Showing posts with label dissociation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dissociation. Show all posts

Thursday, November 06, 2014

Our Brain Dissociates Emotional Response from Explicit Memory in Fearful Situations

Anyone who has experienced trauma, or works with survivors of trauma, already that one of the most common neuromechanisms for dealing overwhelming fear is to dissociate the emotional impact from the narrative memory of the event(s). Maybe you have had the experience of someone telling you about a horrible thing that happened to him, and all the while he is smiling or even laughing. As a therapist, I immediately think, "affect incongruity." This is a clear indication that the person in question has dissociated the emotions from the experience.

The reason for this, as far as we know, is that part of what the thalamus does is assemble all of the sense data (sight, sound, touch, emotions, etc.) when encoding a memory into a coherent package, but it does not function correctly under conditions of extreme stress, so the memory ends of being fragmented. Often the emotional content gets separated out so that the person can describe the event with no related affect being visible. On the other hand, a sound associated with the trauma may trigger a flashback of the emotional experience.

We are finally beginning to understand the neuroscience behind how the brain processes trauma.

Our Brain Dissociates Emotional Response from Explicit Memory in Fearful Situations


Neuroscience News
November 6, 2014

Researchers at the Cognition and Brain Plasticity Group of the Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL) and the University of Barcelona have been tracking the traces of implicit and explicit memories of fear in human. The study was published in the journal Neurobiology of Learning and Memory; it describes how, in a context of fear, our brain differently encodes contextual memory of a negative event (the place, what we saw, etc) and the emotional response associated.

The study measures electrodermal activity of eighty-six individuals in a fearful context generated in the laboratory and in a neutral context in which they have to learn a list of words. One week and two weeks after the experiment they were tested to see which words they remembered.

“In both contexts —explains Pau Packard, author of the study—, forgetting curve was normal. Over time, they forgot all the words, the explicit trace. Moreover, in the fearful context the electrodermal activity —the emotional implicit response— was exactly the same, much higher than in the neutral context”.

This image shows a man's face in red with fearful images accompanying.
In traumatic events, it seems that, over time, there is a portion of memory that is erased or inaccesible; we forget the details but still maintaining the emotional reaction. This image is for illustrative purposes only. Credit geralt.

In traumatic events, it seems that, over time, there is a portion of memory that is erased or inaccesible; we forget the details but still maintaining the emotional reaction. The imprint is divided into two separate paths. According to Packard, “the brain dissociates the explicit memory of a negative event from the emotional response”.

This may help to understand why in pathological situations of post-traumatic stress disorders, the uncontrolled emotional response linked to the negative event is generated without knowing what causes it.

Lluís Fuentemilla, project coordinator, emphasises that “the study helps to explain how the processing of fearful memories can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder”. Furthermore, it opens the door to the investigation of new therapeutic strategies for these disorders because “the implicit memory trace in a fearful context does not loose over time and can be detected through electrodermal measures”.

About this memory research

Contact: Press Office – University of Barcelona
Source: University of Barcelona press release
Image Source: The image is credited to geralt and is in the public domain

Original Research:
Packard, P. A., Rodríguez Fornells, A., Stein, L. M., Nicolás, B., and Fuentemilla, Ll. (2014, Dec). Tracking explicit and implicit long-lasting traces of fearful memories in humans. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory; 116: 96–104. Published online September 26 2014 doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2014.09.004
* * * * *

Here is the original abstract from Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

Tracking explicit and implicit long-lasting traces of fearful memories in humans


Pau Alexander Packarda, Antoni Rodríguez-Fornellsa, Lilian Milnitsky Stein, Berta Nicolás, Lluís Fuentemilla,

Highlights

 
• We track implicit and explicit memory traces for fearful episodes over time.
• SCR at test was higher for verbatim words encoded in a fearful context.
• Subjects were unable to report words’ emotional encoding context.
•Implicit memory traces of a fearful context was dissociated from the gist.


Abstract


Recent accounts of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) suggest that the encoding of an episode within a fearful context generates different implicit and explicit memory representations. Whilst implicit memory traces include the associated emotional states, explicit traces include a recoding into an abstract or gist-based structural context of the episode. Theoretically, the long-term preservation of implicit memory traces may facilitate the often untreatable memory intrusions in PTSD. Here, we tracked in two experiments how implicit and explicit memory traces for fearful episodes dissociate and evolve over time. Subjects (N = 86) were presented with semantically-related word-lists in a contextual fear paradigm and tested for explicit memories either immediately (i.e., 30 min) or after a delay (i.e., 1 or 2 weeks) with a verbal recognition task. Skin Conductance Response (SCR) was used to assess implicit memory responses.

Subjects showed high memory accuracy for words when tested immediately after encoding. At test, SCR was higher during the presentation of verbatim but not gist-based words encoded in a fearful context, and remained unchanged after 2 weeks, despite subjects being unaware of words’ encoding context. We found no clear evidence of accurate explicit memory traces for the fearful or neutral contexts of words presented during encoding, either 30 min or 2 weeks afterwards. These findings indicate that the implicit, but not the explicit, memory trace of a fearful context of an episode can be detected at long-term through SCR and is dissociated from the gist-based memory. They may have implications towards the understanding of how the processing of fearful memories could lead to PTSD.

