In their reply to Binder and Rayner (1998), Kellas and Vu (1999) raised que
stions about the criteria we used to exclude items from the Kellas, Martin,
Yehling, Herman, and Vu (1995) stimulus set. In this reply, we further doc
ument these criteria and also address the issue of local versus published n
orms. We continue to believe that the stimulus set used by Kellas et al. (1
995) was problematic. We also address the issue of strength of context, a c
oncept used in earlier research that dealt with the subordinate bias effect
. We argue that the contexts used by Kellas et al. (1995) were no stronger
than the contexts previously used that established this effect. Therefore,
we continue to think that our finding that context does not eliminate the s
ubordinate bias effect is valid.