I think of JS as being Scheme-like, but not because of any love for the language. Instead, whenever I'm using JS I take a Crockford-like approach by only using a nice subset of the language: basically, closures and not much else.

When I'm writing JS in this way, my mental model is basically "a crappy Scheme", i.e. I'll tend to come up with implementations which are similar to what I'd do in Scheme (pure functions and closures), except I have to consciously avoid boilerplate (since there are no macros to tame it) and unbounded recursion (since there's no tail-call elimination), hence the "crappy".

Maybe it helps that none of my Scheme code has used continuations, outside of examples/playing, so there's less of a disconnect there?