1964: Studies in English Literature, volume 41, page 104 (Mouton)
After discussing the orthographical schemes, Peacham moves on to the more significant and less expedient “Schemats Syntactical . . . which serue to a fygured [c]onstruction . . . in which somthing eyther wanteth, redoundeth, or is transposed, from the proper place, or else altered by chance” (E iii verso).
1966: Edward L. Mattil (editor), A Seminar in Art Education for Research and Curriculum Development, page 158 (Pennsylvania State University)
Hence, we need think of integration only “as a natural result of differentiation, and organization as a residual effect of a process which generates the child’s vocabulary of schemats.”
1976: The United States National Commission for the Review of Federal and State Laws Relating to Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance, Commission Hearings: Supporting Materials for the Report, volume 2, page 1,278 (United States Government Printing Office)
The Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs actually called us from San Antonio and they wanted us to do a schemats (schematic diagram) of our equipment.
1987: David S. Gorfein and Robert R. Hoffman (editors), Memory and Learning: The Ebbinghaus Centennial Conference, page 266 (illustrated edition; L. Erlbaum Associates; →ISBN, 9780898596533)
Effectors, action schemats, and intention goal systems can all be considered to be specialized processors, or coalitions of specialized processors.
1989: Nikolas A. Peppas (editor), One Hundred Years of Chemical Engineering: From Lewis M. Norton (M.I.T. 1888) to Present, page 175 (Springer; →ISBN
Process schemats relating to the later medieval era (AD 1200–19th century) not only throw light on the continuously evolving craft practices, but provide more depth of detail that was lacking in the aphoristic description of methods and procedures found in ancient literature of the prechristian eras.
1990: Raymond L. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, and Steven Berglas (editors), Self-Handicapping: The Paradox That Isn’t, page 105 (illustrated edition; Plenum Press; →ISBN, 9780306435409)
Kelley, H. H. (1972). Causal schemats and the attribution process.
The group is classified by Wilson as ‘Figures of a worde’ and by Peacham more specifically as ‘Schemats Orthographicall’, ‘which be occupyed about letters, and sillables of wordes, lawfull only to Poets . . . unlawfull in prose’.⁷