Sunday, September 21, 2014

Books on Parts Work and Dissociative Identity Disorder

http://morethananidea.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2014-Spectrum_of_Dissociative_Effects.jpg

Someone recently asked for a list of the books that inform how I work with trauma, dissociation, and dissociative identity disorder, so here is that list. I thought I might share it here for those who work with these clients or those who suffer with these symptoms.

The books with an * are books I endorse as excellent resources.


Best Readings in Trauma and Dissociation:

Psychosynthesis:

Subpersonalities, Ego States, and Parts:

Internal Family Systems Therapy:

Dissociative Disorders:

Dissociative Identity Disorder:

For Clients or By Clients:

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Heidi Hanson - 7 PTSD Feedback Loops

This post comes from the Healing from Trauma blog by Heidi Hanson, many of whose posts are being compiled into a book tentatively called the Trauma Healing Resource Book.

This particular post, which was shared with me by some friends on Facebook, presents some of the essential experiences of PTSD within the context of feedback loops. Based on the experience of my clients, this seems quite useful.

7 PTSD Feedback Loops

by Heidi Hanson

In the book I have been working on, Trauma Healing Resource Book (tentative title), which chronicles my healing journey through PTSD, I identify 7 Feedback Loops that act like quicksand, pulling one further into PTSD even as one desires to find one’s way out. This needs further research, but feedback loops could be one reason some cases of PTSD become chronic.

Note: This article and all articles on this blog are based on my personal experience as someone recovering from PTSD. Much is theoretical material, however it is material I consider worth being studied in depth in a scientific manner at some point in time.

Excerpt from the book:

Definition: The technical definition of a feedback loop is “a system where outputs are fed back into the system as inputs, increasing or decreasing effects.” *

I would define a feedback loop related to human psychology as a group of external life circumstances and internal patterns that keep reinforcing each other, making it difficult to change either the circumstances or the patterns.

Feedback loops can be propelled by internal patterns of thoughts, perceptions, emotions, and behaviors, each element stimulating the next.

Negative feedback loops frequently lead to downward spirals, in which case some aspect of the situation worsens slightly every time one or several loops are completed.

Experiences of trauma may lead us to develop mental habits; feedback loops are mechanisms that keep maintaining and deepening these habits. One could theorize that feedback loops contribute to reinforcing specific neural pathways in the brain and to developing chronic imbalances in the nervous system and physiology.

Negative feedback loops lead to what I call a “trauma-based reality.” This is when we perceive all of our reality through a filter created from our past traumatic experiences. The “normal” reality we experienced prior to the traumatic experiences can only be sensed for brief moments.

In the following illustration, the individual is in a room dancing with trauma, and through the windows she can see momentary glimpses of the reality that exists outside of the trauma-based reality.


Book Illustration: Trauma-based Dance Floor
Sometimes, dancing, I catch hints of Life, outside

I have identified seven feedback loops based on my own experiences. I’m sure there are more; there are also variations on these seven, not included here.

* http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Feedback_loop

1. A Dangerous World Feedback Loop


Synonyms: Magnifying Triggers Feedback Loop, Environmental Triggers Feedback Loop

This feedback loop occurs when we have experienced trauma, and we happen to be in an environment that continuously triggers memories of the trauma. If constantly triggered, we can be reminded of the trauma and automatically feel fear over and over again, which makes the environment around us seem more frightening, and we end up imprinting the idea of trauma more and more deeply onto the environment. Seeing increasingly more danger makes us more likely to experience triggers, and makes the triggers more impactful when they come.

It’s not just the perception of the environment as more and more dangerous that increases the impact of the triggers. Being triggered a lot can gradually increase our sensitivity and raise our overall level of hyperarousal. In turn, feeling more sensitive increases the impact of the triggers.

In this scenario, all levels of danger are perceived as a red alert – there are no orange and yellow alerts; danger is stuck on High setting and only increases from there.

This feedback loop is one reason it is so important to get to an environment that gives some relief from triggers, or change the environment (get rid of furniture, redecorate, put new scents in the air etc.).

If the amount of stress puts the system into immobility more and more frequently, this feedback loop can lead to the Immobility Downward Spiral – getting increasingly immobile e.g. feeling numb, unresponsive, still, paralyzed.


I noticed this Dangerous World Feedback Loop and Immobility Downward Spiral happening early on in my experience of PTSD. This is an illustration that shows how too many triggers can feel like an invasion, or a kind of poison that is constantly being inserted into the brain and nervous system, causing the mind to go into meltdown or immobility on a regular basis.


2. Constricted Reality Feedback Loop / Downward Spiral


Synonyms: Self-isolation Feedback Loop, Resource Avoidance Downward Spiral, Resource Rejection Downward Spiral

Being extremely sensitive and being hit constantly by a wide variety of triggers can also lead to a Constricted Reality Feedback Loop. In this case, each time some life situation is associated with trauma, we may decide to avoid it as well as anything related to it. In the following illustration, we see that this individual’s hypersensitivity to triggers in his community make him cut off his connection, automatically and without thought, to resource after resource, until he is alone in his room, isolated and disconnected from the rest of the world.

