CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Dissociative identity disorder

controversial mental diagnosis that includes multiple personality states ("alters"), dissociation and amnesia

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 24, 2026
Entity authorityQ18657 ↗
Source-derived summary

Dissociative identity disorder (DID), previously known as multiple personality disorder (MPD), is a dissociative disorder characterized by the presence of at least two personality states or "alters". The diagnosis is controversial and remains disputed. Proponents of DID support the trauma model, viewing the disorder as an organic response to severe childhood trauma. Critics of the trauma model support the sociogenic model of DID as a societal construct and learned behavior used to express distress; developed through iatrogenesis in therapy, cultural beliefs, and exposure to the behavior in media or online.

Public perceptions of the disorder were popularized by allegedly true stories in the 20th century; Sybil influenced many elements of the diagnosis, but was later found to be fraudulent. After multiple personality disorder (MPD) was recognized as a diagnosis in DSM-III in 1975, an epidemic of the disorder spread across North America, closely tied to the satanic panic. Therapists began using hypnosis on patients, believing they were discovering alters and recovering forgotten memories of satanic ritual abuse. Psychologists familiar with the malleability of memory argued they were constructing false memories. Diagnoses reached 50,000 by the 1990s, but the FBI failed to validate allegations made against caregivers. Skepticism increased when MPD patients recovered from the behavior, retracted their false memories, and brought successful lawsuits against therapists.

Editorial summary

“Dissociative identity disorder” enters the record as controversial mental diagnosis that includes multiple personality states ("alters"), dissociation and amnesia. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Dissociative, identity and disorder can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1975—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Dissociative, identity and disorder.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Dissociative identity disorder” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Dissociative, identity and disorder provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q18657. The Library of Congress control number is sh85088368. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1975.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Dissociative identity disorder”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Dissociative identity disorder primary sources, Dissociative identity disorder archive and Dissociative research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Dissociative identity disorder”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Dissociative identity disorder” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.