I.

The Problem and Its Background

1.1 Introduction
People in Davao City each, has unique preferences when it comes to consuming
goods. Nowadays, there are consumers who are health conscious and some are not. But
there still remains a group of smokers who prefer to smoke rather than quit. Even though
the government has implemented the mandatory igger warning signs, the question is,
how do smokers respond to it!
"he researchers would e focusing on the uying ehavior of consumers in Davao
City regarding the implementation of the igger warning signs, how it influences smokers
and how it affects the sales of cigarette companies. "he demographic segmentation will
e across the different generations.
#fter the research, the researchers would attempt to come up with a working
theory, which may or may not e conclusive, concerning the preferences of the
consumers towards the implementation of igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
1.2 Problem Statement
$ow does the implementation of igger warning signs on cigarette packs affect
the consumers across the different social classes and generations!
%
1.3 Objectives
"o determine how the implementation of igger warning signs affect the
consumers across the different social classes.
"o determine how the new implementation of igger warning signs affect the
consumers across the different generations.
1.4 Theoretical rame!ork
"he dependent variale which the researchers would like to measure is what
would e the effects of the igger warning signs on cigarette packs to the consumers. &t
would e influenced y the independent variale which are the different social classes
and generations to which a consumer elongs.
"he relationship of the igger warning signs to the consumers is that it might
affect the perception of the consumers towards cigarettes and this may affect the demand
for cigarettes. But since people have diverse perceptions they tend to assimilate and
interpret things differently. "he consumer ehavior may also vary in the different social
class and generations that they elong.
'
1." #ssum$tions
People tend to perceive things differently given the following factors( attitude,
social class, age group, orientation and elief, among other things. "hese factors
invarialy affect the consumer)s ehavior. "herefore, the researchers assumed that
the perception on the implementation of igger warning signs would also vary
across the different social classes and generations.
"he igger warning signs have less impact in lessening the numer of smokers.
"his is with the assumption that the people are already aware of the negative
effects of smoking.
Cigarette companies would still earn the same profits as efore, given that these
warning signs were already visile enough to e seen in the cigarette packs efore
the new directive to make them igger was implemented.
#cross the different social classes, each has their own way of purchasing
cigarettes, upper classes tends to purchase cigarettes y packs or rims, middle and
lower classes sometimes only uy cigarettes y packs and more often y sticks
only.
#cross the different generations, each has their own way of thinking and ideas
towards these warning signs, ay oomers which are more aware of this warning
signs tends to still ignore the warning signs since they know it already even
efore, *eneration +, which has recently noticed aout the warning signs may e
affected with their consumption of cigarettes and *eneration ,, which are less
-
knowledgeale that those elong to the Bay Boomers and *eneration +s can e
affected y the warning signs on cigarette packs.
1.% &'$othesis
.pper class, Bay Boomers smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
.pper class, *eneration +)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
.pper class, *eneration ,)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
/iddle class, Bay Boomers smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
/iddle class, *eneration +)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
/iddle class, *eneration ,)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
0ower class, Bay Boomers smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
0ower class, *eneration +)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
0ower class, *eneration ,)s smokers are not affected y the implementation of
igger warning signs on cigarette packs.
1
1.( Signi)icance o) the Stud'
"he study is helpful in determining how effective the new ig warning signs are
on cigarette packs with regards to lessening the numers of smokers. &t is also important
to cigarette companies to give them a general view of whether the implementation is a
threat or not to their sales. "his would aid them to work on further ad2ustment
plans3strategies in the long run.
"he study is also significant to other researchers for future studies ecause they
can use the data gathered as a enchmark in their research.
1.* Sco$e and +imitation
"he study would only e focused on the implementation of igger warning signs
in cigarette packs and which is geographically limited only in Davao City. "he study
would only cover those who smoke only since not everyone in the total population in
Davao City smokes. "he population of the smokers would e ased from the years %445
up to the present. "he sample si6e would e taken from 17 respondents.
"he su2ects of the study would e oth male and female from different social
classes and generations. "he income for the social classes would e ased in the year
'55-, since it is the most recent data availale. "he primary data would e taken from our
survey questions through the use of questionnaires.
