The dubious assumptions of segmentation and targeting

Abstract

Discusses Mitchell’s recent proposal for astrological segmentation which demonstrates the extremes to which segmentation and targeting can be taken if we uncritically accept their core assumptions. Proposes that although Mitchell’s proposal can be subjected to a number of minor criticisms, it can only be finally disposed of by critically examining whether astrological segments really are associated with a stable set of preferences, and whether targeting these segments actually gives a higher return than other approaches. Once the stability of segments, the logic of targeting, and the empirical evidence are examined, it turns out that not only is Mitchell’s approach unsupported, but so are most other segmentation and targeting efforts.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.