Depersonalization (DEP) and derealization (DER) were examined among college students with and without borderline personality disorder (BPD) and/or dissociative disorders (DDs) by self-report and clinician assessment. The Steinberg Depersonalization Questionnaire (SDEPQ), the Steinberg Derealization Questionnaire (SDERQ), the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, and the screening tool of the BPD section of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM– IV (SCID-BPD) were administered to 1,301 students. Those with BPD (n = 80) according to the SCID-BPD and 111 non-BPD controls were evaluated using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM–IV Dissociative Disorders by a psychiatrist blind to the diagnosis. Of the participants, 19.7% reported SDEPQ (17.8%) and/or SDERQ (11.0%) scores above cutoff levels and impairment from these experiences. Principal component analysis of 26 items of both scales yielded 4 factors: cognitive-emotional self-detachment, perceptual detachment, bodily self-detachment, and detachment from reality. Participants with concurrent DD and BPD had the highest scores for DEP and DER in the clinical interview and self-report. The total number of BPD criteria was associated with the severity of childhood trauma and dissociation. Both BPD and DD were associated with clinician-assessed and self-reported DER, self-reported DEP, and the cognitive-emotional self-detachment factor. Unlike BPD, DD was associated with clinician-assessed DEP, and BPD was related to the self-reported detachment from reality factor. Although the latter was correlated with the total childhood trauma score, possibly because of dissociative amnesia, clinician-assessed DER was not. Being the closest factor to BPD, the factor of detachment from reality warrants further study.

Dissociative Identity Disorders (DID) has been thought to occur in individuals with trauma in their early developmental years. Many argue on the reason this happens, having some even question its reality. Although some think DID is a fictional disease, others believe it to be a form of developmental Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, having the alters carry the burden of the toxic memories. The purpose of this literature review is to collect past studies done on DID and evaluating its relationship with PTSD. The analysis will particularly be focused on the symptoms of DID, it’s diagnosis, treatment, and brain imaging. It will compare that of which we know about PTSD to what latest studies have shown about DID. Its result will show that these two disorders although linked by symptoms, diagnosis, and treatments, are not entirely the same. Because of three problematic questions with DID being PTSD in early developmental years, it concludes that those with DID are suffering from both PTSD and BPD.

Background: We present recommendations for revision of the diagnostic criteria for the Dissociative Disorders (DDs) for DSM-5. The periodic revision of the DSM provides an opportunity to revisit the assumptions underlying specific diagnoses and the empirical support, or lack of it, for the defining diagnostic criteria. Methods: This paper reviews clinical, phenomenological, epidemiological, cultural, and neurobiological data related to the DDs in order to generate an up-to-date, evidence-based set of DD diagnoses and diagnostic criteria for DSM-5. First, we review the definitions of dissociation and the differences between the definitions of dissociation and conceptualization of DDs in the DSM-IV-TR and the ICD-10, respectively. Also, we review more general conceptual issues in defining dissociation and dissociative disorders. Based on this review, we propose a revised definition of dissociation for DSM-5 and discuss the implications of this definition for understanding dissociative symptoms and disorders. Results: We make the following recommendations for DSM-5: 1.Depersonalization Disorder (DPD) should derealization symptoms as well.2.Dissociative Fugue should become a subtype of Dissociative Amnesia (DA).3.The diagnostic criteria for DID should be changed to emphasize the disruptive nature of the dissociation and amnesia for everyday as well as traumatic events. The experience of possession should be included in the definition of identity disruption.4.Should Dissociative Trance Disorder should be included in the Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD) category.Depersonalization Disorder (DPD) should derealization symptoms as well.Dissociative Fugue should become a subtype of Dissociative Amnesia (DA).The diagnostic criteria for DID should be changed to emphasize the disruptive nature of the dissociation and amnesia for everyday as well as traumatic events. The experience of possession should be included in the definition of identity disruption.Should Dissociative Trance Disorder should be included in the Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD) category.Conclusions: There is a growing body of evidence linking the dissociative disorders to a trauma history, and to specific neural mechanisms. Depression and Anxiety, 2011. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

This paper examines and reviews the article, “Personality Differences on the Rorschach of Dissociative Identity Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, and Psychotic Inpatients” (Brand, Armstrong, Loewenstein & McNary, 2009). Reviewing this article revealed a study conducted by the authors that used the Rorschach Comprehensive System (RCS), with the hypothesis of theoretically and clinically being able to discriminate personality traits of clients diagnosed with DID, versus those diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), and Psychotic Disorders (PSD). Their study also hypothesized the determination of variables such as reflecting capacity for working alliance, complexity of experience, and the ability to reason despite traumatic flooding. This author explores this specific empirical study in regards to how and why it was performed, as well as the efficacy of their chosen methods or procedures. This paper explains the relevancy of their findings, the strengths and weakness that were viewed during the course of analyzing this article. In closing, this author expounds on the importance and value of this type of empirical study and article to the field of psychology in general, as well as to this author’s training and education, and finally its marketability to the consumer. Key Terms: Borderline Personality Disorder; Dissociative Identity Disorder; Psychotic Disorder, Rorschach Test.

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is a complex, posttraumatic, developmental disorder for which we now, after four decades of research, have an authoritative research base, but a number of misconceptualizations and myths about the disorder remain, compromising both patient care and research. This article examines the empirical literature pertaining to recurrently expressed beliefs regarding DID: (1) belief that DID is a fad, (2) belief that DID is primarily diagnosed in North America by DID experts who overdiagnose the disorder, (3) belief that DID is rare, (4) belief that DID is an iatrogenic, rather than trauma-based, disorder, (5) belief that DID is the same entity as borderline personality disorder, and (6) belief that DID treatment is harmful to patients. The absence of research to substantiate these beliefs, as well as the existence of a body of research that refutes them, confirms their mythical status. Clinicians who accept these myths as facts are unlikely to carefully assess for dissociation. Accurate diagnoses are critical for appropriate treatment planning. If DID is not targeted in treatment, it does not appear to resolve. The myths we have highlighted may also impede research about DID. The cost of ignorance about DID is high not only for individual patients but for the whole support system in which they reside. Empirically derived knowledge about DID has replaced outdated myths. Vigorous dissemination of the knowledge base about this complex disorder is warranted.

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is a chronic post-traumatic disorder where developmentally stressful events in childhood, including abuse, emotional neglect, disturbed attachment, and boundary violations are central and typical etiological factors. Familial, societal, and cultural factors may give rise to the trauma and/or they may influence the expression of DID. Memory and the construction of self-identity are cognitive processes that appear markedly and centrally disrupted in DID and are related to its etiology. Enduring decoupling of psychological modes may create separate senses of self, and metamemory processes may be involved in interidentity amnesia. Neurobiological differences have been demonstrated between dissociative identities within patients with DID and between patients with DID and controls. Given the current evidence, DID as a diagnostic entity cannot be explained as a phenomenon created by iatrogenic influences, suggestibility, malingering, or social role-taki...