Replies to commentaries by D. Albarracin, W. Hart, and K. C. McCulloch (see record 2006-10465-004), A. W. Kruglanski and M. Dechesne (see record 2006-10465-005), and R. E. Petty and P. Brinol (see record 2006-10465-006) on B. Gawronski and G. V. Bodenhausen's (2006; see record 2006-10465-003) recently proposed associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model raised a number of interesting conceptual, empirical, and meta-theoretical issues. The authors consider these issues and conclude that (a) the conceptual criticisms raised against the APE model are based on misinterpretations of its basic assumptions, (b) the empirical criticisms are unfounded, as they are inconsistent with the available evidence, and (c) the proposed alternative accounts appear to be less parsimonious and weaker in their predictive power than the APE model. Nevertheless, the commentators offered valuable suggestions for extensions of the APE model, which the authors discuss with respect to their implications for new directions in attitude research.