Existing accounts of analogical transfer highlight the importance of comparison-based schema abstraction in aiding retrieval of relevant prior knowledge from memory. In this talk, we discuss an alternative view, the category status hypothesis—which states that if knowledge of a target principle is represented as a relational category, it is easier to activate as a result of categorizing (as opposed to cue-based reminding)—and briefly review supporting evidence. We then further investigate this hypothesis by designing study tasks that promote different facets of category-level representations and assess their impact on spontaneous analogical transfer. A Baseline group compared two analogous cases; the remaining groups experienced comparison plus another task intended to impact the category status of the knowledge representation. The Intension group read an abstract statement of the principle with a supporting task of generating a new case. The Extension group read two more positive cases with the task of judging whether each exemplified the target principle. The Mapping group read a contrast case with the task of revising it into a positive example of the target principle (thereby providing practice moving in both directions between type and token, i.e., evaluating a given case relative to knowledge and using knowledge to generate a revised case). The results demonstrated that both Intension and Extension groups led to transfer improvements over Baseline (with the former demonstrating both improved accessibility of prior knowledge and ability to apply relational concepts). Implications for theories of analogical transfer are discussed.