A Critical Analysis of Myths About Dissociative Identity Disorder

In a review of the literature in this journal, Piedfort-Marin et al. (1921) identified what they purported to be myths about dissociative identity disorder (DID) and dissociative amnesia. When responding to these beliefs, they supported the Trauma Model of dissociation and argued for a causal etiological link between trauma and dissociative conditions. In contrast, they challenged the Sociocognitive Model (SCM), which they claimed rejects the existence of DID and associated disorders (e.g., dissociative amnesia) and considers symptoms to be the byproduct of fantasy, suggestion, and the iatrogenic effect of psychotherapies. In this article, we critically evaluate the authors’ arguments and propose a more balanced, accurate, and comprehensive view of the sociocognitive model. We demonstrate that this model neither rejects the existence of DID, nor a link between trauma and dissociation potentially mediated by a variety of cognitive-affective-behavioral variables. We argue, contrary to Piedfort-Marin et al., that the tendency to confabulate and other cognitive and sociocultural variables may also contribute to the development of DID. We contend that a multifactorial integrative etiological perspective can move the field beyond a limited focus on controversies that divide the TM and SCM models of dissociation