Final whole

INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND
TECHNOLOGY
The Brand Preferences of Cigarette in
Pakistan
Prepared By
Shah Shahabuddin Khurram
(BME / 633)
Course Code : MKT-606
MBA (Marketing and Advertisement)
FACULTY OF
MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL
SCIENCES
SPRING 2010

The Brand Preferences of Cigarette in Pakistan
Institute of Business and Technology 1

CONTENT
Page No.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT………………………………………………………04
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………. 05
CONTENTS OF TABLE AND CHARTS
TABLES
TABLE #1: Tobacco use among Teenagers
TABLE #2: Tobacco use among Races
TABLE #3: Recreational drug use
TABLE #4: Statistics
TABLE #5: What is your Gender
TABLE # 6: What is your Age
TABLE #7: Do you Smoke
CHARTS
CHART #1: Tobacco Use
CHART #2: Age
CHART #3: What is your Gender
CHART #4: What is your Age
FIGURE:
Figure #1: Percentage of Total Cigarette Consumption in SA Region, 1999
CHAPTER NO.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction and Overview………………………………………………07 & 08
1.2 Problem Statement…………………………………………………………..09
1.3 Aims of the Research............................................................................. 09
1.4 Objective of the Research…………………………………………………..10
1.5 Hypothesis..............................................................................................10
1.6 Limitations…………………………………………………..........................11

CHAPTER NO. 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Literature Review ………………………………………………...……………13
2.1 Articles …………………………………………………………………………14
2.2 Article on Smuggling ………………………………………………….……..15
2.3 Article on Price War ………………………………………………………....16
2.4 Article on Effect of Price Increase on Cigarette Consumption …………..17
CHAPTER NO. 3 CIGRAETTES BRAND
3.1 Cigarette Consumption Globally ……………………………………………20
3.2 International Work done ……………………………………………………. 21
3.3 Recreational Drugs Used alternate to Cigarette ………………………….22
3.4 Tobacco Industry in Pakistan ………………………………………………..39
3.5 List of countries by cigarette consumption per capita ..............................42
CHAPTER NO. 4 HYPOTHESIS TESTING
4.1 Population and Sample Size………………………………………………. 48
4.2 Data Gathering Instruments…………………………………………..….… 49
4.3 Procedure Followed To Gather Data ……………………………………... 49
4.4 Statement of the Hypothesis ………………………………………………..49
4.5 Statistical Techniques……………………………………........................... 50
4.6 Methodology ……………………………………………………………….....51
4.7 Solution and Evaluations …………………………………………………... 53
4.8 Frequency Tables…………………………………………………………….54
4.9 Hypothesis Testing ……………………………...................................... 63
CHAPTER NO . 5 RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.1 Questionnaire …......................................................................................91
CHAPTER NO. 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Conclusion…………………………………………….................................94
6.2 Recommendations ………………………………………. …………….……94
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………...............

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
“THANKS TO ALMIGHTY ALLAH”
My sincere thanks to the Teacher Dr. Noor Ahmed Memon
without whose Teachings, help and guidance this Term
Report would not have been possible.
I would like to thank also all the people who cooperated and
provided me their precious time to fill out the questionnaires
during my survey.
I would like to thanks the Biztek Library Staff, my friends
outside Biztek and my class fellows for providing me help,
books & materials related to the topic. And also the company
employees who also provide such company insights.
I would like to thank my parents with out their dedication and
Sacrifice to my future I really wouldn’t be where I am today.
Thanks to all of them.

INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY
ABSTRACT SUBMITTED BY: Shah Shahabuddin Khurram
DISCIPLINE: MBA (Marketing)
TITLE OF PROJECT REPORT: The Brand Preferences of Cigarette in
Pakistan
MONTH OF SUBMISSION: Spring, 2010
NAME OF PROJECT SUPERVISOR: Dr. Noor Ahmed Memon
ABSTRACT
Before I could decide what topic to write for my Project to be
submitted in partial fulfilment of graduation requirements of
the Institute of Business and Technology – BIZTEK MBA –
(Marketing and Advertising) program, I saw and hear a lot
about the Increase of Cigarette Usage and Cigarette
Companies.
So, I decide to explore the topic and to see the effect of the
topic in Pakistan context.
This Term report focus on cigarette brand’s preference of consumers
according to “AICOL”
People belonging to same Age group, Income, Consumption of
Cigarettes, Occupation & Location prefer same brand of cigarettes.
On the basis of this I will discuss my topic briefly.

1.1 Introduction and Overview
1.2 Problem Statement
1.3 Aims of the Research.
1.4 Objective of the Research
1.5 Hypothesis
1.6 Limitations

1.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
Tobacco:
Tobacco is a plant grown for its leaves, which are smoked,
chewed, or sniffed for variety of effects. It is considered as
addiction substance because it contains the chemical
nicotine.
Cigarette is a small role of finely cut tobacco for smoking,
enclosed in a wrapper of thin paper. It is addiction which
means physical or psychological need for a habit- forming
substance, such as a drug or Alcohol. In physical addiction,
the body adapts to a substance being used and gradually
requires increased amounts to reproduce the effects originally
produced by smaller doses. Everyone knows smoking is bad
for them, but millions cannot overcome the addiction.
Research
Let us define the term which we created for the understanding
and easiness of the work at hand and to facilitate the work for
us and for the respondents a like and the word is: “AICOL”
Consisting of these followings:
A= Age
I= Income
C= Consumption a
O=Occupation
L=Location b
a
cigarettes per day smoke by a sample or respondent
b
Area in which respondent lives

OVERVIEW:
This report focuses on cigarettes brand preferences of
consumers as smoking is an addiction. If a person smokes,
what he needs is a filter, tobacco & paper and most
importantly a taste which will satisfy him best. If taste has the
most importance here so consumer will prefer only one brand
over others. If that is the case, how many consumers
belonging to same “AICOL”, than will prefer a specific brand?
Consumer preference defers from consumer to consumer
but can be same according to “AICOL”. In order to check
the level of preference of consumer this report was
started.
Contradicting to the statement “consumer preference differs
from person to person” I found that people according to
AICOL use same cigarette brand. Means usually consumer
from alike set has same psychology and same kind of
products usually satisfies them and provides them value.
A Questionnaire was designed by keeping respondents in
mind & their precious time that is why it consists of only 9
questions because we already studied that the questionnaire
should not be too long and too short and we followed the
teachings of our teacher. But these 9 questions are enough to
provide necessary information according to our hypothesis.
During my research Questionnaire filling, the respondents
responded very comfortably and easily and cooperated well
with us. I selected my respondents randomly and visited
different places like: Offices, Collages, Shopping malls,
Parks, Different Pan shops & Super Markets in different
locations.

1.2 Problem statement:
The problem statement of my research is “to determine the
consumer usage pattern of cigarette according to AICOL
i.e. Age, Income, Consumption, Occupation and
Occupation.
It is usually thought that people from same AICOL use or
prefer same kind of brands, same kind of products. It has also
been observed that people from same AICOL have similar
likes and dislikes, they have same psychology. I have taken
this topic as this will help me in understanding the behavior of
consumers who belongs to similar group of people. And will
also help me to prove this thinking right or wrong.
1.3 Aims of the Research:
Aims of the research are to test out and confirm the known
statements and study the consumption pattern in Pakistan. I
have selected six hypotheses, among which five are to prove
basically brand preference according to age, brand
preference according to income, cigarette brand preference
according to consumption pattern, cigarette brand preference
according to occupation and cigarette brand preference
according to location, the last hypotheses is the consumption
rate according to consumer’s occupation. The last hypothesis
is set to check the consumption rate according to occupation.
Weather occupation and consumption have any relation or
not?

1.4 Objective of the Study:
The objectives of the study/research are to determine:
1) To determine the relationship between age of the
consumers to their cigarette brand preference
2) To determine the relationship between income of the
consumers to their cigarette brand preference.
3) To determine the relationship between consumption of
the consumers to the amount of cigarettes per day.
4) To determine the relation of cigarette brand preference
to the occupation of the consumers
5) To determine the changing behavior of cigarette
consumers according to the location they live.
6) To determine if there is any relationship between rates
of consumption to the occupation they are in.
1.5 Hypotheses:
6 hypothesis were set are as follow;
1) Consumers belong to same AGE group prefer same
brand of cigarettes.
2) Consumers belong to same group of INCOME prefer
same brand of cigarettes.
3) Consumers belong to same rate of CONSUMPTION
group prefer same brand of cigarettes.
4) Consumers belong to same OCCUPATION prefer
5) Consumers belong to same LOCATION prefer same
a. Consumers belonging to same OCCUPATION have
same rate of CONSUMPTION of cigarettes.

1.6 Limitations:
This study was conducted only in Karachi. Due to the fact that
convenience sample was used; the findings cannot be
generalized and would be low in external validity. Sample size
was selected as 263, focusing on people who are from
different organizations and different areas of Karachi.
I tried to make this study comprehensive but there is always a
possibility of getting wrong, inadequate answers from few of
the respondents. Therefore my results may give an idea but
cannot be 100 % correct. As in researches at bigger level
respondents are paid or compensated for their time and to
provide correct answers but for this small level research it
may not be the case.

2 Literature Review
2.1 Articles
2.2 Article on Smuggling …………………………………………………..
2.3 Article on Price War
2.4 Articles by
2.4 Article on Effect of Price Increase on Cigarette Consumption

The focus of this chapter is to providing insights to the
theories that have shaped the understanding of consumer
cigarette consumption, their brand preferences according to
Age, Income, Consumption, Occupation and Location.
Given the focus of this research study, it is important to have
a sound understanding of tobacco industry and usage
patterns on international and national level.