Without any resources, it is unlikely he will be exposed to things that demonstrate that his triggers are false – in other words he won’t have experiences that deconstructs the triggers and rewire his brain to re-perceive reality in a new way, for example encountering someone who at first appears to be a perpetrator but is actually a friend, or an authority figure who appears to be abusive and turns out to actually be a resource. In this scenario there is no way for healing to happen because the individual is isolated from all potential resources.

This one is similar to the Dangerous World and Lack of Trust Feedback Loop (#5). They are all ways of illustrating how fear leads to fear, mistrust leads to more mistrust and isolation leads to more isolation, just with slight variations. Dangerous World has to do with one’s perception of danger, Lack of Trust is specifically in relation to other people, and Constricted Reality has to do with isolation from all types of resources in one’s community including places, events, groups, people etc.

Note: click on the image to see a larger version


3. Dissociation Feedback Loop


Being frequently dissociated means for much of the day we are not present in the body.

Some synonyms for this state of dissociation are:
  • space cadet
  • spaced out
  • absent-minded
  • head in the clouds
  • not paying attention
This could lead to accidents which may be somewhat traumatizing. If traumatic, these accidents could possibly lead to further tendency to dissociate.

The illustration for this one may be simple, but being dissociative can create messy problems. Dissociation can lead to small accidents, like stubbing one’s toe; it can also lead to worse incidents, like doing things that are dangerous without knowing it. General disorganization can lead to problems, for example, a woman who is out late and misplaced her cell phone and is looking for it and then gets mugged whereas she would have been at home by that time if she had been more organized. Dissociation is an escape from the present and it may lead to bad decisions due to lack of awareness of details. Underneath dissociation is a wound(s) that causes tentativeness or rejection in relation to being in the body. In order to heal, we need to be committed to our bodies and ourselves, aware of our surroundings and alert to who is doing what with us, to prevent more accidents.


4. Hyperarousal Feedback Loop


Synonyms: Panic Loop

If we are in hyperarousal a large percentage of the time, it means the nervous system is strung tight like a rubber band pulled almost to the breaking point. We may be jumpy, prone to panic, tend to do things too quickly, rush about in too much of a hurry, and act on impulse. Hyperarousal makes it difficult to process information well because it keeps one stuck in a survival level of thinking, preventing access to the higher mind/rational thought. If we are panicking, we are also more easily manipulated by other people. This chaotic fear state could easily lead to getting into bad situations or accidents/injuries. It is possible this could lead to another trauma, which would only increase the hyperarousal.


5. Lack of Trust Feedback Loop


Synonyms: People Avoidance Feedback Loop, Other People Rejection Feedback Loop, Help Rejection Loop

Sometimes, a traumatic experience includes a breach of trust. Trust can be broken within a close relationship, such as with a partner or parent. Trust can also be violated by an authority figure we had confidence in. Sometimes, when we try to seek help with PTSD, we encounter healing practitioners who do not understand PTSD enough to help us, and can even do or say things that re-traumatize us. So, in some cases, we will develop a lack of trust.

Due to this lack of trust we may feel more comfortable spending time alone. Spending more time alone makes us more vulnerable to the symptoms of PTSD, because there is no information coming from outside to challenge the trauma-based reality. We avoid the very people and situations that may have a positive effect on the nervous system.

Not getting the help we need can lead to issues in the following areas:
  1. Triggers automatically create hyperarousal; we do not learn ways to intervene.
  2. We experience more triggers and this leads to more disregulation and hyperarousal.
  3. Disregulation, hyperarousal, fear and anxiety cause confused information processing.
  4. Due to difficulties with processing information we can’t figure out how to escape or change the situation.
  5. Also, triggers lead us to remain in helplessness/immobility/paralysis; helplessness leads to not feeling one has the power to help themselves.
  6. Low self-esteem remains unchallenged; low self esteem from trauma can stop us from seeking help.
  7. When we perceive ourselves in a constricted reality, we may not see what exists outside it.
  8. The level of sensitivity being unintentionally maintained can lead to more experiences of being traumatized by healing practitioners and other people trying to help.
Thus, the lack of trust seems to be justified by many aspects of our experience, and we spend more time avoiding people. Being alone with our PTSD symptoms can lead to experiencing reality as harsh and other people as unhelpful; we continue to avoid people and our reality becomes more and more constricted.

The Lack of Trust Feedback Loop can lead to a Constricted Reality Feedback Loop/Downward Spiral.



6. Trauma Seeking Feedback Loop


Synonyms: Resolution Block Feedback Loop

Peter Levine has theorized that one of the key reasons human beings do not process and release trauma within minutes like animals do is because we have developed a higher brain, the neocortex. The neocortex gives us great advantages such as the ability to think rationally, but it can also suppress the pent-up trauma related energies the system needs to process and release successfully in order to heal PTSD, such as rage and terror.

In the trauma seeking feedback loop, we may get into a situation where there is the possibility for the pent-up energy to completely release once and for all. We may suddenly feel powerful, primitive uncontrollable rage, hatred, sorrow, fear, or shame. But because of the controls we maintain, we do not recognize this as the opportunity it is. Rather, we think something is terribly wrong with us and force ourselves to push the emotions back down, and thus fail to release the pent-up energy. In other words, when the reptilian brain’s instinctive manner of releasing trauma begins, the neocortex or rational mind automatically suppresses it to escape and avoid the powerful emotions. When the experience is over, we have stabilized again but nothing has changed and the system continues to unconsciously seek a way to discharge the trapped life energy and return to a truly non-traumatized state of calm alertness. The system will unconsciously seek out another situation to stir up these powerful emotions, in the hopes that they will finally be processed to completion.


