Marketing target groups and associative target groups: what is the difference?
Compare marketing and associative target groups. Understand their differences, when they overlap and how to use both in research and communication.
You know which organisations you want to reach and which roles make decisions there. Yet not everyone responds to the same proposition. Should you choose a different market, group people differently or change your message?\n\nDistinguishing a marketing target group from an associative target group helps separate these questions. The first concerns your commercial selection. The second focuses on shared meanings that guide a choice. This article compares both and explains how to use them together.
What is the main difference?
A marketing target group is the group you direct your marketing towards. Within the Neurofactor methodology, an associative target group is a defined group of people whose decisions are guided by similar associations within a specific choice context.
The distinction concerns what the grouping records: your selected market group or the association pattern used to group people. These can coincide, but do not have to. An associative group you have investigated can also become the marketing target group you subsequently choose to serve.
Why is this not a comparison between demographics and psychology?
Marketing segmentation also includes psychographic and behavioural criteria. A marketing target group therefore need not be based solely on age, location or role. OpenStax, §5.1
In 1968, Haley already described segmentation based on the benefits people seek. Investigating substantive buying motives is therefore not exclusive to associative grouping. Haley, 1968
Targeting selects the group towards which marketing efforts and resources are directed. That commercial decision should be distinguished from the criterion used to form the group. OpenStax, §5.5
‘Associative target group’ is Neurofactor’s working definition here, not a term we attribute to these authors. Research into association networks does provide a starting point. John and colleagues, for example, described combining individual brand association maps into a consensus map. Such a map is not, by itself, a tested target group classification. John et al., 2006
Our practical comparison below builds on this distinction. It is not an independently validated model taken from these sources.
Marketing target groups and associative target groups compared
| Dimension | Marketing target group | Associative target group within Neurofactor |
|---|---|---|
| Main question | Who are we targeting with this offer? | Which people attach similar choice-relevant meanings to this offer? |
| Grouping criterion | The selected market criteria, which may also be psychological | A defined pattern of similar associations within a choice context |
| Boundaries | Who belongs to the commercial selection and who does not? | Which pattern counts, how is it established and who fits it? |
| Supporting evidence | Information supporting the selection and its commercial relevance | Data on meaning, evaluation and the relationship to the choice studied |
| Possible output | A selected market group you want to serve | An associative grouping that helps investigate differences in evaluation |
| Reach | Which people and organisations you want to reach | Where the pattern occurs; reaching people requires additional information |
| Communication | Direction for the offer and approach | Hypotheses about relevant meaning, language and evidence |
| What does not follow automatically? | That everyone shares the same associations or buying motives | That everyone can be found, their behaviour predicted with certainty or conversion improved |
A job title is therefore not automatically a marketing target group, and an emotional label is not automatically an associative target group. Both require clear boundaries. In an associative grouping, the shared pattern must demonstrably form part of those boundaries.
How can the two groupings relate?
Within Neurofactor’s approach, three situations are possible:
- One marketing target group, different association patterns. People fit the same commercial selection but give the offer different meanings. Investigate whether this warrants different approaches.
- One association pattern across several marketing target groups. A similar meaning may occur across roles or company types. Investigate whether the similarity remains relevant in their respective decision situations.
- The same group viewed from both perspectives. You identify a useful association pattern and choose that group as your marketing target group. The commercial selection and the grouping criterion then apply to the same people.
These are possible relationships, not predetermined research findings. Nor should an associative target group be treated as a fixed personality type. Its boundaries remain linked to the choice studied.
Example of two CRM choices within the same market group
Fictional example — not a client case or measured result.
Suppose you want to reach marketing leads at B2B service companies with 20 to 100 employees. They are helping to select a new CRM system within twelve months. That is your commercial selection; company size and timing are chosen boundaries in this example.
You then investigate two possible association patterns:
| Element | Possible pattern A | Possible pattern B |
|---|---|---|
| Meaning of a good CRM | Control and predictability | Growth and flexibility |
| Possible associations | Clarity, continuity, error prevention | Opportunities, experimentation, scaling |
| Communication hypothesis | A concrete implementation plan builds confidence | Demonstrable expandability makes the offer attractive |
| Still to test | Whether the pattern is identifiable and relates to preference | Whether the pattern is identifiable and relates to preference |
This does not mean you immediately need a different marketing target group. First, you can investigate whether distinct patterns exist within your current market group. If they are insufficiently differentiated, there is no basis for turning them into two associative target groups.
Testing a message is a separate next step. When price, functionality and support all differ at once, you cannot simply attribute a difference in choice to the intended association.
When should you use each approach?
| Your question | Start with | Intended output |
|---|---|---|
| Which market group should we invest in? | Marketing target group and commercial selection | A defined group with evidenced relevance |
| Why does the same offer not appeal to everyone? | Research into meanings and associations within a clear choice context | Tested similarities and differences |
| Which message should we test? | Associative insights combined with the offer and context | Explicit communication hypotheses |
| Which channel will reach these people? | Reachability and channel data | A workable reach strategy |
| Can we expand the proposition into another market? | Both market selection and testing the association pattern | An evidenced decision to expand or investigate further |
This decision aid is a practical application developed by Neurofactor. A completely new segmentation study is not always necessary. Start with the uncertainty blocking your decision and choose research capable of addressing it.
