "the influence of smoking upon
control of aggressivity."
Conduct studies to investigate the hypothesis
that smokers regulate the amount of nicotine
retained in the body and how they regulate
it.
As a group regular Marlboro smokers did not
significantly change smoking behavior when
switched to Marlboro Lights.
Major changes in delivery are not observed
for the range of flow rates at which most
people smoke. "A smoker's change in volume
or puff count has a more direct relationship
to his smoke intake."
Smokers are insensitive to major delivery
level changes (i.e., 24-18 mg). This appears
contrary to contention that seasoned smokers
smoke for nicotine. "Both the literature and
the internal P.M. R&D findings to date are
not fully supportive of the postulate.
Suggestive, yes, but there has been no study
which revealed the smoker to be titrating to
the degree necessary to maintain constancy in
his nicotine supply when he is faced with a
variation in delivery levels of the cigarette
smoked, or when he is preloaded or
predeprived." "what the smoker gets in the
way of smoke is independent of smoke
concentration levels as delivered within the
range of commercially available cigarettes."
Areas~
8099~ ~00Sg
C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology,
M = Motivation/Quitting,
S = Simulation
DOCUMENT ID
1003287978/7980
1003200909/0916
1000359382/9403
DATE "C"
750625 C
750717 C
751000 C C
AREAS
DESCRIPTION
WLD Quarterly Report.
HRRW Quarterly Progess Report.
WLD/Meyer Special Report, "Low Delivery
Cigarettes and Increased Nicotine/Tar Ratios,
a Replication."
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENT~
Effect of Smokinq on..Ri~k_Takinq.in a
simulated Auto Passinq Situation. Manuscript
approved for publication.
After deprivation smokers (i) increased their
no. of puffs by 37%; (2) increased no. of
cigs consumed by 28%. Lighter smokers showed
the greatest percent increase in no. of cigs
smoked and no. of puffs taken.
Smoke deprivation study completed during this
period suggests that smokers increase their
number of cigarettes smoked and number of
puffs per cigarette in the two hour period
following a two hour "no-smoklng" period, and
that light smokers (under 2 cigarettes per
hour) showed the greatest increase.
Provides evidence that optimum nicotine to
tar ratio for a i0 mg tar cigarette a higher
(.09) than that occurring in smoke from
natural state tobacco (.07). Supports
findings that increasing N/T ratios increases
subjective strength and acceptability of low
delivery cigarettes. Cautions that N/T ratio
should not be increased to extent that
acceptability is lost.
10872405
Areas: C = Compensation, E.= Electrophysiological,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology,
6089Z~00SZ
M = Motivation/Quitting,
S = Simulation
- 13 -
DOCUMENT ID
1003294212/4217
1003288087/8091
1003293172/3176
1003293191/3195
DATE "C" AREAS
751030 C C
751106 C C
751121 C C
760000
C
M
DESCRIPTION
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
Drafts of presentation to a Swiss group re
smoker regulation.
[Dup. 1003294218/4226; 1003294227/4233]
WLD Monthly Report.
WLD memo to TSO, "Plans and Objectives for
1976."
Plans and Objectives.
"Identify the behavioral options available to
the smoker for regulating rate of uptake
determine the degree to which he exercises
these options." "That smokers do alter
behavior in the direction of intake constancy
by a) varying number smoked b) varying
intake/cigarette." "Viewing the body of
information collectively, we're optimistic
that we can convincingly document the
position that the smoker gets what he wants,
such that the imposition of tar limits by FTC
fiat or by law will have little influence on
the smoker's uptake."
Objective: "to find evidence which supports
the notion that smokers regulate the amounts
of physioloqically active substances they
receive from ciqarettes by alterinq their
inhalation pattern."
Measure changes in smoke inhalation as tar
and nicotine deliveries vary. "To further
articulate the role of nicotine in the
reinforcement of smoking behavior." "We
assume that some smokers regulate the amounts
of physiologically active substances that
they obtain from smoking cigarettes." "We
expect to see changes in their smoking
behavior which will compensate for the
differing deliveries, resulting in a constant
intake of nicotine and tar."