7. Survival Mode Feedback Loop


Synonyms: Problematic Memory Encoding Loop, Arrested in Time Loop, Siege Mode Loop

The seventh feedback loop is the state of being immersed in survival instincts, a perpetual state in relation to the reptilian brain managing an eternal moment of shock and trauma, without ever coming out. This is most likely due to the way traumatic memories are encoded. It creates a kind of life in siege mode, a severe experience of life, a survival focused life. Even if one’s survival needs are met one may feel like life is about surviving in basic ways and not about living/thriving (the higher level needs on Maslow’s hierarchy are not in the picture).

The experience of being in shock becomes a timeless moment, a never-ending moment, from which the body does not re-enter time. It is as if the reptilian brain is telling you you are still in shock and need to survive, dominating your experience and keeping you in survival mode forever. The experience cannot be metabolized, psychologically, by the system, and until it becomes metabolized it is holding you hostage. In order for it to be metabolized, the times of the worst dissociation (shock) need to be integrated in the body and brain/memory in a different way than they were at the time of the trauma. There are theories to the effect that the memory of the trauma needs to be moved from short-term to long-term memory.

So the theory about how this one works is that because going into these memories feels too threatening, the procedure seems complex, one lacks skills and also lacks skilled help, one never figures out how to integrate the moments of the worst dissociation, and so the person remains stuck in time and in survival mode. Sorry this one is not clearer, when I understand it better I will update this section.


One feedback loop I have not included in this article is Learned Helplessness. Learned Helplessness (Seligman) is a kind of feedback loop because if we are in a situation in which we are legitimately helpless, we learn that in those kinds of situations we are helpless. Then, when in a similar situation, we behave helplessly even if we truly have power to act. This reinforces our perception of our self and internal experience (felt sense) of being helpless. And so it continues. Learned helplessness is related to depression; I am not sure the relation to PTSD. In my case, because I was injured I have felt helpless in a lot of situations and I feel much more helpless than I did before. I would have to do more research to understand if this is learned helplessness as defined by Seligman or something else.

When I first found Somatic Experiencing and realized how much of healing PTSD is just about using somatic techniques to calm the nervous system and re-enter the body, I thought it would be a clear road out. I was wrong. I am still falling into these feedback loops on a regular basis, and I’m still trying to find ways to outsmart the downward spirals.There is a lot more work to be done, and my first step is to simply acknowledge that these feedback loops are still here and still need addressing.

__________________

Heidi Hanson is an artist and writer in Asheville, North Carolina currently working on an illustrated book chronicling her journey healing from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

The Dissociation Theory of Pierre Janet - A Century of Wisdom Lost and Rediscovered


In his early work, when Sigmund Freud still favored the "seduction theory" of neuroses, which was based in suppressed and/or repressed childhood experiences of sexual trauma, Freud often credited Pierre Janet for creating ideas such as dissociation and the subconscious.

Freud soon dropped his seduction theory model in favor of an unconscious drives theory (wish fulfillment), and the history of trauma therapy was derailed for the next 80-90 years. Curiously, and unfortunately for us, Freud's embrace of the drive theory resulted from his analysis of himself following his father's death. He recognized the repressed rage he felt toward his father and the competition he experienced for his mother's affection.

In essence, Freud's own neuroses became the foundation for his psychological model.

Freud still credited Janet in print and in lectures until around 1913, when Janet published a commentary on the state of psychoanalysis. This is from Wikipedia:
In his report on psychoanalysis of 1913, however, Janet argued that many of the 'novel' terms of psychoanalysis were only old concepts renamed, even to the way his own 'psychological analysis' preceded Freud's 'psychoanalysis'.[21] This provoked angry attacks from Freud's followers, and thereafter Freud's own attitude towards Janet cooled. In his lectures of 1915-16, he said that "for a long time I was prepared to give Janet very great credit for throwing light on neurotic symptoms, because he regarded them as expressions of idées inconscientes which dominated the patients," but, after what Freud saw as his backpedalling of 1913, he said, "I think he has unnecessarily forfeited much credit".[22]

The charge of plagiarism stung Freud especially. In his autobiographical sketch of 1925 he denied firmly that he had plagiarized from Janet,[23] and as late as 1937 he refused to meet him on the grounds that "when the libel was spread by French writers that I had listened to his lectures and stolen his ideas he could with a word have put an end to such talk"[24] but didn't.
This rivalry was lost by Janet and won by Freud - much to our own loss. Freud's drive theory has proven useless at best, and just plain wrong on whole. Meanwhile, Janet has been rediscovered and it turns out that his ideas about trauma and dissociation were spot on.

Of current thinkers in the field, perhaps no one has done more than Otto van der Hart to bring Janet's work to the attention of trauma therapists. As I have read about Janet over the years, I cannot help but wonder how much farther we could be in our work with trauma if Janet's ideas had prevailed.