7
1., -e)inition o) Terms
#bsolute threshold. lowest level of an individual that e8periences sensation
/onsumer Behavior 0 the ehavior that consumers display in searching for,
purchasing, using, evaluating, and disposing of products, services, and ideas.
/onsumers 0 a term used to descrie two different kinds of consuming
entities( personal consumers 9who uy goods and services for their own use or
for household use: and organizational consumers 9who uy products,
equipment, and services in order to run their organi6ation.
Perce$tion 0 the process y which an individual selects, organi6es, and
interprets stimuli into a meaningful and coherent picture of the world.
-i))erential threshold . minimal difference that can e detected etween two
similar stimuli. 9also known as ;ND or 2ust noticeale difference:
Social class < the division of memers of a society into a hierarchy of distinct
status classes, so that memers of each class have either higher or lower status
than memers of other classes.
Stimulus= any unit of input to any of the senses
1$$er class < achievers, are those people elonging in class # 9earns P75,555
aove monthly:.
2iddle class < strivers, are those people elonging in class C' 9earns P>,55%
to P%7,555 monthly:, class C% 9earns P%7,55% to P-5,555 monthly: and class
B 9earns P P-5,555 to P75,555 monthly:
?
+o!er class < strugglers, are those people elonging in class E 9earns P-555
and elow monthly: and class D 9earns P-,55% to P>,555 monthly:.
3eneration 4< represents all the people orn etween %4@@ and %441, these
are children of the ay oomers. Aanging from pre teens to mid= twenties.
Bab' Boomers 0 these are the people orn post= Borld Bar && etween %41?
and %4?1. "hey are one of the most powerful forces that shapes the marketing
environment.
3eneration 5 0 are people orn etween %4?7 and %4@?. "hey lie in the
shadow of the ay oomers and lack some distinguishing characteristics.
II. 6evie! o) 6elated +iterature
2.1 6elated 6eadings
#s diverse individuals, we tend to look at things differently. &t may e ased on
our own e8periences or personal needs, wants and values. Bhenever a person perceives
something, he3 she feels a sensation, which is the immediate and direct response of the
sensory organs to simple stimuli, such as an advertisement and a rand name. # stimulus
is any unit to any of input to any of the senses. Come e8amples of stimuli are products,
packages and commercials. "hese are sensed y the sensory receptors, the human organs
that receive sensory inputs. $uman sensitivity refers to the e8perience of sensation.
#n individual who e8periences a sensation at the lowest level is referred to as the
asolute threshold. &t is the point at which a person can detect a difference etween
@
DsomethingE and DnothingE. &n the field of perception, adaptation or Dgetting used toE
certain sensations may happen. Censory adaptation is one prolem for advertisers. Co
there must e great effort to gain the attention of the consumers. Bhen minimal
difference is recogni6ed, it is called the differential threshold or the ;.N.D 9for 2ust
noticeale difference:. #ccording to Ernst Beer)s law, the important application in
marketing is to determine the relevant ;.N.D. for their products for two very different
reasons( one, so that negative changes are not readily discernale to the pulic, second, so
that product improvements are very apparent to consumers without eing wastefully
e8travagant.
Source: Leon G. Schiffman, Leslie Lazar Kanuk, Consumer Behavior 7
th
edition
#s of % ;uly '55?, all cigarette packs sold in the Philippines must carry prominent
health warning occupying -5F on the ottom portion of one front panel of the pack.
$owever the companies are collectively reaking the ruling. "he toacco companies had
ample time to comply with this provision 9Cect %-c: as they were given three years grace
since the "oacco Aegulation #ct 9A# 4'%%: went into effect in ;uly '55-.
Source: http:!!!.essentialaction.orgto"accoletterphil!arn
TOB#//O 6731+#TIO8 #/T . 67P1B+I/ #/T 8O. ,2119 :ul' 229 2;;2
#N #C" AE*.0#"&N* "$E P#CG#*&N*, .CE, C#0E D&C"A&B."&HN #ND
#DIEA"&CE/EN"C HJ "HB#CCH PAHD.C"C #ND JHA H"$EA P.APHCEC.