"To determine if quitting success is a
function of delivery levels of cigarettes
smoked prior to quitting." Suggests that
reducing delivery levels may provide a
stepping stone to quitting, thus posing a
risk to the industry.
10872403
0~gz~00SZ
C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology,
M = Motivation/Quitting,
S = Simulation
DOCUMENT ID DATE
1003288079/8084 760210
1000362772/2795 760709
1000744611/4616
1003288042/8043
"C"
C
760916 C
760924 C
AREAS DESCRIPTION
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
C WLD Monthly Report.
People accepting a low tar cig with added N
are people who smoke, at least in part, for
N.
C Behavioral Research Annual Report, approved
by WLD.
[Dup. 1003293201/3205]
Ryan memo to Daniel, "Consumption Changes
Following Reduction in Delivery Changes."
Levy and Ryan memo to TSO re Smoker
Psychology Program.
Smokers did not change their puff volume or
inhalation volumes when smoking markedly
different cigarettes.
No significant differences in puff volumes or
inhalation volumes when subjects smoked
cigarettes with different T&N deliveries.
Regulators took more puffs on the low
delivery cigarette under non-deprived smoking
conditions. "All subjects tended to take
larger puffs on the low delivery cigarette."
Smokers either do not change number of
cigarettes consumed when delivery is lowered
or change by very trivial amounts. It
appears when a person switches from a full-
flavored to a low-delivery cigarette, he
reduces his T&N intake almost
proportionately.
"Because we are having trouble finding
regulators we are considering modifying our
theories." Habitual smokers may not show
compensation when nicotine is decreased.
10872403
Areas| C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
- 15 -
DOCUMENT ID DATE "C"
1003293209/3214 770000 C
1003295450/5451
1000369089/9121
1003295039/5043
10872403
770224 C
770613 C C
P
770913 C
AREAS
DESCRIPTION
Ryan Report, "5-year Plan Discussion."
Goodman memo to Garwin, "Effect of Filter and
Rod Length on Smoking Profiles."
Behavioral Research Annual Report.
Dunn presentation to Goldsmith,
"Acceptability of Varying Tar Deliveries."
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
Whv people smoke based on how people smoke.
Ryan assumes that smokers need to maintain a
certain level of nicotine in their system.
When nicotine falls below this level, the
smoker smokes a "need" cigarette. A
cigarette smoked when nicotine is above the
optimal level is a "habit" cigarette
associated with certain external cues. "Most
cigarettes are smoked 'in the same way'
regardless of delivery or other cues,
". . . however, "more puffs will be taken on
a need-cigarette than on a habit-cigarette
particularly when the need is high."
An overtipped cigarette is smoked with
slightly smaller puff volumes and fewer puffs
than a regular cigarette. Otherwise, length
of tipping paper or total length of the
cigarette do not change~smoking parameters~
Regulator Identification Program (Levy).
"regulators obtained more nicotine from the
high delivery cigarette when they were
deprived than when they were non-deprived.
Regulators and Non-regulators respond
differently to smoke deprivation."
Smokers, nonsmokers and smokers deprived
performed equally well under the no stress
conditions. Under stressful conditions,
nonsmokers worsened performance, deprived
smokers remained the same and smokers
improved performance.
Smoking can help people better handle
disruptive effects of stressful situations.
Proposes a study to monitor delivery level
preferences over the next six years ....
Also asks, "so how far down should we go?"
C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, s = simulation
DOCUMENT ID
1001521417/1418
1003293160/3165
1003293384
DATE "C" AREAS
771111 C C
771123 C C
780123 C C
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
Investigate whether people smokefor nicotine
or something else. "[M]any of his cigarettes
will be smoked out of habit . . . rather than
out of any nicotine need .... " Two-part
study planned-- (i) distinguish those smokes
who smoke many cigarettes from habit and few
from need, from their opposites; (2) switch
to groups from high (or low) nicotine to low
(or high) nicotine. Smokers who smoke mainly
from habit should show little compensation,
others who smoke from need should show
compensation.
