Table 3

Product perceptions of flavour capsule cigarettes by construct

ConstructStudy IDStudy designComparisonMain findings related to perceptions of flavour capsule cigarettes
Risk perceptions
Perceived harmBarrientos-Gutierrez et al37Cross-sectional, DCEView one and two capsule versus non-capsule packsLess harmful (one capsule)
Brown et al28Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsNo different in harm
Emond et al31Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus menthol/regularNo different in harm
Hoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsNo different in harm
Moodie et al45Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsNo different in harm
Moodie et al46Focus groupsView capsule versus standard cigarettesMixed views on harm
Moodie et al14Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus regularNo different in harm
Schneller et al42Randomised controlledAfter smoking capsule crushed versus uncrushedNo different in harm
Thrasher et al41CohortUsual brand capsule versus regular premiumLess harmful (discount brands in Mexico, USA); no different (Australia)
Outcome expectancies
Smoothness on throat and lightness in tasteCho and Thrasher30Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus regularLighter in taste and smoother on throat
Gilbert and Ewald48InterviewsMenthol capsule versus non-capsuleLighter, milder, less harsh on throat
Hoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsSmoother taste (more likely among non-daily, former smokers and susceptible non-smokers than daily smokers)
Thrasher et al41CohortUsual brand capsule versus regular premiumSmoother (Australia, discount brands in Mexico, USA) and lighter (discount brands in Mexico)
Pleasantness of taste, breath, smellGilbert and Ewald48InterviewsMenthol capsule versus non-capsuleTastes more minty, sweeter, fresher, cleaner, more artificial; masks smell
Grilo et al44Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsTastes better, masks smell of tobacco, easier to conceal
Hoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsLeaves breath more pleasant.
Moodie et al73Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsTastes better (among younger groups, mixed among older adults), fresher breath, smells less, easier to conceal
Moodie et al46Focus groupsView capsule versus standard cigarettesTastes more pleasant, like gum, fresher breath, smells less
Wackowski et al47Focus groupsCamel Crush versus regular mentholTastes like candy/gum, toothpaste/mouthwash, more minty, less of smoke
Satisfaction/fun to smokeHoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore satisfying and fun to smoke, respectively (more likely among former smokers and susceptible non-smokers than daily smokers)
Thrasher et al41CohortUsual brand capsule versus regular premiumMore satisfying (Australia, discount brands in Mexico); no different (USA)
Perceived impact on initiation quittingMoodie et al45Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsEncourages non-smokers to experiment, smokers to consume more, and discourages attempts to quit. Like a starter cigarette
Moodie et al46Focus groupsView capsule versus standard cigarettesMakes it easier for non-smokers to try and smokers to use
Consumer interest
Brand awareness and recallAbad-Vivero et al39Cross-sectional, experimentalView capsule versus non-capsule packsNo more likely to be recalled. Pall Mall capsules among top brand varieties with highest levels of recognition and correct brand recall
Grilo et al44Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsIn general, able to identify
Moodie et al45Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsAwareness greater among younger adults (16–35 years) than older groups
Wackowski et al47Focus groupsCamel Crush versus regular mentholParticipants across all age groups were familiar
Perceived target audience and user associationsBrown et al28Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsYounger audience, including teens, young adults in their 20s, millennials, students and ‘party-goers’
Grilo et al44Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsYoung girls and women
Moodie et al45Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsYoung people, those who don’t like the taste of smoke, but want to look cool, and menthol smokers. Associated with e-cigarettes due to different flavours
Moodie et al46Focus groupsView capsule versus standard cigarettesChildren, young people. Those starting smoking, wanting to conceal smoking and wanting something different. Associated with being for special occasions, such as a party, wedding, prom or a night out
Wackowski et al47Focus groupsCamel Crush versus regular menthol cigarettesYounger, newer smokers, those who like to play with stuff. Associated with toys and as being used by smokers occasionally for entertainment
Appeal, attractiveness and preferred choiceAbad-Vivero et al39Cross-sectional, experimentalView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore attractive. Pall Mall and Camel capsules most often rated as very attractive
Barrientos-Gutierrez et al37Cross-sectional, DCEView one and two capsule versus non-capsule packsMore attractive (one capsule, two capsules. Menthol, normal branding and small health warning labels (30%), respectively, enhanced attractiveness
Brown et al28Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore attractive and most named as favourite pack because of the nice colours and the ‘button’ imagery that created expectations around taste
Gilbert et al48InterviewsMenthol capsule versus non-capsuleImproves and personalises the smoking experience because tastes fresher, lighter and more minty, and can decide when to crush the capsule
Grilo et al44Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsAvailability of different flavours, the colours, and presence of double capsules increased the appeal of the pack
Hoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore attractive (more likely among non-daily, former smokers and susceptible non-smokers than daily smokers) and more stylish (more likely among former smokers than daily smokers)
Moodie et al45Focus groupsView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore appealing among young people because novel, cool, fashionable, fun, can share with others, and can conceal. Older adults viewed as a gimmick
Moodie et al46Focus groupsView capsule versus standard cigarettesMore appealing than standard and menthol because high-tech, cool, novel, choice of flavours. Less appealing than pink coloured and slim cigarettes
Thrasher et al41CohortUsual brand capsule versus regular premiumMore stylish (discount brands in Mexico, USA); no different (Australia)
Wackowski et al47Focus groupsCamel Crush versus regular menthol cigarettesReasons for popularity: flavour options, sharing between non-menthol and menthol smokers, fun and entertaining. Some saw as a gimmick
Future use intentionsAbad-Vivero et al39Cross-sectional, experimentalView capsule versus non-capsule packsGreater likelihood of interest in trying (Pall Mall had greatest odds)
Barrientos-Gutierrez et al37Cross-sectional, DCEView one and two capsule versus non-capsule packsGreater interest in trying (one and two capsule). Menthol, normal branding and small health warning labels, respectively, enhanced interest in trying
Hoek et al38Cross-sectional, DCEView capsule versus non-capsule packsMore likely to try if offered by a friend
Reasons for actual use or brand choiceCho and Thrasher30Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus regularMore likely to choose brand because of taste
Emond et al31Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus menthol or regularMore likely to choose brand because of taste, less expensive and the design of the pack
Moodie et al14Cross-sectionalUsual brand capsule versus regularReasons for using capsules (>20%): taste, smoother on airways, choice of flavours, clicking capsule, more interesting
Paraje et al34Cross-sectionalLast brand capsule versus non-capsuleMore likely to choose flavour/taste in last purchase
  • .DCE, discrete choice experiment; e-cigarettes, electronic cigarettes.