>
Be it enacted y the Cenate and $ouse of Aepresentatives of the Philippines in Congress
assemled.
Cection %. Chort "itle = "his #ct shall e known as the K"oacco Aegulation #ct of '55-.K
Cection '. Policy = it is the policy of the Ctate to protect the populace from ha6ardous
products and promote the right to health and instill health consciousness among them. &t
is also the policy of the Ctate, consistent with the Constitutional ideal to promote the
general welfare, to safeguard the &nterests of the workers and other stakeholders in the
toacco industry. Jor these purposes, the government shall institute a alanced policy
wherey the use, sale, and advertisements of toacco products shall e regulated in order
to promote a healthful environment and protect the citi6ens from the ha6ards of toacco
smoke, and at the same time ensure that the interest of toacco farmers, growers, workers
and stakeholders are not adversely compromised.
Cection -. Purpose = &t is the main thrust of this #ct to(
a. Promote a healthful environmentL
. &nform the pulic of the health risks associated with cigarette smoking and toacco
useL
c. Aegulate and susequently an all toacco advertisements and sponsorshipsL
d. Aegulate the laeling of toacco productsL
4
e. Protect the youth from eing initiated to cigarette smoking and toacco use y
prohiiting the sale of toacco products to minorsL
f. #ssists and encourage Jilipino toacco farmers to cultivate alternative agricultural
crops to prevent economic dislocationL and
g. Create an &nter=#gency Committee on "oacco 9&#C="oacco: to oversee the
implementation of the provision of this #ct.
Cource(
http:!!!.livinginthephilippines.comphilippines#citizenship#act#$%&&.htmlunescap.org
esidpsispopulationdata"asepopla!sla!#phiphi#'(&.htm
Barning signs and laels are everywhere. /any factors are conspiring to fill the
world with more in2unctions against our desired ehavior. Daily life is increasing in
comple8ity while technology continually invents more powerful machines, drugs and
chemicals. /oreover, the cost of in2ury and insurance as well as accompanying litigation
is spiraling upward rapidly. #s a result, failures of warning compliance cause costly
social and economic impact.
.nfortunately, warnings often fail to change peopleMs ehavior. Either the warning
goes unnoticed, or, as increasingly happensL the warning is seen ut ignored. Jor many
years, designers focused their concern on sensory aspects of warnings( color, shape,
location, pictures vs. te8t, si6e and so on. $owever, recent research suggests that effective
warning design depends as much on the contents of the viewerMs head as on the contents
of the warningMs message.
%5
&f a warning tells the viewer to refrain from ehavior which will enale him3her to
easily and directly achieve a goal, then the viewer makes a cost=enefit analysis. &n some
cases, the viewer might lose the goal altogether 9KNo CmokingK signs:, or e8ert more
effort 9KDetourK signs:. Bithout knowing the viewerMs goal 9fast travel, least effort,
keeping shoes clean, etc: the complete cost cannot e precisely specified.
"he si6e of the enefits depends on another psychological factor, perception of
danger, which has two components, ha6ard and risk. $a6ard is the KadnessK of the
possile outcome. Jor e8ample, eing in a ma2or auto accident is a greater ha6ard than
getting a speeding ticket. Aisk is the proaility of the outcome. Being killed y a falling
meteorite is certainly a severe ha6ard, ut it is also a very small danger ecause the risk
proaility is tiny. 9Note( much of the research literature confuses the terms risk and
danger, using the term risk to cover oth. $owever, the difference is important for
understanding viewer perception.:
"he viewer then must take oth ha6ard and risk into account when making the
cost=enefit analysis. &f the person elieves that there is great danger, then s3he will see a
larger enefit in compliance. Conversely, perception of small danger means low enefit
and compliance will decrease.
Jinally, decision=making factors affect compliance. "wo people could make the
same cost=enefit analysis, ut one might ignore the warning and the other doesnMt.
People accept different danger levels, have different attitudes aout their aility to control
danger and are differentially affected y social and cultural norms.