2.1 Articles:
Smoking may not be good for health but it is certainly good for
numerous national economies around the world, and Pakistan
is no exception. This article intends to highlight the important
role tobacco plays in the economics of the country, nothing
more nothing less.
By Syed M. Aslam
Jul 31 - Aug 06, 2000
Tobacco industry — growing, manufacturing, distribution and
retailing — contributed 4.4 per cent or over Rs 27.5 billion to the
total GDP of Pakistan including Rs 15.17 billion, including Rs 14.54
billion in excise duty and sales tax, in 1997. It is the single biggest
contributor of excise duty, six-times than that from cotton yarn.
Over 5 per cent of all taxes collected in the country come from the
tobacco industry. It employs over one million people directly or
indirectly which in terms of full-time equivalent jobs means 312,500
jobs supporting some 1.2 million persons.
The area under tobacco cultivation increased by 30 per cent during
1990-91 to 1998-99 — from 44,000 hectares to 57,000 hectares.
The production has increased even more significantly during the
same period — by 145 per cent from 75,000 tones to 109,000
tones. The value-added sector, the cigarette production, depicted a
far more un-proportionate increase of 72 per cent — from 29.8
billion sticks to 51.5 billion sticks during the same period.
Tobacco is the only crop grown in Pakistan whose yield is well
above the world average and matches the per hectare yield in the
US and other developed countries — an average yield of 1,900
kilograms per hectare. Tobacco industry — growing,
manufacturing, distribution and retailing employs over one million
persons directly or otherwise. This translates in the full time
equivalent of 312,500 jobs supporting approximately 1.2 million

persons. Manufacturing employs the highest number of persons —
35 per cent followed by 33 per cent by growing and 32 per cent in
distribution and retail.
2.2 Article on Smuggling
It is easy to understand the threat of huge revenue loss that
presence and easy availability of smuggled cigarettes pose to the
economy of Pakistan. The government is losing substantial revenue
of Rs 3 billion from the smuggling of cigarettes into the country.
According to Aslam Khaliq, the director consumer and regulatory
affairs of Pakistan Tobacco Company, the second top cigarette
manufacturer after Lakson Tobacco, the government is losing at
least Rs billion every year due to cigarette smuggling. He blamed
the high taxation as the singular most important incentive for
cigarette smuggling.
This is true if one looks at the global trends of taxation on
cigarettes. Smokers in Pakistan pay the highest tax in the world
second only to Denmark and the UK where 85 per cent and 82 per
cent of the retail price respectively goes toward taxation. In
Pakistan, 78 per cent of the retail price of premium brands ( all
brands whose retail price is over Rs 10 per 20 sticks) and 58 per
cent of the retail price of low segment brands go toward taxation.

2.3 Article on Price war
Defending the price war started by PTC by slashing the prices of a
number of its middle-priced brands early this year, Aslam said that
it brought numerous domestic manufacturers in the excise duty and
sales tax net. For instance, slashing the prices on some of its brand
by 50 per cent from Rs 19 to Rs 9 reduced the excise duty from 63
per cent to 43 per cent with sales tax remaining unchanged at 15
per cent. Despite price reduction, Aslam said, PTC was able to
break even due to increased turnover and at the same time forced
manufacturers who did not pay excise duty and sales tax in the net
to create a level playing field.
Though worried about smuggling and high taxation, Aslam
expressed that cigarette prices in Pakistan are on the much low
side. He said that the manufacturers should be allowed to increase
the prices of their products to better their revenues which are
constantly threatened by massive smuggling. He also suggested
that price increases would help discourage smoking in the country.
True. Experience in many countries show that each 10 per cent
increase in cigarette prices results in a 5 per cent decrease in the
numbers of smoking adults and much more in young adults —
between 6 to 8 per cent — who have little surplus funds to spend
on smoke. However, the argument that high prices discourage
smoking is a bit flawed particularly in the context of Pakistan.
Number one, unlike all developed and many developing countries
Pakistan choose not to spend even a negligible portion of tobacco
taxes on healthcare, research, education, and anti-smoking
activities. Such developing countries, not to mention the developed
ones, as Nepal and Peru spend a share of cigarette taxes to
support cancer research and treatment. Latvia allocates 30 per cent

of the revenue which it earns from the tobacco tax on healthcare.
Iran earmarks a portion of tobacco tax revenue on healthcare and
education.
Secondly, if the manufacturers and policy makers are really serious
about reducing smoking in Pakistan through price increases — and
no one say that they are — they need to raise taxes on all brands
of cigarettes be it locally manufactured — imported. Supporting the
domestic tobacco industry against imports, as is the case with
Pakistan, may be good for the local industry but negates the very
argument that higher prices and taxation discourages smoking.
2.4 Article on Effect of price increases on cigarette consumption
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Jonathan Foulds, MA, MAppSci, PhD
A recent paper published by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention described the dramatic increases in tobacco prices over
recent years. From the end of 1995 to April 2009 all but 5 states
increased their state cigarette taxes (Florida, Missouri, Mississippi,
North Dakota and South Carolina didn’t). The average increase
over that time period was from 33 cents to $1.20. The state
cigarette taxes range from 34 cents (Florida) to $2.75 (New York).
Over the same time period the federal tax per pack increased from
24 cents to $1.01, making an overall average tax increase from 57c
to $2.21. In addition, the tobacco industry itself has increased its
prices (before tax), and many other cities and municipalities have
additional taxes. For example, New York City has its own $1.50 tax
and Chicago has its own Cook County tax of $2.68.

These increases really took off around 2000, and the recent federal
tax increase (which includes all tobacco products) marks the single
largest effect on national cigarette prices. When these increases
are added to local sales taxes and combined with the widespread
lowering in disposable income caused by the economic recession, I
believe they will cause a really significant reduction in tobacco
consumption in the United States. One effect of such price
increases is that smokers smoke fewer cigarettes per day. This
may or may not reduce health risks. Another effect is to increase
motivation to quit among existing smokers, and another is to
decrease interest in initiating regular smoking (primarily on young
people).
Of all these effects, the one with the largest initial impact on both
individual and population health is stimulation of greater motivation
to quit smoking and more quit attempts. Its really only by
completely quitting smoking that major health benefits can be
achieved. So although these are tough financial times, its important
that smokers are given assistance to quit at this key time when
finances will provide an extra motivation.

CHAPTER NO. 3 CIGRAETTES BRAND
3.1 Cigarette Consumption Globally
3.2 International Work done
3.3 Recreational Drugs Used alternate to Cigarette
3.3 Tobacco Industry in Pakistan
3.2 List of countries by cigarette consumption per capita

3.1 Cigarette’s Consumption (Globally)
“Short, snappy, easily attempted, easily completed or just
as easily discarded before completion – the cigarette is
the symbol of the machine age.
SOURCE: WHO 2009
"New York Times, 1925 Global consumption of cigarettes has
been rising steadily since manufactured cigarettes were
introduced at the beginning of the 20th century. While
consumption is leveling off and even decreasing in some
countries, worldwide more people are smoking, and smokers
are smoking more cigarettes. The numbers of smokers will
increase mainly due to expansion of the world’s population.
By 2030 there will be at least another 2 billion people in the
world. Even if prevalence rates fall, the absolute number of
smokers will increase. The expected continuing decrease in
male smoking prevalence will be offset by the increase in
female smoking rates, especially in developing countries. The
consumption of tobacco has reached the proportions of a
global epidemic. Tobacco companies are cranking out
cigarettes at the rate of five and a half trillion a year – nearly
1,000 cigarettes for every man, woman, and child on the
planet. Cigarettes account for the largest share of
manufactured tobacco products, 96 percent of total value
sales. Asia, Australia and the Far East are by far the largest
consumers (2,715 billion cigarettes), followed by the Americas
(745 billion), Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Economies
(631 billion) and Western Europe (606 billion).

3.2 International work done
Tobacco Use among Middle and High School Students –
U.S.A 1999
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
January 28, 2000 / 49(03); p.49-53
The prevalence of cigarette smoking nationwide among high
school students increased during the 1990s; more than 80%
of current adult tobacco users started smoking cigarettes
before age 18 years. To determine the prevalence of
cigarette, smokeless tobacco (i.e., chewing tobacco and
snuff), cigar, pipe, biddy, and Kretek use among middle
school and high school students nationwide, the American
Legacy Foundation, in collaboration with the CDC
Foundation, conducted the National Youth Tobacco Survey
(NYTS) during the fall of 1999.
This report summarizes data from the NYTS on current use of
tobacco products, which indicate that 12.8% of middle school
students and 34.8% of high school students use any type of
tobacco; that the low prevalence of current cigarette smoking
observed among black high school students throughout the
1990s is not found among middle school students; and that
the percentages of high school students who currently use
biddies and retakes (two new forms of tobacco in the United
States) are almost as high as the proportion who use
smokeless tobacco.

The school-based 1999 NYTS employed a nationally
representative sample of students in grades 6-12. 145
schools were selected, and approximately five intact classes
of a required subject (e.g., English or social studies) across
grades 6-12 were randomly selected from each participating
school. All students in the selected classes were eligible to
participate. 15,058 students in 131 schools completed
questionnaires. The school response rate was 90%, and the
student response rate was 93%, resulting in an overall
response rate of 84%.
Students completed an anonymous, self-administered
questionnaire that included questions about tobacco use,
exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, minors' ability to
purchase or otherwise obtain tobacco products, knowledge
and attitudes about tobacco, and familiarity with pro- and anti-
tobacco media messages. Current use of biddies, cigarettes,
cigars, retakes, pipes, and smokeless tobacco was defined as
use on one or more of the 30 days preceding the survey. Any
current tobacco use was defined as using any of these
products on one or more of the 30 days preceding the survey.

Middle School Students
Among middle school (grades 6-8) students, the overall
prevalence of any current tobacco use was 12.8% (see Table
1 below). Cigarettes (9.2%) were the most prevalent type of
tobacco used, followed by cigars (6.1%). Cigarette smoking
rates were similar among boys and girls and among
racial/ethnic groups.
Boys were significantly more likely than girls to use
smokeless tobacco (4.2% and 1.3%, respectively), smoke
cigars (7.8% and 4.4%, respectively), and smoke tobacco in a
pipe (3.5% and 1.4%, respectively). Black students were
significantly more likely than white students to smoke cigars
(8.8% and 4.9%, respectively).
High School Students
Among high school (grades 9-12) students, the overall
prevalence of any current tobacco use was 34.8%. Cigarettes
(28.4%) were the most prevalent type of tobacco used,
followed by cigars (15.3%). Boys were significantly more likely
than girls to use smokeless tobacco (11.6% and 1.5%,
respectively), smoke cigars (20.3% and 10.2%, respectively),
smoke tobacco in a pipe (4.2% and 1.4%, respectively), and
smoke bid is (6.1% and 3.8%, respectively).
White and Hispanic students were significantly more likely
than black students to smoke cigarettes (32.8%, 25.8%, and
15.8%, respectively). White students were significantly more
likely than black and Hispanic students to use smokeless
tobacco (8.7%, 2.4%, and 3.6%, respectively).

