The structure of pulp fiction is one that is highly complex and a film you actually have to pay attention to to get all glorious nuances the "genius" Tarantino gives you throughout the film. To say this film is disastrous better yet outrageous because of how cheaply made you think it is is just cruel. What I'm trying to get at is that the film is so bad that some can argue ( and by some, I mean me) that it is almost a masterpiece; and I say that lightly. Please do not come after me in the comment section!
In digital storytelling we had an open dialogue that spoke of what makes a story, well, good. People thought the ones that are deemed suitable are the stories that can get the viewer to engage in the film or the listener to visualize the scenes in their mind. All together we came to the answer that necessity of having a great story starts with the most common feature: one that has a beginning, middle and end. From first glance the scenes in the film are disjointed and not connected. You are sitting there thinking this director should not be directing but that is exactly what Tarantino wants you to think. After rewatching the film yet again I finally noticed that mini stories are happening within one greater story, coming to conclusion that I myself had been played by the beautiful mind of Mr. Quentin Tarantino. Jules, Butch and Vincent have their on beginning, middle and end. In each of their own stories they had multiple plot points that kept our minds constantly in flux. Tarantino effectively merged these three characters' stories together to produce the film that is Pulp Fiction.
Where Pulp Fiction left off, giving us a glimpse from the outside of each of the character's stories, Hitchcock's film PYSCHO picked up. We were able to be drawn right in to the film and every situation that happened as if we were experiencing it for ourselves. Every event that took place in that film had a cause & effect factor. Starting out with a women stealing money ( for a good reason one might argue) to ending up dead in a shower is what Hitchcock did best. He got us so immersed in the problems of a character for them to bumped off leaving us confused and unable to figure out who to identify with.
All in all, I can say where both films meet is that they have multiple stories within on larger one. I do believe however they are completely separate in how those stories are told and that is more in detail with Tarantino's outrageous love for excessive bloody scenes/explosions and Hitchcock's beautiful usage of camera angles and scene introductions!