&n sum, people who view a warnings use a mental model to perform a cost=enefit
analysis. "he three main process components are %: cost of compliance, ': perception of
%%
danger level and -: personal and social and cultural decision=making factors. #ll
elements of the cost=enefit analysis are psychological. &t is perceived risk, perceived
ha6ard, perceived control and perceived norms that matter, not actual ones. "his may e
ovious, ut is worth saying e8plicitly since many of the people who design warnings are
engineers. "hey are not so likely to consider mental models or psychological concepts.
"hatMs one reason that much of the warning research is so concerned with physical factors
such as warning color, shape, etc and less with goals and motivation.
Cource(
2arc 3reen "he Psychology of Barnings
%
do!nloaded from
http:!!!.visuale)pert.com*esourcesps+ch!arnings.html
Prevalence
1%.4F of students had ever smoked cigarettes 9Boy N 71.'F, *irl N -%.7F:
%4.?F currently use any toacco product 9Boy N '?.7F, *irl N %-.5F:
%7.5F currently smoke cigarettes 9Boy N '%.>F, *irl N >.>F:
>.'F currently use other toacco products 9Boy N %5.4F, *irl N 7.@F:
%-.>F of never smokers are likely to initiate smoking ne8t year
<no!ledge and #ttitudes
'4.?F think oys and %7.1F think girls who smoke have more friends
%@.4F think oys and %%.>F think girls who smoke look more attractive
%'
#ccess and #vailabilit' 0 /urrent Smokers
'%.-F usually smoke at home
7@.1F uy cigarettes in a store
?'.>F who ought cigarettes in a store were NH" refused purchase ecause of their age
7nvironmental Tobacco Smoke
7@.?F live in homes where others smoke in their presence
74.5F are around others who smoke in places outside their home
>>.@F think smoking should e anned from pulic places
@%.@F think smoke from others is harmful to them
77.@F have one or more parents who smoke
%'.'F have most or all friends who smoke
/essation . /urrent Smokers
>>.'F want to stop smoking
>?.4F tried to stop smoking during the past year
45.1F have ever received help to stop smoking
2edia and #dvertising
45.-F saw anti=smoking media messages, in the past -5 days
>@.?F saw pro=cigarette ads on illoards, in the past -5 days
>%.@F saw pro=cigarette ads in newspapers or maga6ines, in the past -5 days
%?.1F have an o2ect with a cigarette rand logo
%-.4F were offered free cigarettes y a toacco company representative
%-
School
?>.5F had een taught in class, during the past year, aout the dangers of smoking
?'.'F had discussed in class, during the past year, reasons why people their age smoke
?@.7F had een taught in class, during the past year, the effects of toacco use
Cource(
Borld $ealth Hrgani6ation do!nloaded from
http:!!!.cdc.govto"accoGlo"alG,-Sfactsheets%''./hilippines#factsheet.htm
III. 2ethodolog'
3.1 6esearch -esign
"he type of investigation to e used would e causal investigation, since the
effects of the igger warning signs of cigarette packs on the consumers across the
different social classes and generations is to e studied. "he study would e ased on the
reactions of consumers through the use of questionnaires and oservations. "he study
setting is non=contrive wherein the researchers would e gathering primary and
secondary data in their natural environment. #nalysis would e in group and the time
hori6on of the study would e longitudinal since we gathered data more than once.
%1
3.2 -etermination o) Sam$le Si=e
%.4?
'
9.'7:3 .%5
'
N 4? rounded off to %55 respondents
Bhere( %.4? is 47F Confidence level
.%5 is the margin of error
.'7 is the ma8imum variaility
&n this study, there should e %55 respondents according to the formula of Ned
Aoerto, ut the researchers gathered information only from 17 respondents. Jrom the 17
respondents, there should e appro8imately 7 respondents for each generation, which are
the ay oomers, generation + and generation ,, and 7 from each social class.
3.3 Sam$ling -esign and Techni>ue
"he sampling design and technique to e used would e the non=random
2udgment sampling wherein the respondents are selected through the 2udgment of the
researchers. "he respondents would e taken in Davao City only.