Tobacco use among Teenagers
1. Percentage of students in middle school (grades 6-8) and high
school (grades 9-12) currently* using tobacco products, drugs by
type of tobacco product, sex, and race/ethnicity United States,
National Youth Tobacco Survey, 1999[95% Confidence intervals in
parentheses. Middle School (MS) High School (HS).
2. Used tobacco on one or more of the 30 days preceding the survey
3. Any Tobacco Use (cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigars, pipes,
bides, or Kretekes (Kretek are cigarettes made with a blend of
tobacco, cloves and other flavors. The word "kretek" itself is an
onomatopoetic term for the crackling)
TABLE # 1: Tobacco use among Teenagers
Sex Race/Ethnicity
Male Female White Black Hispanic Total
MS 14.2(±2.2) 11.3(±2.2) 11.6(±2.3) 14.4(±2.7) 15.2(±5.2) 12.8(±2.0)
HS 38.1(±3.2) 31.4(±3.1) 39.4(±3.2) 24.0(±4.2) 30.7(±4.4) 34.8(±2.7)
B. Cigarettes
MS 9.6(± .17) 8.8(± 1.7) 8.8(± 2.0) 9.0(±1.8) 11.0(± 4.1) 9.2(± 1.6)
HS 28.7(±2.8) 28.2(±3.3) 32.8(±3.1) 15.8(±3.8) 25.8(± 4.7) 28.4(±2.7
C. Smokeless Tobacco/Chew/Snuff
MS 4.2 (±1.3) 1.3(±0.5) 3.0(±1.1) 1.9(±0.9) 2.2(± 0.9) 2.7(±0.7)
HS 11.6(±2.8) 1.5(±0.6) 8.7(±2.1) 2.4(±1.3) 3.6(± 1.6) 6.6(±1.6)

D. Cigars
MS 7.8 (± 1.3) 4.4 (± 1.3) 4.9 (± 1.0) 8.8 (± 2.3) 7.6 (± 2.9) 6.1(±1.1)
HS 20.3(±1.9) 10.2(±1.6) 16.0(±1.6) 14.8(±3.5) 13.4(±2.9) 15.3(±1.4)
E. Pipe
MS 3.5(± 0.8) 1.4(± 0.6) 2.0(± 0.6) 2.0(± 0.9) 3.8(± 1.7) 2.4 (± 0.5)
HS 4.2(± 0.9) 1.4(± 0.5) 2.6(± 0.6) 1.8(± 0.9) 3.8(± 1.4) 2.8 (± 0.5)
F. Bidis
MS 3.1(± 0.8) 1.8(± 0.6) 1.8(± 0.5) 2.8(± 1.3) 3.5(± 1.6) 2.4(± 0.6)
HS 6.1(± 1.0) 3.8(± 1.0) 4.4(± 0.9) 5.8(± 2.1) 5.6(± 2.1) 5.0(± 0.8)
G. Kreteks
MS 2.2(± 0.6) 1.7(± 0.7) 1.7(± 0.7) 1.7(± 0.8) 2.1(± 0.6) 1.9(± 0.5)
HS 6.2(± 1.1) 5.3(± 1.5) 6.5(± 1.5) 2.8(± 1.5) 5.5(± 1.9) 5.8(± 1.2)

CDC Editorial Note
This report is the first to measure the prevalence of current
tobacco use among a nationally representative sample of
middle school students and the first to report the prevalence
of current bids and Kretek use among a nationally
representative sample of middle and high school students.
Although previous national surveys have shown that cigarette
smoking rates among black high school students have been
increasing, black students still were smoking at much lower
rates than other high school students. However, the findings
in this report indicate that current cigarette smoking
prevalence among middle school black students was similar
to rates among white and Hispanic students and that current
cigar use prevalence among middle school black students
was significantly higher than among white students.
Future surveys should evaluate whether the rate of increase
in smoking rates among black students has accelerated and
whether the difference in smoking rates between black and
white high school students are disappearing. In addition, more
research is needed to determine whether black youth are
finding smoking appealing and socially acceptable.
Current use of novel tobacco products, such as bids and
retakes, is an emerging public health problem among U.S.
youth. Cigarettes remain the most widely used tobacco
product by youth; however, recent trends underscore the
importance of monitoring the rates at which youth adopt other
tobacco products. The social and cultural factors related to
differing patterns of tobacco product use across sex and
racial/ethnic groups require additional study.

The 1999 NYTS estimates for high school students will be
compared with those of the Monitoring the Future (MTF) study
and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), the other
national school-based surveys. Comparison of NYTS
estimates with those of other national surveys must be
interpreted with caution for several reasons.
First, YRBS and MTF were conducted during spring 1999,
and NYTS was conducted during September-October 1999, a
different academic year. Within each grade, the fall school
population is approximately 6 months younger than the spring
school population. This difference can be expected to lead to
higher estimates of ever smoking in the spring surveys and
may lead to higher estimates of current smoking.
Second, the tobacco industry increased the wholesale price of
tobacco products during 1999, but also provided substantial
price discounts during the same period, making determination
of the precise effect of retail prices on smoking rates difficult.
However, preliminary per capita consumption estimates from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture suggest cigarette
consumption has decreased in 1999, suggesting that the
prevalence among youth also may have decreased.
Third, the NYTS is a single-topic survey (tobacco), and MTF
and YRBS are multi-topic surveys. The effect of the number
of topics surveyed on the resulting estimates is unknown.
Finally, NYTS had a 90% school response rate, a higher
reported school response rate than YRBS and MTF. Some
schools that participated in the NYTS may not participate in
YRBS or MTF.

The findings in this report are subject to at least two
limitations. First, these data apply only to youth who attended
middle or high school and are not representative of all
persons in this age group. Few persons aged less than 16
years do not attend school and, in 1997, only 4% of 16-year-
olds and 6% of 17-year-olds who had not completed high
school were not enrolled in a high school program. The
dropout rate for young adults aged 16-24 years varies greatly
by race/ethnicity (7.6%, white; 13.4%, black; and 25.3%,
Hispanic). Second, "any current tobacco use" might be
underestimated in this report because it does not include a
measure of "roll-your-own" tobacco smoking.
To evaluate the potential impact of the expanding levels of
tobacco prevention efforts nationwide and in the individual
states, surveillance of trends in tobacco use among youth
must be continued and expanded. YRBS has provided
national and state-specific surveillance of tobacco use among
high school students since 1991. The NYTS and state-
specific youth tobacco surveys are extending this surveillance
effort to middle school students and across a wider range of
evaluation variables, including knowledge and attitudes about
tobacco, exposure to environmental tobacco smoke,
familiarity with pro-smoking and antismoking media
messages, and exposure to tobacco-use prevention
curriculum in schools.
CDC has prepared "Best Practices" guidelines to help states
determine funding priorities and to plan and carry out effective
comprehensive tobacco-use prevention and control programs.
If current patterns of smoking behavior persist, an estimated 5
million U.S. persons who were aged less than or equal to 18

years in 1995 could die prematurely from smoking-related
illnesses.
Implementation of the "Best Practices" guidelines, along with
nationwide prevention efforts, enforcement of the proposed
Food and Drug Administration rules, increases in the excise
tax on tobacco products, and increased availability of smoking
cessation treatment options, could dramatically reduce these
projected deaths.
Editorial Note
The 1999 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) is the first
national school-based survey to provide information not only
about tobacco use, but about related knowledge, beliefs,
attitudes and behaviors. It is also the first national survey to
focus on all varieties of tobacco use among youth and the first
survey of middle school students.
As such, this survey will provide us with considerable new
knowledge about the onset of the nicotine epidemic and
should serve to remind us not to forget about all forms of
tobacco use. We look forward to reading future reports on the
1999 survey and hope that future surveys will be conducted to
enable us to examine trends over time.
The prevalence of current cigarette use among high school
students in fall 1999 has decreased substantially since spring
1997. These comparisons are shown in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2 Tobacco Use among Races
1997 YRBS 1999 NYTS
Overall 36.4%(±2.3) 28.4% (±2.7)
Males 37.7%(±2.7) 28.7% (±2.8)
Females 34.7%(±2.8) 28.2% (±3.3)
Whites 39.7%(±2.4) 32.8% (±3.1)
Blacks 22.7%(±3.8) 15.8%(± 3.8)
Hispanics 34.0%(±2.7) 25.8%(± 4.7)
Current smokeless tobacco among male high school students
declined from 15.8% (± 3.7) in 1997 to 11.6% (± 2.8) in 1999;
however, this decline was not statistically significant (as the
95% confidence intervals overlap). The declines in cigarette
use may be due to events that occurred in the interim (e.g.
price increases due to the Tobacco Settlement or state tax
increases) or to cohort differences. However, it's also possible
that the differences in smoking prevalence are at least
partially attributable to differences in the methods used in
these two surveys (e.g., different content of survey
questionnaires and response rates).
The National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) appears to have
employed very high quality survey methods. Sampling, survey
administration, response rates, and weighting and analysis of
the data appear to be very strong. The overall response rate
of 84% boosts our confidence that the results from this
sample are generalizable to the national school population.
(The report, however, did not indicate whether private schools
were included in the sample.) The overall response rate and
the school participation rate (90%) for this survey are
remarkable especially as compared to other national school-

based surveys (e.g., the overall response rate for the 1997
National Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was 69% and
for the 1998 Monitoring the Future Survey (MTF) was less
than 58%). Also remarkable is how quickly the preliminary
findings from this survey were released to the public.
Perhaps, other national surveys can be improved in these
areas.
The 95% confidence interval means that there is a 95%
likelihood that the actual value in the population should be
within that many percentage points of the observed sample
value. For example, 12.8 (± 2.0) for total tobacco use among
middle school students (which appears at the end of the first
row of Table 1) can be interpreted as follows: there is a 95%
likelihood that from 10.8% (12.8 - 2.0) to 14.8% (12.8 + 2.0) of
middle school students in the U.S. used some form of tobacco
in the 30 days preceding the survey.

Tobacco Use in the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse
The results of the 1998 National
Household Survey on Drug Abuse
(NHSDA) have been released by the
U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services. The results for tobacco use have been
summarized below followed by a summary of the survey
design.
Tobacco Use in the United States
An estimated 60 million Americans were current cigarette
smokers in 1998. This represents a smoking rate of 27.7
percent for the population age 12 and older. The rate
decrease from 29.6 percent in 1997 is statistically significant.
Current smokers were more likely than nonsmokers to be
heavy drinkers and illicit drug users. Among current smokers,
the rate of heavy alcohol use (five or more drinks on the same
occasion on five or more days in the past month) was 14.0
percent, the rate of marijuana/hashish use was 13.6 percent,
and the rate of current illicit drug use was 16.1 percent.
Among nonsmokers, only 2.9 percent were heavy drinkers,
1.8 percent was marijuana/hashish users, and 2.5 percent
were illicit drug users.
An estimated 3.1 percent of the population was current users
of smokeless tobacco in 1998. The rate has remained steady
since 1991.
An estimated 6.9 percent of the population was current users
of cigars in 1998. This represents a statistically significant
increase from 1997, when the rate was 5.9 percent.

