493 



ria- 



C«n>ril Product Of 



A vtry l4^t* BAjorlcy of Ch« Cttt elfartce«« th«C w«r« tuDdtd out 

 var* 



A vary t«r^ aajorKj ec cd« caac cigaraccaa caac vara naoaaa ouc 

 •aoktd. Jot AMh produce Cria4 ovar half cba raapoodcaca raporc«4 

 thac chaj had ^\td fll cba clgarattas eheaaalvat aa4 cba reaaiodar 

 had aaoked a raatob^le at^bar. Xa total oaly 2Z of cha teat cl|arattaj 



reoaioed uasaokad, and^-ti)i( figura scarcely varied becweeo che 4 product!. 



.\ 

 Although aott respoo^«ttcs raported that they taoked the test 



cigarettes to a aonul butt leQJgth, a aloority left a longer butt thaa 



vhen seeking their regular brand. 'This mioority was greatest for 



cigarette A (2SZ), least for B (20Z). 'Other apacific changes in their 



aor«al-v$aoking behaviour were each mentioned by leas than SZ of respoodeots; 



S2X repcrjbid no change apart froa the iacreas«Jl|i bate length already 



aeat toned. . ^y ^>- 



Test Cigaretcys - Likes and Dislikes C^ '- 



^ 



'O. 



'Aj. 



Sponcaneoua lik«^ and dislikes of the four cigareccn' are tabulated 

 */ « 



ia Table 3 (oaittiag a ti^ cooaaents that were only aentioned by a very 



/^ 



small percentage of r««pendenj) . Cigarette A, with the lowest aicotiaa 

 delivery, was cha lease llkad jucjging froa the percentage of respondents 

 recording "nothing particularly like4*Laod "generally disliked/poor taste"; 

 it was the aost criticised aainly oa the founds that it was too aild, 

 too loosely packed, had a poor taste aad was^oot satisfying ("did not 

 feel you'd had a saoke"). The coanents laply tt(((t cigarette A was 



loosely packed compared with B, C and D and CbAC it burned aore quickly, 



. . . ' / 08 



though these criticisas cannot be substantvated by physical aeasureaentt C 



^- i 



Cigarettes C and D were clearly seen as stronger and aore sa4fi5fying *^ 



' Z ® 



than A and B which is in line with the nicotine deliveries; spontaneous ^ 



o» 

 >4 