3.4 The Subject
"he su2ects of this study are y sample and the data of 17 respondents would e
taken from smokers who reside in Davao City. "he respondents significantly differ in
%7
generation and social class. "he respondents would e identified y non=proaility
sampling, distinctively, the 2udgment and quota sampling.
3." The 6esearch Instrument
"he researchers would use a questionnaire in gathering data. "he questionnaire
has two parts. Jirst, the respondents would e asked for their profile in regards to the
social class and the generation they elong. # close=ended question would e used for
measuring oth social class and generation questions to specify their identity in the
community. Cecond part aims to measure the awareness of the person regarding the new
implementation of igger warning signs and its effectiveness towards the consumers.
Close=ended questions would e used to measure the level of awareness of the people
with the implementation of igger warning signs. *raphic scale would e used in
measuring the effectiveness of the igger warning signs on the consumers.
3.% Statistical Treatment
"he statistical tool the researchers will e using is the mode and mean. "he mode
is to get the most common, so in this research, the researchers will e calculating for the
frequent numer of smokers per class that have een affected in a positive way. "he
respondents that were not counted in the mode are the ones that have not een affected,
and y doing this, the researchers will know appro8imately how the new implementation
of warning signs have made an impact to the sample respondents. "he mean is used to get
%?
the average numer of people who were affected y the new implementation of the
warning signs.
I?. indings
4.1 -etail o) indings
%@
%>
Based on the graph, the effectiveness is ased on 7 questions from the questionnaire,
namely(
&s there still a need to put warning signs on cigarette packs!
Do the warning signs persuade you to stop smoking!
$ow well are you convinced to stop smoking!
$ow well are you affected with the warning signs as a consumer!
Bith the new implementation of igger warning signs, do you still want to
smoke!
4.2 -ata #nal'sis and Inter$retation
Bay Boomers Effectiveness
.pper /oderately effective
/iddle Not effective
0ower /oderately effective
%4
*eneration + Effectiveness
.pper Clightly not effective
/iddle Not effective
0ower Clightly effective
*eneration , Effectiveness
.pper Not effective
/iddle $ighly effective
0ower Clightly not effective
?. Bibliogra$h'
*reen, /arc D"he Psychology of BarningsE do!nloaded from
http:!!!.visuale)pert.com*esourcesps+ch!arnings.html
Kotler, /hilip, 0rmstrong, Gar+, 0ng, S!ee 1oon, Leong, Sie! 2eng, -an Chin -iong
and -se, 3avid K., /rinciples of 2arketing 0n 0sian /erspective
Schiffman, Leon G. and Kanuk, Leslie Lazar, Consumer Behavior 7
th
edition
http:!!!.livinginthephilippines.comphilippines#citizenship#act#$%&&.htmlunescap.org
esidpsispopulationdata"asepopla!sla!#phiphi#'(&.htm
http:!!!.essentialaction.orgto"accoletterphil!arn
Borld $ealth Hrgani6ation do!nloaded from
http:!!!.cdc.govto"accoGlo"alG,-Sfactsheets%''./hilippines#factsheet.htm
?I. #$$endi@ A>uestionnaireB
*reetingsO
'5
Be, the BCC=/# students of #teneo de Davao .niversity are taking our usiness
research course, and we are conducting a study on the consumer ehavior regarding the
implementation of igger warning signs on cigarette packs. Be would like to ask a it of
your time to fill up this survey questionnaire. &t would e very helpful in our study.
"hank you for your participation.
Aespondents Profile(
%. #ge Aange(
PP%-=-5 PP-%=1' PP1-=?%
'. *ender(
PP/ale PPJemale
-. /onthly $ousehold &ncome(
PPP-,555 elow PPP-,55%=P>,555 PPP>,55%=P%7,555
PPP%7,55%=P-5,555 PPP-5,55%=75,555 PPP75,55% and aove
Questionnaire(
%. Do you currently notice any difference in the packaging of cigarettes!
PP,es PPNo
'. #re you aware of the warning signs in the cigarette packs!
PP,es PPNo
-. #re the warning signs visile enough!
