When two targets are presented in rapid succession, the first target (T1) is usually identified, but the second target (T2) is often missed. A remarkable exception to this "attentional blink" occurs when T2 immediately follows the first T1, at lag 1. It is then often spared but reported in the wrong order--that is, before T1. These order reversals have led to the hypothesis that "lag 1 sparing" occurs because the two targets merge into a single episodic representation. Here, we report evidence consistent with an alternative theory: T2 receives more attention than T1, leading to prior entry into working memory. Two experiments showed that the more T2 performance exceeded that for T1, the more order reversals were made. Furthermore, precuing T1 led to a shift in performance benefits from T2 to T1 and to an equivalent reduction in order reversals. We conclude that it is not necessary to assume episodic integration to explain lag 1 sparing or the accompanying order reversals.