Age
Approximately 4.1 million youth age 12-17 were current
smokers in 1998. The rate of smoking among youth age 12-
17 was 18.2 percent. The rate was 18.9 percent in 1994, 20.2
percent in 1995, 18.3 percent in 1996, and 19.9 percent in
1997. There were no statistically significant changes.
The current smoking rate among young adults age 18-25
continues to follow an upward path from 34.6 percent in 1994
to 35.3 percent in 1995, 38.3 percent in 1996, 40.6 percent in
1997, and 41.6 percent in 1998. The 1998 rate is significantly
higher than the 1994, 1995 and 1996 rates.
An estimated 5.6 percent of youths age 12-17, or 1.3 million,
were current cigar users in 1998.
This rate compares to 5.0
percent in 1997; the difference is
not statistically significant.
Race/Ethnicity
In 1998, current smoking rates were 29 percent among
Blacks, 28 percent among Whites, 26 percent among
Hispanics, and 24 percent among those of other race/ethnic
groups.
Smokeless tobacco use was more prevalent among Whites
(3.7 percent) than among Blacks (2.0 percent) or Hispanics
(0.8 percent).

Gender
Males had higher rates of smoking than females (29.7 percent
vs. 25.7 percent). Among youths age 12-17, the rates for
males and females were similar (18.7 percent for males, 17.7
percent for females). The rate for female’s age 12-17 years
decreased significantly between 1997 and 1998, from 20.7
percent to 17.7 percent.
The rate of current smokeless tobacco use was significantly
higher for men than for women in 1998 (5.9 percent vs. 0.5
percent). About 91 percent of smokeless tobacco users were
men. Similarly, males were more likely than females to use
cigars (11.9 percent vs. 2.3 percent).
Region/Urban-city
The rate of current cigarette use was 32.0 percent in the
North Central region, 27.9 percent in the South, 25.5 percent
in the Northeast, and 24.5 percent in the West. The rate of
smoking was 26.5 percent in large metropolitan areas, 27.2
percent in small metropolitan areas, and 30.5 percent in non-
metropolitan areas.
Education
Level of educational attainment was correlated with tobacco
usage. Fifty percent of adult’s
age 26-34 who had not
completed high school smoked
cigarettes, while only 15
percent of college graduates in this age group smoked. The
opposite relationship was found for cigar use: 10.7 percent of
college graduates age 26-34 were current cigar smokers,
compared to 7.5 percent of those who had not completed high
school.

Tobacco as a "Gateway Drug"
Youths age 12-17 who currently smoked cigarettes were 11.4
times more likely to use illicit drugs and 16 times more likely
to drink heavily than nonsmoking youths.
An estimated 5.6 percent of youths age 1217 were current
cigar smokers in 1998. This compares to 5.0 percent in 1997,
not a statistically significant difference.
Between 1997 and 1998, there was no change in the
percentages of youths age 12-17 reporting great risk from
using cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, or alcohol.
The current rate of smoking among young adults age 18-25
has increased from 34.6 percent in 1994 to 40.6 percent in
1997 and 41.6 percent in 1998.
Survey Design
This survey is the primary source of statistical information on
the use of illegal drugs by the United States population.
Conducted since 1971, the survey collects data by
administering questionnaires to a representative sample of
the population at their place of residence. The survey covers
residents of households, no institutional group quarters (e.g.,
shelters, rooming houses, dormitories), and civilians living on
military bases. Persons excluded from the survey include
homeless people who do not use shelters, active military
personnel, and residents of institutional group quarters, such
as jails and hospitals.
Interviews were conducted with 25,500 persons between
January and December 1998. Response rates for household
screening and for interviewing were 93.0 percent and 77.0
percent, respectively. The sample design over sampled
Blacks, Hispanics, and young people, to improve the

accuracy of estimates for those populations. In addition,
residents of Arizona and California were over sampled to
provide direct survey estimates for these state populations.
Editorial Note:
The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse is one of the
most carefully conducted surveys in the nation. The sample
coverage and the response rate are very good. The survey
administration methods are designed to elicit accurate
responses even to very sensitive questions.
Cigarette smoking has declined slightly among older adults
and adolescent females, has remained stable among
adolescent males, and has increased substantially among
young adults (18-25 years of age). Smokeless tobacco use
has remained stable, and cigar smoking has increased.
More attention must be paid to prevention and cessation
of smoking among young adults as 42% of these groups
now smoke cigarettes.

Recreational Drug use alternate to Cigarette
Table # 3: Recreational drug use
Major
Recreational
Drugs
Cannabinoids THC (Cannabis · Hashish · Hash oil)
Depressants
Barbiturates · Benzodiazepines · Ethanol
(Alcoholic beverages) · GHB ·
Nonbenzodiazepines · Kava
Entactogens MDA · MDMA (Ecstasy)
Hallucinogens
Psychedelics
Bufotenin (Yopo · Vilca ·
Psychoactive toads) · DMT
(Ayahuasca) · LSD-25 ·
Mescaline (Peyote · San
Pedro · Peruvian Torch) ·
Psilocybin & Psilocin
(Psilocybin mushrooms)
Dissociatives
DXM · Inhalants (Nitrous
oxide) · Ketamine · PCP ·
Salvinorin A (Salvia
divinorum)
Deliriants
Datura · Deadly Nightshade ·
Henbane · Mandrake
Opioids
Codeine · Diacetylmorphine (heroin) ·
Hydrocodone · Morphine (Opium) ·
Oxycodone · Kratom
Stimulants
Amphetamine · Arecoline (Areca) · Betel ·
Caffeine (Coffee - Tea) · Cathinone (Khat) ·
Cocaine (Coca) · Ephedrine (Ephedra) ·
Methamphetamine · Methylphenidate ·
Nicotine (Tobacco) · Theobromine (Cocoa)

Culture and Related Topics
Cannabis
420 · Stoner Film · Spiritual Use of
Cannabis · Medical Cannabis · Cannabis
Cultivation · Cannabis smoking
PsychedelicArt · Drug · Experience · Literature · Music
Other
Counterculture of the 1960s · Club Drug ·
Dance Party · Drug Tourism · Drug
Paraphernalia · Hippie · Party and Play · Poly
Drug Use · Rave · Sex and Drugs Spiritual
use of drugs
Problems with Drug Use
Abuse · Addiction (Prevention · Rehabilitation ·
Responsible Use) · Illegal Trade · Overdose
Legality of Drug Use
International
1961 Narcotic Drugs · 1971 Psychotropic
Substances · 1988 Drug Trafficking
State Level
Drug Policy (Prohibition · Decriminalization) ·
Policy Reform (Liberalization · Harm
Reduction · Demand Reduction)
Other
Designer Drug · Drug Possession · Drug
Test · Hard and Soft Drugs · Narc · War on
Drugs

3.4 Tobacco industry in Pakistan
Pakistan with a population of 160 million is the 7th most
populous country in the world. The health and demographic
situation in Pakistan is characterized by a high birth rate (29
per 1000) a comparatively low death rate (8 per 1000) and a
consequent rapid population growth rate of 1.9 %. The infant
mortality rate of 72 per 1000 live births and maternal mortality
of 400 per 10000 deliveries is still very high[i]
.
Tobacco use in Pakistan:
Tobacco use in Pakistan is common and one of the highest in
the South East Asian Region. There are about 22 million
smokers in the country and 55% of the households have at
least one individual who smokes tobacco[ii]
. As a result
Pakistan accounts for a sizeable proportion of the cigarettes
consumed in South Asia as shown below in Figure 1[iii]
. In
Pakistan about 100,000 people die annually from diseases
caused by use of tobacco.[iv]

Figure 1: Percentage of Total Cigarette Consumption in
SA Region, 1999
Tobacco consumption does not only occur in the form of
cigarettes but also includes beedis (hand rolled cigarettes),
Huqqa (water pipe) and chewing tobacco. According to the
National Health Survey of Pakistan 1998, 54% men and 20%
women used tobacco in one form or the other.[v]
WHO-EMRO
(Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office) website[vi]
quoting
the National Health Survey[vii]
states that 36 % of adult men
and 9 percent of adult women smoke in Pakistan.

Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS) supported by WHO
and conducted in Pakistan focused on adolescents aged 13-
15 years. GYTS reported 1.7% of the students (2.5% boys
and 0.5% girls) having smoked cigarettes in the month prior to
the survey.[viii]
The above information has been contributed by Dr. Ehsan Latif taken
from his paper entitled: ‘An assessment of the impact of the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control on tobacco control policies in Pakistan’,
submitted to London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine as partial
fulfillment of MSc. Public Health course.
[i] World Health Statistics 2007 http://www.who.int/whosis/en/index.html
accessed 21 July 2007 (1600 GMT)
[ii] Pakistan Health Education Survey, 1991. Ministry of Health,
Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
[iii] Economics of Tobacco for the South Asia (SA) Region June 18,
2001
Available at
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTETC/Resources/375990108991320
0558/SouthAsia.pdf
[iv] Pakistan Health Education Survey, 1999 –Pakistan Medical Research
Council, G 5, Islamabad
[v] Pakistan Medical Research Council. National Health Survey of
Pakistan 1990-94. Islamabad, Pakistan: Pakistan Medical Research
Council, Network Publication Service, 1998.
[vi] Tobacco Control Country Profiles 2003, American Cancer Society,
Atlanta, GA, 2003 http://www.emro.who.int accessed 10 July 2007 (1000
hrs GMT)
[vii] Pakistan Medical Research Council. Pakistan Health Education
Survey (ISBN: 969-499-003-3 [pbk]). Islamabad, Pakistan: Pakistan
Medical Research Council, 2003
[viii] World Health Organization. Global Youth Tobacco Survey: Tobacco-
free Initiative. Cairo, Egypt:

3.5 List of countries by cigarette consumption per capita
This is a list of countries by annual per capita
consumption of tobacco cigarettes.
Cigarettes are smoked by over 1.1 billion people. While
smoking rates have leveled off or declined in developed
nations, in developing nations tobacco consumption continues
to rise at a rate of around 3.4% per annum.
Smoking rates in the United States have dropped by half from
1965 to 2006 falling from 42% to 20.8% of adults. There are
large regional differences in smoking rates, with Kentucky,
West Virginia, Oklahoma and Mississippi topping the list, and
Idaho, California and Utah at significantly lower rates.
In Australia the incidence of smoking is in decline, with figures
from 2004-5 showing 23% of the population to be current
smokers, a decline of 2% compared to 1995. Amongst the
indigenous population, the rate is much higher, with 51% of
men and 49% of women reported being current daily
smokers. Young adults are the most likely age group to
smoke, with a marked decline in smoking rates with
increasing age. The prevalence of smoking is strongly
associated with socioeconomic disadvantage, with over
double the rate in the most disadvantaged quintile of the
population as compared to the least.