PP,es PPNo
'%
1. #re these warning signs important to you as a consumer!
PP,es PPNo
7. Does the implementation of igger warning signs affect your
consumption of cigarettes!
PP,es PPNo
?. $ow many cigarettes do you usually consume efore the
implementation of igger warning signs!
PP%=7sticks PP7=%5sticks PP%5=%7sticks PP'5=aove
PPPPPPPPPPothers9pls. specify:
@. $ow many cigarettes now do you consume after the
implementation of igger warning signs!
PP%=7sticks PP7=%5sticks PP%5=%7sticks PP'5=aove
PPPPPPPPPothers9pls. specify..:
>. &s there still a need to put warning signs on cigarette packs!
PP,es PPNo
4. Do the warning signs persuade you to stop smoking!
PP,es PPNo
%5. $ow well are you convinced to stop smoking! 92ust put an 98: mark on the line:
Not at all ============================================================== Bell convincedO
''
%%. "he following are the messages in the warning signs. $ow effective does the
following warning signs affect on your consumption of cigarettes!
Pls. rate from % 9not effective: to 7 9very effective:.
% ' - 1 7
*overnment Barning( Cigarette smoking is
dangerous to your health
*overnment Barning( "oacco smoke can
harm your children.
*overnment Barning(
Cmoking Gills
*overnment Barning(
Cigarettes are addictive.
%'. Chould there e changes in the design or the way the warning
signs are placed to make it more convincing to smokers!
PP,es PPNo
%-. Bhich do you think must e improved to make the warning
signs effective!
PPJont PPJont Color PPPicture PPBackground color
PPDesign PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPothers9pls. specify:
%1. $ow well are you affected with the warning signs as a consumer!
92ust put an 98: mark on the line:
No effect at all ====================================================== Iery effectiveO
%7. Bith the new implementation of igger warning signs, do you still want to smoke!
=7 =1 =- =' =% Cmoke! R% R' R- R1 R7
'-
3ra$h
Age Range
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulativ
e Percent
Valid 13-30 yrs
old
15 33.3 33.3 33.3
31-4 13 !." !." #.
43-#1 1$ 3$.! 3$.! 100.0
%otal 45 100.0 100.0

'1
Gender
1$ 3$.! 3$.! 3$.!
! #. #. 100.0
45 100.0 100.0
&emale
male
%otal
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
'ont(ly )ouse(old *ncome
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulativ
e Percent
Valid P3+000
,elo-
15 33.3 33.3 33.3
P3+001-
P!+000
$ 15.# 15.# 4!."
P!+001-
P15+000
! 1$.! 1$.! ##.$
P15+001-
P30+000
# 13.3 13.3 !0.0
P30+001-
50+000
" 0.0 0.0 100.0
%otal 45 100.0 100.0

'7
'?
Do you currently notice any difference in the packaging of cigarettes!
>>.4F notices the changes in the packaging of cigarettes.
%%.%F does not notice the changes in the packaging of cigarettes.
#re you aware of the warning signs in the cigarette packs!
>4.4F are aware of the warning signs in the cigarette packs.
%%.%F are not aware of the warning signs in the cigarette packs.
'@
#re these warning signs visile enough!
>1.1F says that the warning signs are visile enough.
%7.?F says that the warning signs are not visile enough.
#re these warning signs important to you as a consumer!
?5F says that warnings are important.
15F says that warnings are not important.
'>
Does the implementation of igger warning signs affect your consumption of cigarettes!
7-.-F says that their consumption of cigarettes is not affected y the implementation of
the warning signs.
1?.@F says that their consumption of cigarettes is affected y the implementation of the
warning signs.
$ow many cigarettes do you usually consume efore the implementation of igger
warning signs!
1'.'F consume %=7 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
''.'F consume ?=%5 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
'5F consume %%=%7 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
'.'F consume %? or more sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger
warnings
%-.-F do not smoke
'4
$ow many cigarettes do you usually consume after the implementation of igger warning
signs!
11.1F consume %=7 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
'5F consume ?=%5 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
%@.>F consume %%=%7 sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger warnings
'.'F consume %? or more sticks of cigarette efore the implementation of igger
warnings
%7.?F do not smoke
Do the warning signs persuade you to stop smoking!