This is one of van der Hart's earliest articles on Janet's work. You can find others on his Research Gate page.

Full Citation:
van der Hart, O, and Horst, R. (1989), The Dissociation Theory of Pierre Janet. Journal of Traumatic Stress; 2(4). 11 pages.


The Dissociation Theory of Pierre Janet

ONNO VAN DER HART AND RUTGER HORST
Although the concept of dissociation had been described earlier, Pierre Janet was the first to show clearly and systematically how it is the most direct psychological defense against overwhelming traumatic experiences. He demonstrated that dissociative phenomena play an important role in widely divergent post-traumatic stress responses which he included under the 19th-century diagnosis of hysteria. His dissociation theory is outlined here as a background for Janet's specific studies of trauma, it is based on nine concepts developed or elaborated by Janet: psychological automatism, consciousness, subconsciousness, narrowed field of consciousness, dissociation, amnesia, suggestibility, fixed idea, and emotion.

INTRODUCTION

According to a recent definition, "dissociation represents a process whereby certain mental functions which are ordinarily integrated with other functions presumably operate in a more compartmentalized or automatic way usually outside the sphere of conscious awareness or memory recall" (Ludwig, 1983, p. 93). A similar description of dissociation was given by Pierre Janet a century ago. He was not the first to introduce this concept, but was its most important student. Janet's dissociation theory is once again receiving deserved attention. Because he focuses on the role of dissociation in traumatically induced disorders, Janet's theory is particularly relevant for research into traumatic stress. Janet commenced his studies of dissociation with observations of patients suffering from hysteria. In the late 19th century, hysteria was considered to be a broad class of mental disorders, which embraced conditions we now include under the dissociative disorders: somatization disorder, conversion disorder, borderline personality disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. It was already well known that hysteria often followed stressful life events (cf. Pine], 1808; Briquet, 1859; Charcot, 1887). It was Janet, however, who explored and described the role that dissociation plays in posttraumatic hysteria. Historically Janet's approach to hysteria consisted of studies of observable behaviors followed by etiological studies. A similar line of inquiry is followed in this paper.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF DISSOCIATION IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
 

Janet's Predecessors

According to Carlson (1986), the American physician, Benjamin Rush (1812), was probably the first author to use the concept of dissociation. He used it, however, for patients that Americans of that era called "flighty," "hairbrained," or "a little cracked;" patients who were probably suffering from manic attacks or schizophrenic excitement.

In France the concept of dissociation became linked with hysteria and hypnosis. The psychological phenomena it referred to were well known to the "magnetizers" by the end of the 18th, and the beginning of the 19th century. Following the Marquis de Puységur, they observed patients who talked about themselves in the third person while in a state of induced or artificial somnambulism-as deep hypnosis was then known. According to Deleuze (1913), it seemed as if they were two different people: one awake and the other in a somnambulistic state. The one in the waking state was usually amnestic for the experiences of the somnambulistic other, while the one in somnambulism had, as a rule, memories of both states. In addition to somnambulism other unusual phenomena would also occur with these patients. For example, when distracted they could write a complete story without any awareness of the process or contents.

The French philosopher Maine de Biran (often cited by Janet) raised important questions about the dissociative phenomena in the patients of Deleuze and other magnetizers: How is a person to imagine a feeling that he does not feel, or a sensation that he does not perceive? What is the matter with the individual who can feel or sense something without having any notion of it? These questions became the point of departure for Janet's dissociation theory.

In France, Moreau de Tours (1845) was probably the first to use the concept of dissociation per se. In his experimental studies of the psychological effects of hashish, he conclude that

the action of hashish weakens the will-the mental power that rules ideas and associ­ates and connects them together. Memory and imagination become dominant; present things become foreign to us, and we are concerned entirely with things of the past and the future. (1973, p. 33)
According to Moreau de Tours, dissociation-or disintegration (désagrégation)-was the splitting off or isolation of ideas. If they had been aggregated, or integrated, they would have formed a normal harmonious whole. Although Moreau de Tours first dealt with chemically induced dissociation, in later works he included psychological factors (Moreau de Tours, 1865, 1869).

With regard to "natural" and induced somnambulism, Gros Jean (1855; cited by Janet, 1889) remarked:

We have seen in the same individual two simultaneous streams of thought: the one which formed the ordinary person, the other which occurred outside of him. We are in the presence of only the second person [in somnambulism]. The other remains asleep, exhausted. Because of this, it is impossible for the ordinary person to remember upon awakening anything of what has taken place during his attack (access). Such is the nature of the perfect somnambulism.
Regarding his experiments with "automatic writing" in hypnotized subjects, Taine (1878) spoke of a splitting (dédoublement) of the ego: the simultaneous existence in one and the same individual of "two thoughts, two wills, two distinct actions, the one of which he is aware, the other of which he is not aware and which he ascribes to invisible beings." Charles Richet (1884, p. 243, 250) also used the concept of dissociation. He distinguished three divergent streams in what he called the intellectual existence of man: (1) the personality, i.e., the conscious memory of ourself, age, sex, etc.; (2) the perceptions of events outside of us; and (3) the ego (moi), that is, the notion of a being who both observes and acts. Feeling, thinking, and acting are the characteristics of the ego. Richet remarked that in individuals who are in the somnambulistic state, these psy­chological elements become dissociated.

