In this article, I respond to comments made by K. Salzinger and A. Aleman and A. S. David on my original article. The constructive, reconstructive, and interpretive nature of human cognition is well illustrated by these two responses to my recent article on schizophrenia. In the original article, I used meta-analytic summaries of the published literature to show that a majority of schizophrenia patients are distinguishable from healthy people on the basis of standard tests of cognitive ability. I also showed that commonly reported brain-imaging findings lack this discriminating power, at least in terms of variables that lend themselves to meta-analytic synthesis. I went on to discuss influences, from brain disturbance to stress to endophenotypes, that may underpin the sensitivity of cognitive performance to schizophrenia. Neither Salzinger nor Aleman and David disputed the meta-analytic evidence I presented. Instead, they have their own rather oblique takes on my findings and advocate research not included in the quantitative summaries or related discussion.