Bassok, M., & Medin, D. L. (1997). Birds of a feather flock together: Similarity judgments with semantically rich stimuli. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 311–336. Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. F. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 177–210. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
Conrad, R. (1964). Acoustic confusion in immediate memory. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 149-154.
Davidoff, J. & Roberson, D. (2004). Preserved thematic and impaired taxonomic categorization: A case study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 137-174.
Deese, J. (1959). On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 17-22.
Estes, Z. (2003a). Attributive and relational processes in nominal combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 304-319.
Estes. Z. (2003b). A tale of two similarities: Comparison and integration in conceptual combination. Cognitive Science 27, 911–921.
Estes, Z. & Hasson, U. (2004). The importance of being nonalignable: A critical test of the structural alignment theory of similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1082-1092.
Estes, Z., & Jones, L. L. (2006). Priming via relational similarity: A COPPER HORSE is faster when seen through a GLASS EYE. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 89-101.
Estes, Z. & Jones, L. L. (2009). Integrative priming occurs rapidly and uncontrollably during lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 112-130.
Gagné, C. L., & Shoben, E. (1997). The influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 71-87.
Gati, I. & Tversky, A. (1984). Weighting common and distinctive features in conceptual and perceptual judgments. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 341-370.
Gentner, D. & Brem, S. K. (1999). Is snow really similar to a shovel? Distinguishing similarity from thematic relatedness. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum. Gentner, D. & Gunn, V. (2001). Structural alignment facilitates the noticing of differences. Memory and Cognition, 9, 565-577.
Gentner, D. & Markman, A. B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity. Psychological Science, 5, 152-158.
Gentner, D. & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45–56.
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
Godden, D. R. & Baddeley, A. D. (1975). Context dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater. British Journal of Psychology, 66, 325-331.
Jones, L. L., Estes, Z., & Marsh, R. L. (2008). An asymmetric effect of relational integration on recognition memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1169-1176.
Jones, M. & Love, B. C. (2007). Beyond common features: The role of roles in determining similarity. Cognitive Psychology, 55, 196-231.
Lin, E. L. & Murphy, G. L. (2001). Thematic relations in adults’ concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 3-28.
Markman, A. B. (1996). Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 227-230.
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (1993). Splitting the difference: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 517-535.
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (1996). Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons. Memory and Cognition, 24, 235-249.
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology, 118, 501-538.
Markman, A. B. & Wisniewski, E. J. (1997). Similar and different: The differentiation of basic level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 54-70.
Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1990). Similarity involving attributes and relations: Judgments of similarity and difference are not inverses. Psychological Science, 1, 64-69.
Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M., (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238. Meyer, D. E. & Schvanenveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227-234.
Murphy, G. L. (2001). Causes of taxonomic sorting by adults: A test of the thematic-to- taxonomic shift. Psychological Bulletin and Review, 8, 834-839.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 111-144). New York: Academic Press.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Simmons, S. & Estes, Z. (2008). Individual differences in similarity and difference. Cognition, 108, 781-795.
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
Waxman, S. R. & Namy, L. L. (1997). Challenging the notion of thematic preference in young children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 555-567. Wisniewski, E. J. (1997). When concepts combine. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 167-183.
Wisniewski, E. J. & Bassok, M. (1999). What makes a man similar to a tie? Stimulus compatibility with comparison and integration. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 208-238.