By 1887, the concept of dissociation is encountered in the work of Frederic Myers, in England, and of Charcot, Gilles de la Tourette and Pierre Janet, in France. Myers (1887) sought to show how far the dissociation of memories, faculties, and sensibilities could go in multiple personalities without resulting in chaos. Charcot remarked that "by reason of the easy dissociation of mental unity, certain centers may be put into play without the other regions of the psychic organ being made aware of it and called upon to take part in the processes" (p. 455). Gilles de la Tourette (1887) used the concept to describe the abolition of certain senses in hysterical patients: they are dissociated from the patients' normal mental state. Janet (1887) used the term in the same sense as Charcot and Gilles de la Tourette did, to described a variety of phenomena which characterized his hysterical subject Lucie and which could also be evoked in her under hypnosis.

Janet's Observations of Dissociation in Lucie

Like many modern researchers in the field, Janet first encountered dissociative phenomena in the form of a remarkable patient, Lucie. Janet's initial psychological experiments with Lucie (1886) demonstrated that she could perform several actions and perceive a number of sensations apparently unconsciously. While in the somnambulistic state, Janet suggested that she would come to see him again in 8 days. Once out of the trance, she neither remembered this nor any other aspect of the hypnosis. She did, however, come to see him on the appointed date.

Janet also instructed Lucie in automatic writing while under hypnosis. He then succeeded in having her do this when not in hypnosis. He would have someone else distract her attention, while he softly suggested to her that she take a pencil and paper and write. While Lucie concentrated on the conversation with the third person, her right hand answered Janet's questions. The resulting text was signed "Adriene." In this way, Janet discovered that it was Adrienne who remembered the posthypnotic suggestions and carried them out. Later, when Lucie appeared at her doctor's in response to a sug­gestion, Janet, who was also present, established that she was hallucinating that she was at home. Through automatic writing, Adrienne let Janet know that she had come at his instigation and that Lucie knew nothing about it.

Lucie was anesthetic over her entire body. When Janet pinched her arm hard she showed absolutely no reaction. Like the hidden observer phenomenon Hilgard (1973, 1977) experimentally demonstrated almost a century later-Adrienne responded with automatic writing to Janet's questions. Everything that Lucie did not feel, Adrienne did, and wrote down.

Later, Janet (1889) discovered yet another altered state of consciousness, between Lucie and Adrienne, and remarked that Lucie's consciousness seemed to be composed of three parallel streams: "Lucie 1," "Lucie 2," and "Lucie 3" (as he then called Adrienne). When Lucie 1 was hypnotized and entered the first stage of somnambulism, the first stream was interrupted and Lucie 2 appeared. In this state, Lucie 2 not only had memory for the periods in which she was predominant but also for everything Lucie 1 had experienced. In the third stage the stream of Lucie 2 was interrupted and Lucie 3 (i.e., Adrienne) appeared. Lucie 3 was able to remember experiences from all three personality states.

In Janet's view, Lucie 3 represented the total and complete individual consciousness. In the integrated third state she neither exhibited anesthesias nor unconscious actions. She also retained memories of a traumatic event that occurred at the age of 7 and which Janet believed to be responsible for her condition. While she was on holiday, two men hidden behind a curtain terrified her (Janet, 1886). In a later work, Janet wrote that such traumatic events could, in predisposed individuals, evoke dissociative phenomena, such as those manifested by Lucie.

CONCEPTS CENTRAL TO JANET'S DISSOCIATION THEORY


Most of Janet's predecessors and contemporaries believed that when a person such as Lucie did not perceive certain stimuli, they were still perceived unconsciously or mechanically (cf. Despine, 1880). Janet disagreed instead with authors such as Moreau de Tours and Taine who observed a separate awareness of such perceptions (Janet, 1886, 1887, 1889). Janet's conceptual point of departure was that behavioral patterns in animals as well as human beings always have conscious components. These perform a directive, regulatory function for movement and action of the organism. Not all of these proprioceptive functions (as Sherrington (1906) called them), however, are integrated in one indivisible subject, nor are they always registered by one indivisible personality.

In his first paper on this matter, Janet (1886) remarked that it is ridiculous to speak about the unconscious nature of suggestions. "One cannot say that there was in Lucie an absence of consciousness, but rather the existence of two states of consciousness (consciences)." In order to elaborate on this, Janet required the concepts discussed below; concepts which he developed and modified on the basis of his experimental studies and clinical observations. Our exegesis in particular follows the system used in L'Au-tomatisme psychologique, Janet's doctoral dissertation and his first major study of dissociation (Janet, 1889).

It should be mentioned that this book occupies a complex position in Janet's oeuvre. On the one hand it was his first book and the one in which he presented his dissociation theory. It was highly descriptive, covering psychological phenomena exhibited in hysteria, hypnosis, suggestion, possession, spiritism, etc., and described the role of traumatic experiences in hysteria. As such, it formed the basis for an extensive series of clinical studies on hysteria, all of which can be classified under his dissociation theory (e.g., Janet, 1894a, 1898, 1907, 1909a, 1911).

