English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In their reply to Binder and Rayner (1998), Kellas and Vu (1999) raised questions about the criteria we used to exclude items from the Kellas, Martin, Yehling, Herman, and Vu (1995) stimulus set. In this reply, we further document these criteria and also address the issue of local versus published norms. We continue to believe that the stimulus set used by Kellas et al. (1995) was problematic. We also address the issue of strength of context, a concept 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 subordinate bias effect is valid.

Does contextual strength modulate the subordinate bias effect? A reply to Kellas and Vu