TYPES AND TOKENS - UNSCATHED OR UNSCATHABLE - REPLY

B. W. A. Whittlesea, M. D. Dorken, and K. W. Podrouzek (1995) presente d evidence conflicting with N. G. Kanwisher's (1987) type-token accoun t of ''repetition blindness,'' and, instead, proposed an explanation b ased on ordinary principles of remembering. P. Downing and N. Kanwishe r (1995) argued that none of Whittlesea et al.'s results were inconsis tent with the type-token account and that it emerged unscathed. In thi s reply, the authors argue that the type-token account escaped only be cause Whittlesea et al.'s procedures and analyses were defined as inva lid on the grounds that they were incompatible with the assumptions of the type-token account.