On the other hand, the main goal of this project was to study human behavior in its simplest and most rudimentary form, and to show that this elementary activity forms a psychological automatism: an automatism because it is regular and predetermined, and psychological because it is associated with consciousness. As such this book was Janet's first step in the direction of a more comprehensive psychology, both normal and abnormal, which came to be called the psychology of conduct (la psychologie de la conduite) (cf. Janet, 1920/1, 1926a,ó, 1927, 1928, 1929, 1932, 1935, 1936). Janet felt that he could best study psychological automatism in individuals who exhibited it to an extreme degree, that is, in patients suffering from hysteria. He came to discover that most of these patients also suffered from unresolved- i.e., dissociated- traumatic memories.

Psychological Automatism

In his introduction to L’Automatisme psychologique, Janet made an apology for typifying the behavioral phenomena of his patients as automatisms, and for characterizing them as psychological. His intention was to distinguish automatisms from the mechanical-physical movements of inanimate objects. He felt that dissociated behavior patterns exhibited in catatonic or somnambulistic states or under hypnosis were not regulated by normal personality systems. Nevertheless, even when they were maladaptive, these patterns were still determined by psychological factors and could be readily distinguished from the action of mechanical objects.

Consciousness

There exists in living beings a poorly understood multidimensional regulating system, which Janet tried to describe and analyze in psychological terms. Regulating systems such as these which employ complex feedback mechanisms can never function autonomously. They serve a larger organization, i.e., the whole living organism. They regulate environmentally oriented (exteroceptive) movement. Inner proprioceptive regulating systems are based on these primary exteroceptive systems. In the course of evolution they have increased in number, and become connected and integrated in as yet poorly understood functional units. For Janet consciousness comprised these proprioceptive, inner regulating activities.

Janet's studies of his patient's behavior led him to break with traditional, quasi religious notions of consciousness and mind; notions that were based upon metaphysical attributes such as unity and identity. The consciousness manifested in his patients was not at all characterized by unity or an all-embracing identity. Janet noted his own findings and those of many predecessors which-demonstrated that a single organism can sometimes be steered by two or more systems of consciousness, by subsystems which interfere with each other or take control in capricious succession as exemplified by Lucie/Adrienne.

The Subconscious

Psychological observations have shattered belief in the unity and indivisibility of consciousness. Introspection alone shows us that at any given moment that we are aware of only a selected part of all possible sensory perceptions, thoughts, memory elements, feelings, and expectations. Conscious activities are but the vanguard of interactions between the living organism and its environment. They give ad hoc priority to every aspect of the current situation, and this has the greatest value for maintaining contact with reality. The remote past and the near future have less reality value. By determining systematic activity, however, they nevertheless provide the essential background for more primary, exteroceptive, conscious activities. To this background also belong expectations, ideals, habits, memories, and acquired and inborn skills.

Janet summarized this whole functional background in his concept of subconsciousness. His predecessors and contemporaries often attributed supernatural or superhuman qualities to the subconscious, but Janet was opposed to these views, regarding them as prescientific. According to Janet, subconsciousness consisted of psychological automatism. He observed the formation of new nuclei of consciousness from hysterical automatisms. These dissociated nuclei of consciousness were independent from the central personality, and developed in response to vehement emotional experiences. The latter were particularly related to traumatic events.

As mere psychological automatisms these nuclei are defective in adaptation. They do not have functions at a reality level, and lack the powers of attention, judgement and volition necessary for adaptive interaction with the surroundings. Some of these nuclei, however, expand or grow through association with new ideas or images. As the central personality is weakened and the tendency to dissociate becomes stronger, these alternative states of consciousness, or somnambulistic states, more often take over control of the body.

In his study of the "elementary forms of human activity," Janet paradoxically found that certain dissociated elementary forms had, in fact, acquired creative and integrative capacities (cf. Binet, 1890). The creative process of association which tends towards functional unity thus seems not to be restricted to the main stream of consciousness.

Narrowing of the Field of Consciousness

With the introduction of the concept "field of consciousness," Janet added another dimension to the conscious/subconscious system. He wanted to show that not only the capacity for integration differs from individual to individual, but also the extent of consciousness varies. The field of consciousness is particularly restricted in hysterical patients. Conscious functions involved in current activities play a central part in the field or consciousness. The subject is less aware of psychological activities which occur at the periphery. Activities outside the field of consciousness become psychological automatisms.

The phrase "field of consciousness" was inspired by the analogous phrase "visual field." In the visual field, the central part also serves focused conscious perception, while the periphery registers vague stimuli. While peripheral stimuli may not be consciously perceptible to an individual, the person nevertheless often responds to them "involuntarily." An example is automatic movement of the head or trunk in the direction of a fleeting peripheral movement.

Narrowing of the field of consciousness does not refer to sensory perceptions alone. On a more abstract level, Janet (1909a) described the narrowing of the field of consciousness as the reduction of the number of psychological phenomena that can be simultaneously united or integrated in one and the same personal consciousness. In Janet's view, narrowing of the field of consciousness is one of the two basic characteristics of hysteria. Dissociation is the other.

Dissociation

A number of different factors can disturb the integrative capacity and lead to the splitting off (dédoublement) and isolation of certain psychological regulating systems. These dissociated nuclei of consciousness continue to lead lives of their own, as demonstrated by Lucie/Adrienne. Different nuclei of consciousness alternate in taking over the behavior, or interfere with each other.