List
Ranking Country
Number
of
cigarettes
per adult
per year
1 Greece 3,017
2 Slovenia 2,537
3 Ukraine 2,526
4 Bulgaria 2,437
5
Czech
Republic
2,368
6 Macedonia 2,336
7 Russia 2,319
8 Moldova 2,239
9 Spain 2,225
10
Bosnia &
Herzegovina
2,145
11 Armenia 2,083
12 Japan 2,028
13 Latvia 1,890
14 Croatia 1,849
15 Belarus 1,846
16 Lebanon 1,837
17 Cyprus 1,830
18 Poland 1,810
19 Kazakhstan 1,805
20 Belgium 1,763
21 South Korea 1,733
22 Estonia 1,718
23 Switzerland 1,698
24 Austria 1,684
25 China 1,648
26 Hungary 1,623
27 Italy 1,596
28 Tunisia 1,532

29 Kuwait 1,509
30 Turkey 1,499
31 Denmark 1,495
32 Romania 1,480
33 Slovakia 1,430
34 Ireland 1,391
35
Trinidad and
Tobago
1,337
36 Portugal 1,318
37 Malta 1,287
38 Albania 1,201
39 United States 1,196
40 Israel 1,173
41 Australia 1,130
42 Germany 1,125
43
United Arab
Emirates
1,092
44 Azerbaijan 1,089
45 Egypt 1,082
46 Philippines 1,073
47 Syria 1,067
48 Georgia 1,040
49 Kyrgyzstan 1,017
50 Argentina 1,014
50 Cuba 1,010
52 Indonesia 974
53 Paraguay 968
54 Finland 956
55 Lithuania 920
56 Chile 909
57 Canada 897
58 Netherlands 888
59 Vietnam 887
60 France 876
61 Libya 860

62 Jordan 846
63 Mauritius 846
64 Uruguay 793
65
United
Kingdom
790
66 Iraq 784
67 Iran 764
68 Sweden 751
69 North Korea 714
70 Saudi Arabia 648
71 Malaysia 646
72 Thailand 634
73 Venezuela 622
74 Brazil 580
75 Algeria 577
76 New Zealand 565
77 Costa Rica 552
78 Laos 544
79 South Africa 511
80 Hong Kong 499
81 Turkmenistan 496
82 Norway 493
83 Jamaica 480
84 Colombia 479
85 Mexico 470
86 Honduras 450
87 Cambodia 447
88 Morocco 430
89 Singapore 406
90 Angola 397
91 Pakistan 391
92 Nicaragua 386
93 Senegal 380
94
Dominican
Republic
335

95 Guatemala 325
96 Uzbekistan 317
96 Yemen 317
98 Togo 306
99 Panama 291
100 Madagascar 276
101 El Salvador 275
102 Nepal 274
103 Ecuador 234
104 Mozambique 213
105 Myanmar 209
106 Sri Lanka 205
107 Côte d'Ivoire 198
108 Bolivia 178
109 Bangladesh 172
110 Kenya 167
111 Cameroon 141
112
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo
131
113 Peru 129
114 Tanzania 108
115 Nigeria 103
116 India 99
117 Zimbabwe 86
118 Ghana 80
119 Sudan 75
120 Zambia 71
121 Ethiopia 52

CHAPTER NO. 4 HYPOTHESIS TESTING
4.1 Population and Sample Size
4.2 Data Gathering Instruments
4.3 Procedure Followed To Gather Data
4.4 Statement of the Hypothesis
4.5 Statistical Techniques
4.6 Methodology
4.7 Solution and Evaluations
4.8 Frequency Tables
4.9 Hypothesis Testing

4.1 Population and Sample Size
Sekaran (2000 p 255) defines a population as “entire group of
people, events or things of interest that a researcher wants to
research”
I have selected a population as people of Karachi City Population of
2-Crors, which is the largest city of Pakistan. I have selected this
population as per my convenience. I per statistics Karachi is the
only city to which people from almost all cities migrate and having
said that it has population of 2 million, almost all type of professions
have been adopted by this population. Therefore it will be easy for
me to get the cigarette consumers from all the occupations.
Occupations include managerial as well as labor work.
Leary (2004, p. 118) defines sampling as, “the process by which a
researcher selects a sample of participants for a study from the
population of interest”.
A total of 263 questionnaires were sent manually to respondents
and a total of 263 completed the questionnaire but responses of
some of the questions are ambiguous. According to Sekaran
(2001), a response rate of thirty percent is acceptable for most
studies. The response rate for this study was ninety eight percent
(98%). A convenience sample was used, which according to Leary
(2004) refers to a sample of participants that are readily available.
Such samples, he postulates, are used because they are easy to
obtain and not representative of people in general. Therefore the
finding of studies, such as the present one which utilizes
convenience sampling, is low in generalizability.

4.2 Data Gathering Instruments
For the purpose of this study a quantitative methodology was
followed and a questionnaire was used as the measuring
instrument. According to Leary (2004), the major advantages of
questionnaires are that they can be administered to groups of
people simultaneously, and they are less costly and less time-
consuming than other measuring instruments.
4.3 Procedure Followed To Gather Data
This section describes how the researcher gathered the relevant
data for this study. Although known to the population, the
researcher relied on random sampling to obtain access to the
sample. The researcher has direct contact with the population and
therefore had more influence in terms of creating a sense of
urgency to complete the questionnaires.
Each respondent was given a time of 15 minutes to understand and
fill the questionnaire. While making a questionnaire I tried my best
to make it as easy as possible so that there will be no difficulty for
respondents to fill the questionnaire.
4.4 Statement of the Hypothesis
1. Consumers belong to same AGE group prefer same brand of
cigarettes.
2. Consumers belong to same group of INCOME prefer same
3. Consumers belong to same rate of CONSUMPTION group prefer
4. Consumers belong to same OCCUPATION prefer same brand of
cigarettes.

5. Consumers belong to same LOCATION prefer same brand of
cigarettes.
6. Consumers belonging to same OCCUPATION have same rate of
CONSUMPTION of cigarettes.
4.5 Statistical Techniques
DATA ANALYSIS
The statistical programmed used for the analyses and presentation
of data in this research is the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) version 12. The descriptive statistics utilized are
based on frequency tables and graphical illustrations to provide
information on key demographic variables in this study. This is
followed with presentation of the inferential statistics based on
examination of each hypothesis formulated for the research. The
upper level of statistical significance for null hypothesis testing was
set at 5%. All statistical test results were computed at the 2-tailed
level of significance in accordance with the non-directional
hypotheses presented (Sekaran, 2001).
STATISTICAL ANALYSES
According to Leary (2004, p. 37), “statistical analyses are used to
describe an account for the observed variability in the behavioral
data.” This involves the process of analyzing the data that has been
collected. Thus the purpose of statistics is to summaries and
answer questions about the behavioral variability that was obtained
in the research. Statistical analyses involve both descriptive and
inferential statistics.

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Descriptive statistics are used to describe and summaries the
behavior of the respondents in a study. They refer to the ways in
which a large number of scores or observations are reduced to
interpretable numbers such as averages and percentages.
The descriptive statistics utilized in this study are based on
frequency tables and graphical illustrations to provide information
on key demographic variables, as well as the means and standard
deviations for the responses on the Work Motivation and
Satisfaction Questionnaire.
INFERENTIAL STATISTICS
Inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions about the
reliability and generalizability of the findings. According to Leary
(2004, p. 38), inferential statistics are used to assist in answering
questions such “How likely is it that my findings are due to random
extraneous factors rather than to the variables of central interest in
the study? How representative are the findings of the larger
population from which the sample was taken?” In order to test the
research hypotheses, the inferential tests used include the Pearson
Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient, Multiple Regression
Analysis and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
4.6 METHODOLOGY
The methodology we have adopted for the subject study is briefly
discussed below:

SELECTING BRAND NAMES FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Pan shops, super markets, retailer stores and cigarette consumer
were asked about brand names & then it was put in to the
questionnaire. So that respondents can identify hisher brand of
choice on this question and if their brand of choice is not there
heshe can reply on the option of “others”
DATA COLLECTION METHOD
Data was collected through a questionnaire which was distributed
on different locations and some were filled or noted down through
an informal interviewc
form some of respondents.
VARIABLE AND MEASURES
Our Questionnaire was based on nine different questions, out of
which five were related to personal information (gender, age,
occupation, income & location); a Nominal Scale was used to
measure the personal data. The other remaining four were related
to independent variables like: Do you smoke? How long have you
been smoking? Which brand do you smoke? & how many
cigarettes do you smoke per day).

4.6 Solutions and Evaluation
Frequencies
Table # 4: Statistics
Interpretation
263 out of 263 respondents replied on gender, age, do you
smoke & where do you live, no one was found missing.
226 out of 263 respondents replied on how long you have been
smoking & how many cigarettes per day, 37 found to be missing
in both.
227 out of 263 respondents replied on what is your occupation,
36 were found missing.
226 out of 263 respondents replied on which brand you smoke,
37 found to be missing.
220 out of 263 respondents replied on what is your income, 43
found to be missing.
Statistics
263 263 263 226 226 227 226 220 263
0 0 0 37 37 36 37 43 0
Valid
Missing
N
what is
your
gender
what
is your
age
do you
smoke
howlong
have you
been
smoking
how
many
cigrettes
per day
what is
your
ocupation
which
brand
do you
smoke
what is
your
income
where
do you
live

4.7 Frequency Tables
Table # 5: What is your Gender
233 male respondents were male having valid percentage of 88.6%
and 30 were female having valid percentage of 11.4% no one was
found missing.
Chart #3: What is your Gender
what is your gender
233 88.6 88.6 88.6
30 11.4 11.4 100.0
263 100.0 100.0
male
female
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
femalemale
what is your gender
100
80
60
40
20
0
Percent
11.41%
88.59%
what is your gender

Table # 6: What is your Age
According to age group, 2.7 % belong to 16-17 age groups
with 7 frequencies, 14.8 % belong to 18-20 age groups with
39 frequencies, 24% belong to 21-25 age groups with 63
Frequencies, 14.4% belong to 26-30 age groups with 38
frequencies, 13.7% belong to 31-35 age groups with 36
frequencies, 8 % belong to 36-40 age groups with21
frequencies, 5.3% belong to 50 & above age groups with 14
frequencies
what is your age
7 2.7 2.7 2.7
39 14.8 14.8 17.5
63 24.0 24.0 41.4
38 14.4 14.4 55.9
36 13.7 13.7 69.6
21 8.0 8.0 77.6
30 11.4 11.4 89.0
15 5.7 5.7 94.7
14 5.3 5.3 100.0
263 100.0 100.0
16-17
18-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
50 & above
Total
Valid
Cumulative
Percent

50 &
above
46-5041-4536-4031-3526-3021-2518-2016-17
what is your age
25
20
15
10
5
0
Percent
5.32%5.7%
11.41%
7.98%
13.69%14.45%
23.95%
14.83%
2.66%
what is your age
do you smoke
25 9.5 9.5 9.5
225 85.6 85.6 95.1
13 4.9 4.9 100.0
263 100.0 100.0
no
yes
already quited
Total
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Chart #4: What is your Age
Table #7: Do you Smoke
25 respondents replied they do not smoke which is 9.5%,
225 replied yes they smoke which is 85.6%, 13 replied that
they had quite smoking which is 4.9%, no data was found
missing.