?@.@F says that warning signs do not persuade them to stop smoking.
--.-F says that warning signs persuade them to stop smoking.
-5
$ow effective are these warning signs to you as a consumer!
D*overnment Barning( Cigarette Cmoking is Dangerous "o your $ealthE
$ow effective are these warning signs to you as a consumer!
D*overnment Barning( "oacco Cmoke can $arm your ChildrenE
-%
$ow effective are these warning signs to you as a consumer!
D*overnment Barning( Cmoking GillsE
$ow effective are these warning signs to you as a consumer!
D*overnment Barning( Cigarette is #ddictiveE
-'
Chould there e changes in the design or the way the warning signs are placed to make it
more convincing to smokers!
?@.@F says that there should e changes in the design or the way the warning signs are
placed.
--.-F says that there is no need for any changes in the design or the way the warning
signs are placed.
Bhich do you think must e improved to make the warning signs effective!
--
$ow well are you affected with the warning signs as a consumer!
?5F are not affected y the warning signs.
15F are affected y the warning signs.
Bith the new implementation of igger warning signs, do you still want to smoke!
?5F of the consumers still want to smoke.
15F of the consumers are in dout if they still want to smoke.
-1
Table 1. Total Number of Families, Total and Average Family Income and Expenditure by Income lass! "##$
===========================================================================================================
| |
Income Class and Area Total | INCOME | EXPENDITURE
Number of | |
Famles | Total A!era"e | Total A!era"e
#In t$ousands% | #In mllons% #In t$ousands% | #In mllons% #In t$ousands%
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
P$l''nes ()*+,- .*+/0*.1- (+, .*-/,*+0( (.+
Under 10,000 30 242 8 286 10
10,000 - 19,999 273 4,381 16 4,992 18
20,000 - 29,999 685 17,499 26 19,170 28
30,000 - 39,999 1,133 39,904 35 42,031 37
40,000 - 49,999 1,286 57,953 45 59,068 46
50,000 - 59,999 68,978 55 69,028 55
60,000 - 79,999 2,206 153,364 70 147,538 67
80,000 - 99,999 1,733 155,249 90 145,745 84
100,000 - 149,999 2,840 347,863 122 316,132 111
150,000 - 249,999 2,704 519,938 192 444,138 164
250,000 - 499,999 1,790 603,480 337 485,719 271
500,000 and over 545 468,398 860 304,624 559

-7
Income class and area Total | INCOME | EXPENDITURE
Number of | |
Famles | Total A!era"e | TOTA2 A3ERA4E
#In t$ousands% | #In mllons% #In t$ousands% | #In mllons% #In t$ousands%
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Re"on XI & Da!ao ,(( 51*//- ((0 ,(*-,1 (--
Under 10,000 1 10 9 10 9
10,000 - 19,999 23 375 16 415 18
20,000 - 29,999 49 1,258 26 1,351 28
30,000 - 39,999 79 2,785 35 2,922 37
40,000 - 49,999 72 3,209 45 3,147 44
50,000 - 59,999 84 4,631 55 4,525 54
60,000 - 79,999 129 9,038 70 8,692 67
80,000 - 99,999 84 7,490 89 7,166 85
100,000 - 149,999 123 14,991 122 13,686 111
150,000 - 249,999 104 19,905 191 16,970 163
250,000 - 499,999 45 15,099 338 12,042 270
500,000 and over 18 16,540 912 10,158 560
Notes: #Detals ma6 not add u' to totals due to roundn"%
#F"ures re'orted n 7ero are less t$an one t$ousand8mllon%
Source: Fnal Results .--/ Faml6 Income and E9'endtures :ur!e6
Income and Em'lo6ment :tatstcs D!son
;ouse$old :tatstcs De'artment
Natonal :tatstcs Offce
Re'ublc of t$e P$l''nes
Date last updated: <ul6 )* .--)
.ource/ (tt0/11---.census.gov.0(1data1sectordata10031ie03&r01.(tm
-?