바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

메뉴

The Self-structure of Dissociation-prone Persons

Abstract

‘Dissociation’ means the disconnection or separation of consciousness, which should be and remain continuous and integrated. This study aimed to explore the internal and external causes of dissociation; the disorganization of mind. We supposed trauma, overwhelming a person's coping ability, to be the external cause and a self-structure with high self-complexity and independently split self-aspects to be the internal cause. To demonstrate this hypothesis, we used the Dissociative Experience Scale to select a dissociative-tendency group and a normal control group from 380 university students taking online and/or offline psychology courses. Then, we administered the Early Trauma Inventory to the participants and we also administered Self Aspect Test to measure self-complexity. These results revealed that dissociative -tendency group have experienced more diverse early trauma than control group. The dissociative-tendency group reported having suffered more emotional, general, and sexual trauma but not more physical trauma than the control group reported, which supported the prediction that trauma functions as the external cause of dissociation. Furthermore, upon measuring self-structure, we found the dissociative group showed greater self-complexity than the normal control group did. They, however, regarded their complex divisions as disharmonious and chaotic mess. In other words, a dissociative group member's great self-complexity indicates the over-division of a less integrated self, which suggests a split self-structure is the internal cause of dissociation. The dissociative group's extraordinary self-complexity seems to be a kind of buffer limiting the shock of a trauma to one part of the self. In conclusion, we understand dissociation to be a phenomenon for over-dividing the self-structure and bufferring the shock of any trauma, at the cost of integrity. We conclude with the study's limitations and suggested directions for future study.

keywords
해리, 외상, 자기 복잡성, 지기구조, 분리, dissociation, trauma, self complexity, splitting, self structure, dissociation, trauma, self complexity, splitting, self structure

Reference

1.

김윤희 (2001). 걱정이 많은 사람들의 자기개념과 자기복잡성. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위 청구논문.

2.

박제민, 최병무, 김명정, 한홍무, 유승윤, 김성환, 주영희 (1995). 한국어판 해리경험척도의 표준화 연구. 정신병리학, 4, 105-125.

3.

이수현a (2005). 섭식문제가 있는 여대생의 완벽주의 패턴과 자기 지식 구조. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위 청구논문.

4.

이수현b (2005). 자기 복잡성과 자기 개념 명료성이 심리적 적응에 미치는 영향. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위 청구논문.

5.

황성훈 (2007). 정신병리에서 이분법적 사고의 역할. 서울대학교 대학원 박사학위 청구논문.

6.

황성훈 (2009). 자기애성 성격 성향자들의 자기 구조 특성: 외현형 및 내현형 자기애의 하위분류에 따른 접근. 2008년도 한국연구재단 신진교수 지원사업 보고서.

7.

American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.) Washington, DC: Author.

8.

Bernstein, E. M., & Putnam, F. W. (1986). Development, reliability, and validity of a dissociation scale. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 174, 727-735.

9.

Bliss, E. L. (1984). Spontaneous self-hypnosis in multiple personality disorder. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 7, 135-148.

10.

Bremner, J. D., Vermetten, E., & Mazure, C. M. (2000). Development and preliminary psychometric properties of an instrument for the measurement of childhood trauma: The Early Trauma Inventory. Depression & Anxiety, 12, 1-12.

11.

Briere, J., & Runtz, M. (1988). Multivariate correlates of childhood psychological and physical maltreatment among university women. Child Abuse & Neglect: The International Journal, 12, 331-341.

12.

Carlson, E. B. , & Putnam, F. W. (1992). Manual for the Dissociative Experiences Scale. Unpublished manuscript.

13.

Carlson, E. B., & Rosser-Hogan, R. (1991). Trauma experiences, posttraumatic stress, dissociation, and depression in Cambodian refugees. American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 1548-1551.

14.

Chu, J. & Dill, D. L. (1990). Dissociative symptoms in relation to childhood physical and sexual abuse. American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 887-892.

15.

Donahue, E. M., Robins, R. W., Robert, B. W., & John, O. P. (1993). The divided self: concurrent and longitudinal effects of psychological adjustment and social roles on self-concept differentiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 834-846.

16.

Gabbard, G. O. (2000). Psychodynamic psychiatry in clinical practice. New York: American Psychiatric Press.

17.

Garfinkle, E. (1989). Remembering and repeating in multiple personality. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 4, 169-181.

18.

Hilgard, E. R. (1977). Divided consciousness: Multiple controls in human thought and action. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

19.

Horevitz, R. & Loewenstein, R. J. (1994). The rational treatment of multiple personality disorder. In S. J. Lynn & J. W. Rhue. (Eds.), Dissociation: Clinical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 289-316). New York: Guilford.

20.

Jordan, A., & Cole, D. A. (1996). Relation of depressive symptoms to the structure of self-knowledge in childhood. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 530-540.

21.

Kernberg, O. F. (1967). Borderline personality organization. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 15, 641-685.

22.

Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Borderline condition and pathological narcissism. New York: Jason Aronson.

23.

Linville, P. W. (1985). Self complexity and affective extremity: Don't put all of your eggs in one cognitive basket. Social Cognition, 3, 94-120.

24.

Linville, P. W. (1987). Self complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 663-676.

25.

Lutz, C. J., & Ross, S. R. (2003). Elaboration versus fragmentation: distinguishing between self-complexity and self-concept differentiation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 537-545.

26.

Marmer, S. S. & Fink, D. (1994). Rethinking the comparison of borderline personality disorder and multiple personality disorder. Psychiatric Clinic of North America, 17, 743-771.

27.

Morgan, H. J., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1994). Positive and negative self complexity: Patterns of adjustment following traumatic versus nontraumatic life experiences. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 63-85.

28.

Myers, W. A. (1976). Imaginary companions, fantasy twins, mirror dreams and depersonalization. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 45, 503-524.

29.

Ogden, T. H. (1986). The matrix of the mind: Object relations and psychoanalytic dialogue. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

30.

Putnam, F. W. (1991). Dissociative phenomena. In A. Tasman & S. M. Goldfinger (Eds.), American Psychiatric Press Review of Psychiatry, Vol 10. (pp.145-160). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press.

31.

Putnam, F. W., Guroff, J. J., Silberman, E. K., Barban, L., & Post, R. M. (1986). The clinical phenomenology of multiple personality disorder: Review of 100recent cases. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47, 285-293.

32.

Rafaeli-Mor, E., Gotlib, I. H., & Revelle, W. (1999). The meaning and measurement of self-complexity. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 341-356.

33.

Ross, C., Norton, G., & Fraser, G. (1989). Evidence against the iatrogenesis of multiple personality disorder. Dissociation, 2, 61–65.

34.

Segal, H (1964). An introduction to the work of Melanie Klein. New York: Basic Books.

35.

Spiegel, D. (1984). Multiple personality as a post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 7, 101-110.

36.

Woolfolk, R. L., Novalany, J., Gara, M. A., & Allen, L. A. (1995). Self-complexity, self-evaluation, and depression: An examination of form and content within the self-schema. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1108-1120.

logo