Respondents were asked to reply on “how long have you
been smoking”, in which 37 respondent are missing due to
they are not smoker which holds 14.1%.
30.1% valid percentd
have been smoking from 1-5 years,
36.7% valid percent have been smoking from 6-10 years &
d
the percentage of non missing data
already quitedyesno
do you smoke
100
80
60
40
20
0
Percent
4.94%
85.55%
9.51%
do you smoke
how long have you been smoking
68 25.9 30.1 30.1
83 31.6 36.7 66.8
75 28.5 33.2 100.0
226 85.9 100.0
37 14.1
263 100.0
1-5 years
6-10 years
11 years & above
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Cumulative
Percent

how many cigrettes per day
21 8.0 9.3 9.3
39 14.8 17.3 26.5
46 17.5 20.4 46.9
63 24.0 27.9 74.8
57 21.7 25.2 100.0
226 85.9 100.0
37 14.1
263 100.0
0-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
25 & above
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
28.5% valid percent have been smoking from 11 years &
above.
Respondents were asked to reply on “how many cigarettes
per day you smoke”, in which 37 respondent are missing due
to they are not smoker which holds 14.1%.
11 years & above6-10 years1-5 years
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
33.19%
36.73%
30.09%

25 & above16-2011-156-100-5
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Percent
25.22%27.88%
20.35%
17.26%
9.29%
what is your ocupation
17 6.5 7.5 7.5
20 7.6 8.8 16.3
21 8.0 9.3 25.6
20 7.6 8.8 34.4
19 7.2 8.4 42.7
31 11.8 13.7 56.4
56 21.3 24.7 81.1
43 16.3 18.9 100.0
227 86.3 100.0
36 13.7
263 100.0
professional
management
technical
sales
financial
business man
student
others
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
9.5% valid percent is smoking 0-5 cigarettes per day, 17.3%
valid percent is smoking 6-10 cigarettes per day, 20.4% valid
percent is smoking 11-15 cigarettes per day, 20.4% 27.9%
valid percent is smoking 16-20 cigarettes per day & 25% valid
percent is smoking 25 & above cigarettes per day.
Respondents were asked to reply on “what is your
occupation”, in which 36 respondent are missing because
they are not smokers which holds 13.7%.
7.5% valid percent belong to professional, 8.8% valid
percent belong to management, 9.3% valid percent belong to
technical, 8.8% valid percent belongs to sales, 8.4% valid
percent belong to financial, 13.7% valid percent belongs to

which brand do u smoke
32 12.2 14.2 14.2
29 11.0 12.8 27.0
15 5.7 6.6 33.6
1 .4 .4 34.1
79 30.0 35.0 69.0
3 1.1 1.3 70.4
3 1.1 1.3 71.7
20 7.6 8.8 80.5
11 4.2 4.9 85.4
8 3.0 3.5 88.9
2 .8 .9 89.8
5 1.9 2.2 92.0
1 .4 .4 92.5
2 .8 .9 93.4
15 5.7 6.6 100.0
226 85.9 100.0
37 14.1
263 100.0
benson & hedges
capstan
dunhill
diplomet
goldleaf
goldflake
K2
marlboro
more
morven gold
pine
red & white
555
others
No preference
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
othersstudentbusiness
man
financialsalestechnicalmanageme
nt
professional
25
20
15
10
5
0
Percent
18.94%
24.67%
13.66%
8.37%8.81%9.25%8.81%7.49%
business man, 24.7% valid percent belongs to students &
18.9% valid percent belong to others.

Respondents were asked to reply on “which brand do you
smoke”, in which 37 respondents are missing because they
are not smokers which holds 14.1%.
14.2 % smokes Benson & hedges, 12.2% smokes Capstan,
6.6% smokes Dunhill, 0.4% smokes Diplomat, 35.0% smokes
Gold leaf, 1.3% smokes Gold flake, 1.3% smokes K-2, 8.8%
smokes Marlboro, 4.9% smokes More, 3.5% smokes Morven
gold, 0.9% smokes Pine, 2.2% smokes Red & White, 0.4
smokes 555, 0.9% smokes other brands.
No Preference e
on cigarettes brand was given by 6.6% of
respondent.
e
smoke more than one brand

No
pref...
other
s
555red &
white
pinemorv
en...
moremarl
boro
K2goldfl
ake
goldl
eaf
diplo
met
dunhil
l
capst
an
bens
on ...
40
30
20
10
0
Percent
6.64%
0.88%0.44%2.21%0.88%3.54%4.87%
8.85%
1.33%1.33%
34.96%
0.44%
6.64%
12.83%14.16%
what is your income
25 9.5 11.4 11.4
15 5.7 6.8 18.2
30 11.4 13.6 31.8
51 19.4 23.2 55.0
61 23.2 27.7 82.7
38 14.4 17.3 100.0
220 83.7 100.0
43 16.3
263 100.0
500-1,500
1,600-3,000
4,000-5,000
6,000-10,000
11,000-20,000
21,000 & above
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
Respondents were asked to reply on “what is your monthly
income/pocket money”, in which 43 respondent are missing
because they are not smokers which holds 16.3%.

21,000 &
above
11,000-
20,000
6,000-10,0004,000-5,0001,600-3,000500-1,500
what is your income
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Percent
17.27%
27.73%
23.18%
13.64%
6.82%
11.36%
what is your income
11.4% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 500-1,500,
6.8% belong to monthly income group of R.s 1,600-3,000,
13.4% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 4,000-5,000,
23% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 6,000-10,000,
27.7% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 11,000-20,000
& 17.3% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 21,000 &
above.

Due to our subject location or area was very important so we
selected small areas to get our result. For that we divided it in
to 25 areas
where do you live
16 6.1 6.1 6.1
19 7.2 7.2 13.3
12 4.6 4.6 17.9
9 3.4 3.4 21.3
17 6.5 6.5 27.8
14 5.3 5.3 33.1
3 1.1 1.1 34.2
8 3.0 3.0 37.3
4 1.5 1.5 38.8
9 3.4 3.4 42.2
2 .8 .8 43.0
16 6.1 6.1 49.0
12 4.6 4.6 53.6
15 5.7 5.7 59.3
10 3.8 3.8 63.1
14 5.3 5.3 68.4
8 3.0 3.0 71.5
6 2.3 2.3 73.8
5 1.9 1.9 75.7
13 4.9 4.9 80.6
11 4.2 4.2 84.8
10 3.8 3.8 88.6
7 2.7 2.7 91.3
13 4.9 4.9 96.2
10 3.8 3.8 100.0
263 100.0 100.0
Clifton
Defence
F.B area
Garden
Gulshan
Gulistan-e-johar
Lasbela
Liaqatabad
Landhi
Malir
Liary
Nazimabad
New karachi
Tariq road
Saddar
P.E.C.H.S
Maripur
korangi
Light house
K.D.A
Azizabad
Jahangir road
Akhter colony
Hill Park
Cantt
Total
Valid
Cumulative
Percent

Cant
t
Hill
Par
k
Akht
er
colo
ny
Jaha
ngir
road
Aziz
abad
K.D.
A
Light
hous
e
kora
ngi
Mari
pur
P.E.
C.H.
S
Sad
dar
Tari
q
road
New
kara
chi
Nazi
mab
ad
Liar
y
Mali
r
Lan
dhi
Liaq
atab
ad
Lasb
ela
Guli
stan
-e-
joha
r
Gul
sha
n
Gar
den
F.B
area
Def
enc
e
Clift
on
where do you live
8
6
4
2
0
Percent
3.8%
4.94%
2.66%
3.8%
4.18%
4.94%
1.9%
2.28%
3.04%
5.32%
3.8%
5.7%
4.56%
6.08%
0.76%
3.42%
1.52%
3.04%
1.14%
5.32%
6.46%
3.42%
4.56%
7.22%
6.08%
where do you live

Case Processing Summary
74 93.7% 5 6.3% 79 100.0%
* what is your age
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Valid Missing Total
Cases
4.8 HYPOTHESIS TESTING
HYPOTHESIS 1
Consumers belonging to same AGE group prefer same brand
of cigarettes.
H1o:- consumers belonging to same age group do not smoke
same brand of cigarette.
H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke same
brand of cigarette
To prove this hypothesis cross tab was done:
Age was considered as independent.
93.7% have responded & 6.3% are been found missing

which brand do u smoke * what is your age Crosstabulation
0 4 5 5 4 2 8 4 0 32
.6 5.0 7.4 5.2 4.5 2.5 3.7 2.0 1.1 32.0
.0% 1.8% 2.2% 2.2% 1.8% .9% 3.5% 1.8% .0% 14.2%
1 4 9 3 1 6 3 1 1 29
.5 4.5 6.7 4.7 4.1 2.3 3.3 1.8 1.0 29.0
.4% 1.8% 4.0% 1.3% .4% 2.7% 1.3% .4% .4% 12.8%
0 2 3 5 1 1 2 1 0 15
.3 2.3 3.5 2.5 2.1 1.2 1.7 .9 .5 15.0
.0% .9% 1.3% 2.2% .4% .4% .9% .4% .0% 6.6%
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
.0 .2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 1.0
.0% .0% .0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4%
2 19 17 15 12 0 6 4 4 79
1.4 12.2 18.2 12.9 11.2 6.3 9.1 4.9 2.8 79.0
.9% 8.4% 7.5% 6.6% 5.3% .0% 2.7% 1.8% 1.8% 35.0%
0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 3
.1 .5 .7 .5 .4 .2 .3 .2 .1 3.0
.0% .0% .0% .4% .4% .0% .4% .0% .0% 1.3%
0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3
.1 .5 .7 .5 .4 .2 .3 .2 .1 3.0
.0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .4% .4% .0% .0% 1.3%
0 1 3 1 6 3 4 1 1 20
.4 3.1 4.6 3.3 2.8 1.6 2.3 1.2 .7 20.0
.0% .4% 1.3% .4% 2.7% 1.3% 1.8% .4% .4% 8.8%
1 1 5 1 2 1 0 0 0 11
.2 1.7 2.5 1.8 1.6 .9 1.3 .7 .4 11.0
.4% .4% 2.2% .4% .9% .4% .0% .0% .0% 4.9%
0 0 2 1 2 3 0 0 0 8
.1 1.2 1.8 1.3 1.1 .6 .9 .5 .3 8.0
.0% .0% .9% .4% .9% 1.3% .0% .0% .0% 3.5%
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2
.0 .3 .5 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 .1 2.0
.0% .0% .0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .9%
0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 5
.1 .8 1.2 .8 .7 .4 .6 .3 .2 5.0
.0% .0% .9% .4% .4% .4% .0% .0% .0% 2.2%
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
.0 .2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 1.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .0% .4%
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
.0 .3 .5 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 .1 2.0
.0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .9%
0 2 6 2 2 0 1 2 0 15
.3 2.3 3.5 2.5 2.1 1.2 1.7 .9 .5 15.0
.0% .9% 2.7% .9% .9% .0% .4% .9% .0% 6.6%
4 35 52 37 32 18 26 14 8 226
4.0 35.0 52.0 37.0 32.0 18.0 26.0 14.0 8.0 226.0
1.8% 15.5% 23.0% 16.4% 14.2% 8.0% 11.5% 6.2% 3.5% 100%
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
benson &
hedges
capstan
dunhill
diplomet
goldleaf
goldflake
K2
marlboro
more
morven
gold
pine
red &
white
555
others
No
preference
which
brand
do u
smoke
Total
16-17 18-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50
50 &
above
what is your age
Total

