ABSTRACT
Psychologists and psychiatrists have studied dissociative phenomena since the late nineteenth century. However, they demonstrate surprisingly little agreement about what dissociation is and about which phenomena exemplify it. Moreover, when they attempt to define “dissociation,” the definitions tend either to be too inclusive or exclusive. This chapter proposes a definition drawing on five key assumptions (capability, non-uniquenss, diversification, ownership, accessibility) that has neither of those flaws, and which countenances the full range of phenomena considered widely to be instances of dissociation – not simply those of immediate concern to mental health professionals. The proposed definition is compared to, and differentiated from, other related constructs (e.g., repression, denial).