"Plans and Objectives-1978." Plans: I) to repeat a modified SEX II
study.
2) to predict how delivery changes
modify
consumption. For people who smoke
primarily
for nicotine "we would expect changes
in
nicotine delivery to produce
compensatory
changes in in the number of
ciggrettes
consumed." Relatively few changes are
expected for smokers whose motives
are other
than nicotine. 3) to investigate
upper and
lower nicotine thresholds. Ryan will
develop
a theory that "smoking is a
multidetermined
act, which in the long time smoker is
based
on a nicotine need .... which
smoking has
become a almost unconditioned
response)."
Although switchers to low tar
cigarettes
probably smoke more cigarettes and
might take
longer, deeper and longer puffs,
their actual
tar intake is less because
compensation
cannot totally make up for the
delivery
difference.
DESCRIPTION
WLD Monthly Report.
[Dup. 1003287995/7996]
WLD memo to TSO,
WLD memo re whether switchers to low tar
cigarettes smoke more to compensate.
10872403
Areas~ C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
17 -
DOCUMENT ID DATE
100369449/9495 780630
1000370391/0403 780726
1003293151/3159 781206
"C"
C
C
C
P
DESCRIPTION
Behavior Research Annual Review - Part I.
Levy/Lieser Completion Report, "Regulator
Indentification Program."
Dunn memo, "Plans and Objectives-1979."
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
"subjects reduced the number of low nicotine
cigarettes they smoked per hour over the ten-
day period of the study/ A similar reduction
for the high nicotine cigarettes was not
observed." "[T]he intercigarette interval
was shorter for the low nicotine cigarettes
than for the high nicotine-cigarettes."
"It has been our contention for some time
that many people smoke for nicotine, and that
these people will alter their smoking
behavior in response to changes in nicotine
availability in an attempt to regulate their
nicotine intake." "these findinqs all
provide support for our contention that some
people smoke for nicotine and some do not."
"To understand the psychological reward the
smoker gets from smoking, to understand the
psychophysiology underlying this reward, and
to relate his reward to the constituents in
smoke." This knowledge will strengthen R&D
capability in developing new products.
"The low nicotine delivery will ensure that
total nicotine in the system remains at or
near the nicotine need threshold, thus
maximizing the proportion of the day's
cigarette consumption which is smoked out of
need and minimizing the nicotine augmentation
from those cigarettes which are smoked out of
habit." "our working hypothesis remains that
the smoker does alter inhalation in response
to cues of smoke composition. "
10872403
Areas~ C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
DOCUMENT ID
1003293314/3321
1003293218/3224
DATE "C" AREAS
781213 C
M
790200 C • C
DESCRIPTION
Gullotta, Levy and Ryan memo to WLD,
"Accomplishments, 1978."
WLD presentation program review.
CONCLUSIONS/COMMENTS
"We were unable to conclude that low-delivery
cigarettes wean smokers away from the
accustomed nicotine intakes thus making it
easier.to quit". Assume there is a
disproportionate number of low delivery
smokers who are health conscious which leads
to higher quit ratios.
"Beginning with the assumption that at least
some people have a developed need for
nicotine, we suggested a theoretical
explanation for their smoking frequency based
upon a homeostatic attempt to keep the amount
of nicotine in the system suprathreshold."
"The nicotine intake from the habit
cigarettes serves to postpone withdrawal
symptoms associated with need."
"Until recently we have entertained a
titration hypothesis - we have postulated
that the habituated smoker is seekig to
maintain some optional [optimal?] level of
nicotine in his bloodstream. As a corollary
we would expect to see the smoker attune
intake to blood level. Given a more diluted
smoke, he would smoke more, with more
cigarettes or bigger puffs, or deeper
inhalations."
Understand the psychological reward the
smoker gets from smoking; understand the
psychophysiology underlying this reward;
relate this reward to the constituents in
smoke.
10872403
Areas= C = Compensation, E = Electrophysiological, M = Motivation/Quitting,
G = General, P = Benefits/Smoker Psychology, S = Simulation
19 -