N
o
preference
others
555
red
&
w
hite
pine
m
orven
gold
m
ore
m
arlboro
K2
goldflake
goldleaf
diplom
et
dunhill
capstan
benson
&
hedges
Count
20
10
0
what is your age
16-17
18-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
50 & above

15 out of 226 respondents to No Preference f
having 6.6%
Consumers belonging to age group 16-17 prefer = gold leaf
0.9%.with a count of 2 out of 4 responded.
Consumers belonging to age group 36-40 prefer = capstan
Consumers belonging to age group 41-45 prefer = Benson &
hedges 3.5%.with a count of 8 out of 26 responded.
Consumers belonging to age group 46-50 prefer = gold leaf &
Benson & hedges both having 1.4 %.with a count of 4 out of
14 responded.
having 1.4 %.with a count of 4 out of 8 responded.
f

With level of significance of 0.041,
Therefore:
We cannot accept H1o
H1o:- consumers belonging to same age group do not smoke
We will accept H1a that is
H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke a
same brand of cigarette

220 83.7% 43 16.3% 263 100.0%
* what is your income
Valid Missing Total
Cases
HYPOTHESIS 2
Consumers belonging to same INCOME group prefer same
H1o:- consumers belonging to same income group do not
smoke same brand of cigarette.
H1a:- consumers belonging to same income group smoke
same brand of cigarette
Income was considered as independent.

No
prefe
rence
other
s
555red &
white
pinemorv
en
gold
moremarl
boro
K2goldfl
ake
goldl
eaf
diplo
met
dunhil
l
capst
an
bens
on &
hedg
es
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Count
21,000 & above
11,000-20,000
6,000-10,000
4,000-5,000
1,600-3,000
500-1,500
what is your income
Bar Chart

which brand do u smoke * what is your income Crosstabulation
3 1 3 1 9 15 32
3.6 2.2 4.4 7.4 8.9 5.5 32.0
1.4% .5% 1.4% .5% 4.1% 6.8% 14.5%
0 1 9 15 3 0 28
3.2 1.9 3.8 6.5 7.8 4.8 28.0
.0% .5% 4.1% 6.8% 1.4% .0% 12.7%
2 1 0 2 5 4 14
1.6 1.0 1.9 3.2 3.9 2.4 14.0
.9% .5% .0% .9% 2.3% 1.8% 6.4%
0 0 1 0 0 0 1
.1 .1 .1 .2 .3 .2 1.0
.0% .0% .5% .0% .0% .0% .5%
15 7 7 18 29 2 78
8.9 5.3 10.6 18.1 21.6 13.5 78.0
6.8% 3.2% 3.2% 8.2% 13.2% .9% 35.5%
0 0 0 1 2 0 3
.3 .2 .4 .7 .8 .5 3.0
.0% .0% .0% .5% .9% .0% 1.4%
1 0 0 2 0 0 3
.3 .2 .4 .7 .8 .5 3.0
.5% .0% .0% .9% .0% .0% 1.4%
0 1 1 0 7 10 19
2.2 1.3 2.6 4.4 5.3 3.3 19.0
.0% .5% .5% .0% 3.2% 4.5% 8.6%
2 1 1 1 2 3 10
1.1 .7 1.4 2.3 2.8 1.7 10.0
.9% .5% .5% .5% .9% 1.4% 4.5%
0 0 5 2 0 1 8
.9 .5 1.1 1.9 2.2 1.4 8.0
.0% .0% 2.3% .9% .0% .5% 3.6%
0 0 0 2 0 0 2
.2 .1 .3 .5 .6 .3 2.0
.0% .0% .0% .9% .0% .0% .9%
0 1 2 0 2 0 5
.6 .3 .7 1.2 1.4 .9 5.0
.0% .5% .9% .0% .9% .0% 2.3%
0 0 0 0 0 1 1
.1 .1 .1 .2 .3 .2 1.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .5% .5%
1 0 0 0 0 1 2
.2 .1 .3 .5 .6 .3 2.0
.5% .0% .0% .0% .0% .5% .9%
1 2 1 7 2 1 14
1.6 1.0 1.9 3.2 3.9 2.4 14.0
.5% .9% .5% 3.2% .9% .5% 6.4%
25 15 30 51 61 38 220
25.0 15.0 30.0 51.0 61.0 38.0 220.0
11.4% 6.8% 13.6% 23.2% 27.7% 17.3% 100%
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
benson &
hedges
capstan
dunhill
diplomet
goldleaf
goldflake
K2
marlboro
more
morven
gold
pine
red &
white
555
others
No
preferenc
e
which
brand
do u
smoke
Total
500-1,500 1,600-3,000 4,000-5,000 6,000-10,000
11,000-
20,000
21,000
& above
what is your income
Total

14 out of 220 respondents to No Preference g
having 6.4%
Consumers belonging to income group of R.S 500 – 1,500
prefer = gold leaf 6.8%.with a count of 15 out of 25
responded.
Consumers belonging to income group of R.S 1,600 – 3,000
prefer = gold leaf 3.2%.with a count of 7 out of 15 responded.
Consumers belonging to income group of R.S 4,000– 5,000
prefer = capstan 4.1%.with a count of 9 out of 30 responded.
responded.
responded.
Consumers belonging to income group of R.S 21,000 &
above prefer = Benson & hedges 6.8%.with a count of 15 out
of 38 responded.
With level of significance of 0.001, we can not accept H1o
H1o:- consumers belonging to same income group do not
g

H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke same
brand of cigarette
HYPOTHESIS 3
Consumers having same rate of cigarettes CONSUMPTIONh
prefers same brand of cigarettes.
H1o:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption
group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.
H1a:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption
group smoke same brand of cigarette.
Consumption was considered as independent.
h
cigarettes per day smoked

No
prefer
ence
other
s
555red &
white
pinemorv
en
gold
moremarlb
oro
K2goldfl
ake
goldle
af
diplo
met
dunhillcapst
an
benso
n &
hedge
s
25
20
15
10
5
0
Count
25 & above
16-20
11-15
6-10
0-5
how many cigrettes per
day
Bar Chart
226 85.9% 37 14.1% 263 100.0%
which brand do u
smoke * how many
cigrettes per day
Valid Missing Total
Cases

15 out of 226 respondents to No Preference i
having 6.6%
Consumers who smokes 0-5 cigarettes per day prefer = gold
leaf 2.2%.with a count of 5 out of 21 responded.
Consumers who smokes 6-10 cigarettes per day prefer = gold
leaf 5.8%.with a count of 13 out of 39 responded.
Consumers who smokes 11-15 cigarettes per day prefer =
gold leaf 7.1%.with a count of 16 out of 46 responded.
Consumers who smokes 16-20 cigarettes per day prefer =
gold leaf 9.3%.with a count of 21 out of 63 responded.
Consumers who smokes 25 & above cigarettes per day prefer
= gold leaf 10.6%.with a count of 24 out of 57 responded.
H1o:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption
group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.
H1a:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption
group smoke same brand of cigarette.

226 85.9% 37 14.1% 263 100.0%
* what is your ocupation
Valid Missing Total
Cases
HYPOTHESIS 4
Consumers belonging to same OCUPATION prefers same
H1o:- consumers belonging to same occupation group do not
H1a:- consumers belonging to same occupation smoke same
brand of cigarette
Occupation was considered as independent.

which brand do u smoke * what is your ocupation Crosstabulation
2 5 0 0 10 6 7 2 32
2.4 2.8 3.0 2.8 2.7 4.2 7.9 6.1 32.0
.9% 2.2% .0% .0% 4.4% 2.7% 3.1% .9% 14.2%
0 0 5 2 1 5 6 10 29
2.2 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.4 3.8 7.2 5.5 29.0
.0% .0% 2.2% .9% .4% 2.2% 2.7% 4.4% 12.8%
2 3 0 0 1 4 3 2 15
1.1 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.3 2.0 3.7 2.9 15.0
.9% 1.3% .0% .0% .4% 1.8% 1.3% .9% 6.6%
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2 1.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .4%
6 0 8 14 4 6 28 13 79
5.9 7.0 7.3 7.0 6.6 10.5 19.6 15.0 79.0
2.7% .0% 3.5% 6.2% 1.8% 2.7% 12.4% 5.8% 35.0%
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
.2 .3 .3 .3 .3 .4 .7 .6 3.0
.0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .9% 1.3%
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
.2 .3 .3 .3 .3 .4 .7 .6 3.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .9% 1.3%
2 7 3 1 0 6 1 0 20
1.5 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.7 2.7 5.0 3.8 20.0
.9% 3.1% 1.3% .4% .0% 2.7% .4% .0% 8.8%
3 3 0 0 1 0 4 0 11
.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 .9 1.5 2.7 2.1 11.0
1.3% 1.3% .0% .0% .4% .0% 1.8% .0% 4.9%
0 0 3 2 1 0 0 2 8
.6 .7 .7 .7 .7 1.1 2.0 1.5 8.0
.0% .0% 1.3% .9% .4% .0% .0% .9% 3.5%
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .5 .4 2.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .0% .4% .9%
0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 5
.4 .4 .5 .4 .4 .7 1.2 1.0 5.0
.0% .0% .4% .0% .4% .0% .4% .9% 2.2%
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2 1.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .0% .0% .4%
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .5 .4 2.0
.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4% .4% .9%
2 1 1 1 0 1 4 5 15
1.1 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.3 2.0 3.7 2.9 15.0
.9% .4% .4% .4% .0% .4% 1.8% 2.2% 6.6%
17 20 21 20 19 30 56 43 226
17.0 20.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 30.0 56.0 43.0 226.0
7.5% 8.8% 9.3% 8.8% 8.4% 13.3% 24.8% 19.0% 100.0%
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
benson &
hedges
capstan
dunhill
diplomet
goldleaf
goldflake
K2
marlboro
more
morven
gold
pine
red &
white
555
others
No
preferenc
e
which
brand
do u
smoke
Total
professional management technical sales financial
business
man student others
Total

