489 



-a- 



cach p4tt«A coap«risoa, rctpoadcaei vert qu«sciooaed about the cvo 

 •aaplct ch«7 k«d (aoktd. Th^ queaciooiuire* uae4 la cheat iacervlcw* 

 arc reproduca/^^pcadix !▼. 



The aecoad. coQS\mu ccsc cook place la July 197S, approxiatfcely 

 a jear after che <srtc test. Tc cook che fora of a a tralghc forward 

 paired comparison betwcea Cht 2 products E and F. The nuaber of packa 

 which were {Ivea to a res^dadeac was deceralned froa his ooraal cigarette 

 / • consuaptioo, as follows: ','-. 



1-4 cigarettes per da^. I pack of each 

 "'^. 5-9 cigarettes per day, ^^acks of each 



^ 10-19 cigarettes per day, 3 pad(^ of each 



'/, 20> cigarettes per day, 4 packs of. iach 



Half the re'sgQndents sookcd E first, half siaoked~,<- firtC. Saokers of 

 king sis* elgaM«,tes were excluded froa the test in'~C>pdfr to avoid 

 having to prod«tce ^j^riaencal cigarettes in two differe^ sizes. 

 Atteapts were aad* to ci^cact all respondents, apart froa king size 

 saokers, who had takaa parfc'in che flrsc consumer test 12 aonths 

 previously. A total of 607 ref^ndcncs coapleted the second test 

 (E Afid f), che fall-ouc b«ia4 lar^ti^ accounted for by chose who ha4 



■<> 



given up sacking (<iOZ), those who had wv^d (27Z) and Chose who were 

 unwilling to take part (l*X). -' ^- 



The questionnaires used at the placeaent ^tycervicw and che recall 

 interview were almost identical to Chose shown in A^endix IV: quescions 



relating to distinctiveness of casce and firmness of fiVl were omicced, ^ 



^^ C 



as these seeaed to give no useful inforaatioa In the first- Cfst, and as r« 



^>. i 



additional question was included at the end of che recall incco^i^cw •' 



* OS 



