Table 2

Unadjusted and adjusted percentages, ORs and 95% CIs from logistic regression models predicting appeal-related outcomes*

VariableComparing phases—unadjusted modelsComparing phases—adjusted models†PP year 1 trend—adjusted models
Per centOR (95% CI)p ValuePer centOR (95% CI)p ValueFormORp Value
Dislikes pack‡ (n=6728)
 Pre-PP59.11.0058.61.00
 Transition65.01.28 (1.05 to 1.56)0.01365.11.32 (1.08 to 1.62)0.007
 PP year 184.93.90 (3.39 to 4.46)<0.00185.04.06 (3.52 to 4.69)<0.001Linear1.020.158
Lower pack appeal than a year ago‡ (n=6179)
 Pre-PP12.71.0012.31.00
 Transition26.02.40 (1.86 to 3.10)<0.00126.52.59 (1.99 to 3.37)<0.001
 PP year 155.88.63 (7.27 to 10.24)<0.00156.29.29 (7.79 to 11.09)<0.001Linear0.970.004
Lower quality than a year ago§ (n=6954)
 Pre-PP13.91.0014.01.00
 Transition17.21.29 (1.01 to 1.66)0.04517.21.28 (0.99 to 1.65)0.063
 PP year 126.72.26 (1.93 to 2.64)<0.00126.62.24 (1.91 to 2.64)<0.001Linear0.990.554
Lower satisfaction than a year ago§ (n=6954)
 Pre-PP12.21.0012.31.00
 Transition13.81.15 (0.87 to 1.51)0.31913.91.15 (0.87 to 1.51)0.334
 PP year 120.71.88 (1.59 to 2.22)<0.00120.61.85 (1.56 to 2.19)<0.001Linear0.990.690
Lower value than a year ago§ (n=6901)
 Pre-PP50.91.0050.41.00
 Transition50.71.02 (0.84 to 1.22)0.87051.61.05 (0.87 to 1.27)0.622
 PP year 156.71.27 (1.13 to 1.43)<0.00156.81.30 (1.15 to 1.46)<0.001Linear1.020.058
Believes brands do not differ in prestige‡ (n=6904)
 Pre-PP44.71.0045.11.00
 Transition42.10.90 (0.75 to 1.09)0.27343.10.91 (0.75 to 1.11)0.373
 PP year 149.91.23 (1.10 to 1.38)<.00149.51.21 (1.07 to 1.37)0.003Linear1.010.310
Believes brands do not differ in taste‡ (n=6840)
 Pre-PP6.71.006.71.00
 Transition8.11.23 (0.87 to 1.72)0.2408.41.27 (0.90 to 1.80)0.174
 PP year 17.71.16 (0.93 to 1.45)0.1907.71.17 (0.93 to 1.47)0.189Linear1.020.250
  • Bold text indicates significant findings at p<0.05.

  • *Valid n's for each model vary because of differences in the number of respondents who were eligible for each question (see below) and the number of missing cases on each outcome. The pack appeal model excluded 15.2% of cases that were missing, while for all other models missing cases ranged from 5.1% to 7.6%.

  • †Multivariate models adjusted for age, gender, educational attainment, SES, Heaviness of Smoking Index, past 3-month Target Audience Rating Points for antismoking mass media campaigns and change in cigarette costliness.

  • ‡Items were only asked of cigarette smokers who, when asked to name which brand of FM cigarettes/RYO tobacco they were currently smoking, provided a valid brand name.

  • §Items were asked of all cigarette smokers.

  • FM, factory-made; PP, plain packaging; RYO, roll-your-own; SES, socioeconomic status.