No
prefer
ence
other
s
555red &
white
pinemorv
en
gold
moremarlb
oro
K2goldfl
ake
goldle
af
diplo
met
dunhillcapst
an
benso
n &
hedge
s
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Count
others
student
business man
financial
sales
technical
management
professional
Bar Chart
15 out of 226 respondents to No Preference having 6.6%
Consumers who are professional prefer = gold leaf 2.7%.with
a count of 6 out of 17 responded.
Consumers who belong to management prefer = Marlboro
Consumers who belong to technical jobs prefer = gold leaf
Consumers who belong to sales jobs prefer = Marlboro

Consumers who belong to financial jobs prefer = Benson &
hedges2.7%.with a count of 10 out of 19 responded.
Consumers who are business men prefer = Marlboro, gold
leaf & Benson & hedges all having 2.7%.with a count of 6 out
of 30 responded.
Consumers who are students prefer = gold leaf 12.4%.with a
count of 28 out of 56 responded.
Consumers who belong to other occupation than above prefer
= gold leaf 5.8%.with a count of 13 out of 43 responded.
H1o:- consumers belonging to same occupation do not smoke
H1a:- consumers belonging to same occupation smoke same
brand of cigarette.
HYPOTHESIS 5

226 85.9% 37 14.1% 263 100.0%
which brand do u
smoke * distric
Valid Missing Total
Cases
Consumers belonging to same LOCATIONj
prefers same
H1o:- Consumers belonging to same LOCATION do not
prefers same brand of cigarettes.
H1a:- Consumers belonging to same LOCATION prefers
To prove this hypothesis cross tab was done with help of chi
square & phi and Cramer’s
Location was considered as independent.
85.9% have responded & 14.1% have been found missing
South: - Clifton, Defense, Akhter colony & Cantt

which brand do u smoke * distric Crosstabulation
10 3 16 1 1 1 32
6.1 8.5 10.8 1.6 2.7 2.4 32.0
4.4% 1.3% 7.1% .4% .4% .4% 14.2%
3 16 4 1 4 1 29
5.5 7.7 9.8 1.4 2.4 2.2 29.0
1.3% 7.1% 1.8% .4% 1.8% .4% 12.8%
7 0 7 0 0 1 15
2.9 4.0 5.0 .7 1.3 1.1 15.0
3.1% .0% 3.1% .0% .0% .4% 6.6%
0 1 0 0 0 0 1
.2 .3 .3 .0 .1 .1 1.0
.0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .4%
9 22 27 7 7 7 79
15.0 21.0 26.6 3.8 6.6 5.9 79.0
4.0% 9.7% 11.9% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 35.0%
0 1 1 0 0 1 3
.6 .8 1.0 .1 .3 .2 3.0
.0% .4% .4% .0% .0% .4% 1.3%
0 0 1 1 0 1 3
.6 .8 1.0 .1 .3 .2 3.0
.0% .0% .4% .4% .0% .4% 1.3%
6 4 7 1 1 1 20
3.8 5.3 6.7 1.0 1.7 1.5 20.0
2.7% 1.8% 3.1% .4% .4% .4% 8.8%
3 1 7 0 0 0 11
2.1 2.9 3.7 .5 .9 .8 11.0
1.3% .4% 3.1% .0% .0% .0% 4.9%
2 0 0 0 5 1 8
1.5 2.1 2.7 .4 .7 .6 8.0
.9% .0% .0% .0% 2.2% .4% 3.5%
1 1 0 0 0 0 2
.4 .5 .7 .1 .2 .2 2.0
.4% .4% .0% .0% .0% .0% .9%
0 5 0 0 0 0 5
1.0 1.3 1.7 .2 .4 .4 5.0
.0% 2.2% .0% .0% .0% .0% 2.2%
0 0 1 0 0 0 1
.2 .3 .3 .0 .1 .1 1.0
.0% .0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .4%
1 0 1 0 0 0 2
.4 .5 .7 .1 .2 .2 2.0
.4% .0% .4% .0% .0% .0% .9%
1 6 4 0 1 3 15
2.9 4.0 5.0 .7 1.3 1.1 15.0
.4% 2.7% 1.8% .0% .4% 1.3% 6.6%
43 60 76 11 19 17 226
43.0 60.0 76.0 11.0 19.0 17.0 226.0
19.0% 26.5% 33.6% 4.9% 8.4% 7.5% 100.0%
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
benson & hedges
capstan
dunhill
diplomet
goldleaf
goldflake
K2
marlboro
more
morven gold
pine
red & white
555
others
No preference
which
brand
do u
smoke
Total
south north east west malir central
distric
Total
North: - F.B area, Liaqatabad, Nazimabad, New Karachi, Maripur &
Azizabad,
East: - Gulshan, Gul-e-johur, P.E.C.H.S, Tariq road, K.D.A,
Jahangir road & Hill park
West: - Garden & lasbela
Malir: -Lanhdi, Malir & Korangi
Central: - Sadder, Liary & Light house,

N
o
preference
others
555
red
&
w
hite
pine
m
orven
gold
m
ore
m
arlb
oro
K
2
goldflake
goldlea
f
diplom
e
t
dunh
ill
capstan
benson
&
hedges
Count
30
20
10
0
distric
south
north
east
west
malir
central
15 out of 226 respondents to No Preference having 6.6%
Consumers who live in south district prefer = Benson &
hedges 4.4%.with a count of 10 out of 43 responded.
Consumers who live in north district prefer = gold leaf
Consumers who live in east district prefer = gold leaf
Consumers who live in west district prefer = gold leaf

Consumers who live in Malir district prefer = gold leaf
Consumers who live in central district prefer = gold leaf
H1o:- Consumers belonging to same location do not prefers
H1a:- Consumers belonging to same location do not prefers

226 85.9% 37 14.1% 263 100.0%
how many cigrettes
per day * what is
your ocupation
Valid Missing Total
Cases
HYPOTHESIS 6
Consumers belonging to same occupation have same
consumption rate of cigarettes.
H1o:- Consumers belonging to same occupation do not have
same consumption rate of cigarettes.
H1a:- Consumers belonging to same occupation have same
85.9% have responded & 14.1% have been found missing
To prove this hypothesis cross tab was done with help of chi
square & phi and Cramer’s
Occupation was considered as independent

how many cigrettes per day* what is your ocupation Crosstabulation
1 2 1 0 1 1 13 2 21
1.6 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 2.8 5.2 4.0 21.0
.4% .9% .4% .0% .4% .4% 5.8% .9% 9.3%
6 2 1 5 5 2 15 3 39
2.9 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.3 5.2 9.7 7.4 39.0
2.7% .9% .4% 2.2% 2.2% .9% 6.6% 1.3% 17.3%
4 4 2 5 7 5 11 8 46
3.5 4.1 4.3 4.1 3.9 6.1 11.4 8.8 46.0
1.8% 1.8% .9% 2.2% 3.1% 2.2% 4.9% 3.5% 20.4%
4 10 7 6 3 10 12 11 63
4.7 5.6 5.9 5.6 5.3 8.4 15.6 12.0 63.0
1.8% 4.4% 3.1% 2.7% 1.3% 4.4% 5.3% 4.9% 27.9%
2 2 10 4 3 12 5 19 57
4.3 5.0 5.3 5.0 4.8 7.6 14.1 10.8 57.0
.9% .9% 4.4% 1.8% 1.3% 5.3% 2.2% 8.4% 25.2%
17 20 21 20 19 30 56 43 226
17.0 20.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 30.0 56.0 43.0 226.0
7.5% 8.8% 9.3% 8.8% 8.4% 13.3% 24.8% 19.0% 100.0%
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% of Total
0-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
25 & above
howmany
cigrettes
per day
Total
professional management technical sales financial
business
man student others
Total
25 & abov e16-2011-156-100-5
Count
20
10
0
what is your ocupati
professional
management
technical
sales
f inancial
business man
student
others

Consumption of professional = 6-10 cigarettes per day with
2.7 with a count of 6 out of 17 responded.
Consumption of management = 16-20 cigarettes per day with
4.4% with a count of 10 out of 20 responded.
Consumption of technical = 25 & above cigarettes per day
with 3.1% with a count of 7 out of 21 responded.
Consumption of sales = 16-20 cigarettes per day with 2.7%
with a count of 6 out of 20 responded.
Consumption of financial = 11-15 cigarettes per day with 3.1%
Consumption of business man = 25 & above cigarettes per
day with 5.3% with a count of 12 out of 30 responded.
Consumption of student = 6-10 cigarettes per day with 6.6%
Consumption of others = 25 & above cigarettes per day with
8.4% with a count of 19 out of 43 responded.

H1o:- Consumers belonging to same occupation do not have
a same consumption rate of cigarettes.
H1a:- Consumers belonging to same occupation have a same

CHAPTER # 5: RESEARCH
FINDINGS
Chap # 5.1 Questionaire

Questionnaire
Please fill out this form
1. What is your gender?
Female Male
2. Your age
16 - 17 18 – 20 21 - 25 26 – 30 31 –
35
36 – 40 41 – 45 46 - 50 50 & above
3. Do you smoke
If NO so go to Q.9
Yes No Already Quitted
4. how long have you been smoking
1 year - 5 years 6 years - 10 years 11 years &
above
5. how many cigarettes per day
0 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 – 20 25 & above
6. Your occupation
kindly tick your occupation
Professional Management Technical Sales
Financial Business man Student Other

7. Tick the brand you smoke
kindly tick only one brand
Benson & hedges Capstan
Dunhill Diplomat
Gold leaf Gold flake
K2
More
Marlboro
Morven gold
Pine Red & white
555 Other
8. Your monthly income pocket money
500 - 1500 1600 – 3000 4000 - 5000
6000 - 10,000 11,000 - 20,000 21,000 & above
9. where do you live

Chapter # 06
Chap # 6.1 Conclusion
Chap # 6.2 Recommendations.

5.1 CONCLUSION
The Top Three most preferred cigarette brands
1st
= Gold leaf
With 79 out 263 respondents smoke it having 35%.
2nd
= Benson & hedges
With 32 out of 236 respondents smoke it having 14.2%
3rd
=Capstan
With 29 out of 263 respondents smoke it having 12.8%
Target Segments of Gold leaf:-
Age: - 18-20
Income: - 11,000 – 20,000
Consumption: - 25 & above
Occupation: - students
Location: - East
Target Segment of Benson & hedges:-
Age: - 41-45
Income: - 21,000 & above
Consumption: - 16 - 20
Occupation: - Financials
Location: -East
Target Segment of Capstan:-
Age: - 21-25
Income: - 6,000 – 10,000
Consumption: - 16- 20
Occupation: - Others
Location: - North

Final whole

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Final whole

Similar to Final whole (20)

Final whole