How do you combine both in one study?
- Specify the decision. State what the organisation wants to decide and which target group choice matters to that decision.
- Describe your starting point. Record the commercial selection and its boundaries. Make clear which elements remain assumptions.
- Investigate associations. Ask about the meanings behind words and record how responses are compared. Select a method suited to the question.
- Assess candidate patterns. Make explicit how people are grouped. Allow for overlap, mixed profiles and insufficient differentiation.
- Test against additional data. To examine the relationship to choices, use an outcome that did not already determine the grouping. This avoids merely confirming your own definition.
- Translate findings into commercial decisions. Decide which group to serve, what to test and how to reach it. Document evidence, interpretation and action separately.
The order may change: you can discover an association pattern first and then investigate which market it is useful in. The separate decisions and evidence steps remain the same.
How do you record the distinction on the target group profile?
Keep two separate management fields: commercial selection and basis of grouping. An associative target group may also be your chosen marketing target group. A single mandatory ‘marketing or associative’ dropdown would hide that combination.
| Management field | Fictional example entry |
|---|---|
| Commercial selection | Marketing leads at B2B service companies planning to replace their CRM |
| Basis of grouping | Candidate pattern around control and predictability |
| Choice context | Selecting a new CRM system |
| Assignment rule | Still to establish; no final group memberships |
| Evidence status | Working hypothesis; pattern and relationship to choice still to test |
| Planned action | Develop the research design and message test |
This is a proposed addition to the information recorded with the profile. The existing Target group, Segment composition, Segment code and Description fields remain useful. Keep their entries consistent with what has actually been investigated; do not present a candidate pattern as an established segment.
Which errors should you avoid?
- Equating marketing target groups with demographics. This artificially exaggerates the difference.
- Assuming an associative group is inherently better. Usefulness depends on the question, data and objective.
- Confusing reach with meaning. A LinkedIn job title can help with selection but does not confirm an association pattern.
- Using a compelling name as evidence. ‘Growth thinkers’ becomes a useful label only when its boundaries are clear.
- Confusing preference with purchase. Report which outcome you measure and what conclusion it permits.
- Treating a grouping as a conversion guarantee. Its translation into communication and results needs separate testing.
Which grouping do you need?
Use a marketing target group to establish your commercial focus. Use associative criteria when you want to investigate which shared meanings guide choices. Where both come together, you can select a group on an evidenced basis and develop focused communication hypotheses.
The practical question is always: what do we want to decide, which information is missing and which grouping helps support that decision?
Sources and status
Sources consulted on 22 September 2026. The comparison and decision guide are practical Neurofactor applications; the CRM example is fictional.
Which grouping will help answer your target group question?
Discuss your commercial selection, the decision you want to understand and the information needed to support your next step.
Key terms
- Marketing target group
- A marketing target group is the group you direct your marketing towards.
- Associative target group
- Within the Neurofactor methodology, an associative target group is a defined group of people whose decisions are guided by similar associations within a specific choice context.
Frequently asked questions
Does an associative target group replace a marketing target group?
Not necessarily. Associative grouping describes the grouping criterion; a marketing target group describes your commercial selection. You can choose an associatively defined group as your marketing target group or investigate several patterns within an existing marketing target group.
Is every psychographic target group also an associative target group?
No. Under Neurofactor’s working definition, similar associations and their relationship to a specific choice must underpin the boundaries. A grouping based on lifestyle or values is therefore not automatically the same thing.
Can both terms refer to the same people?
Yes. When you commercially select an associative group that you have investigated, both terms can describe the same people. Record both your market selection and the associative criterion.
Which approach is better for conversion?
The approach’s name cannot tell you that. Test whether the grouping is useful for your question, then investigate whether the adapted message or offer improves the intended outcome.
How do you find an associative target group in advertising channels?
An association pattern does not automatically provide a selectable advertising attribute. Investigate which additional characteristics or contexts help with reach, and test whether they actually reach the intended group.
Do you need two separate target group profiles?
Not always. If the commercial selection and association pattern concern the same group, you can record both on one profile. Different evidenced patterns with different applications may justify separate profiles.
Sources
- 1.Albrecht, M. G., Green, M. & Hoffman, L. (2023). Principles of Marketing, §5.1: Market Segmentation and Consumer Markets. OpenStax, Rice University.
- 2.Albrecht, M. G., Green, M. & Hoffman, L. (2023). Principles of Marketing, §5.5: Selecting Target Markets. OpenStax, Rice University.
- 3.Haley, R. I. (1968). Benefit segmentation. Journal of Marketing, 32(3), 30–35. DOI: 10.1177/002224296803200306.
- 4.John, D. R., Loken, B., Kim, K. & Monga, A. B. (2006). Brand Concept Maps. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 549–563. DOI: 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.549.
Related topics
Reviewed by: Martijn den Otter · Last reviewed: 9/22/2026
Martijn den Otter
Oprichter van Neurofactor. Expert in neuromarketing en consumentenpsychologie.
LinkedIn →