These dissociated states of consciousness can be of varying degrees of complexity. The simplest form is a single idée fixe (fixed idea), which may be defined as an image, thought, or statement, with accompanying feelings, physical posture, and bodily movements. Traumatic memories are typical examples of such fixed ideas. The most complex of these dissociated states of consciousness are the alter personalities of patients with multiple personality disorder (MPD). In MPD an alter personality may have its own life history, and relatively enduring patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and self (American Psychiatric Association, 1987). These alter personalities have an individual sense of identity and distinguish themselves from the central personality.

Somnambulistic states occurring spontaneously or during hypnosis can also be considered as dissociated nuclei of states of consciousness. Somnambulistic states can gradually become more coherent and stable, but they do not always manifest themselves completely. In Lucie, partial somnambulism occurred when she was talking with somebody else, while Adrienne communicated via automatic writing with Janet.

The prevailing view was that the usual personality was regarded as normal, while the somnambulistic state was regarded as an abnormal, subconscious state. Janet did not always agree with this. For example, his patient Marceline was usually very depressed and had multiple serious symptoms in this state, including total body anesthesia. By contrast in her somnambulistic state she was a cheerful and active woman who had complete sensory control (Janet, 1910). Janet concluded that this healthier (but somnambulistic) state corresponded to the natural state of Marceline in her childhood, before she became ill. Hilgard (1977) recently reported the same observation.

Amnesia

Amnesia is the loss of memory for simple sensory perceptions or more complex products of consciousness such as traumatic memories. Certain so called conversion symptoms can be seen as amnestic lacunae. These lacunae concern sensory perceptions or certain patterns of movement. For example, an arm that is not felt falls outside of personal consciousness and is forgotten. It is ignored-behavior that Janet labeled "la belle indifférence d'une hystérique." In the somnambulistic state lost movement and sensation can return, as well as memory for previous somnambulisms. Conversely, while the habitual personality may have lost memories of sensations and movements, dissociated nuclei of consciousness may have these memories at their disposal. The same applies to traumatic memories, for which the individual is often amnestic.

Suggestion and Suggestibility

Patients suffering from the 19th-century diagnosis of hysteria were, as a rule, highly "suggestible." Recent findings of the high hypnotizability of patients with dissociative disorders such as MPD and PTSD confirm this early observation (cf. Bliss, 1986; Spiegel et al., 1988). When Janet explored the meaning of suggestion he found that it had come to mean practically anything. The vaguest definition was that of Bernheim (1886): "I will define sug­gestion as the action by which an idea is introduced into the brain and accepted by it." For Janet, suggestion was a specific manner of addressing the subconscious. To achieve suggestion effects, personal consciousness first had to be suppressed. This was usually not difficult in hysterical patients since their narrowed field or consciousness allowed them to be easily distracted.

Distraction was not always necessary for suggestive influence with hysterical patients. Given their narrow field or consciousness and their tendency to dissociate, the subconscious part of their personality easily submits itself to another's directions. Sensory perceptions, mental imagery, and emotions have free play. They are no longer subject to critical reasoning, nor to any other activities of personal consciousness. In Fromm's (1965) terms there exists a state of "ego-passivity." Suggestions now operate freely in the subconscious as if nothing exists outside.

Words directly evoke images, and these can seize control of the motor system, and emerge as a psychological automatism without meeting any resistance. Consciousness is reduced to a single isolated datum, a state which Janet termed monoideic somnambulism. The simplest form, in which one idea persists and is not replaced by another, is accompanied by catalepsy. The motor system rigidifies into certain postures or seizure-like states.

Hypnotic suggestions given to the subject in a specific somnambulistic state could only be removed when the subject was brought back to exactly the same state. The suggestion had become part of a system of psychological phenomena which led an autonomous existence outside the other psychological systems. The same applied to traumatic experiences which were subsequently dissociated from personal consciousness, or for events experienced while inebriated or after the use of hashish. Today we understand these phenomena as examples of State Dependent Learning (SDL). Essentially, what individuals learn or experience in one psychophysiological state may not readily be transferable to another state of consciousness, and vice versa. Modern developments in SDL confirm the importance of Janet's observations (cf. Goodwin et al., 1969; Ludwig, 1984; Overton, 1978; Weingartner, 1978).

Because high suggestibility was characteristic of 19th century hysterical patients, some of Janet's contemporaries, such as Babinski (1901, 1909) saw hysteria as an illness based upon suggestion (if not outright malingering). According to Janet, suggestibility was the result of the narrowing of the field of consciousness and the tendency to dissociate.

Fixed Ideas

Fixed ideas (idéas fixes) are thoughts or mental images which assume exaggerated proportions, have a high emotional charge and, in hysterical patients, are isolated from the habitual personality (or personal consciousness) (Janet, 1894a, 1895). When they dominate consciousness, they are enacted in real life. Fixed ideas can remain isolated but they may also grow automatically by assimilating new impressions or by linking together with other fixed ideas. Since they are dissociated, the individual is often, at least temporarily, unaware of them. These ideas manifest themselves in dreams, and during dissociative episodes such as hysterical attacks, somnambulistic states, and via automatic writing. Hypnosis (artificial somnambulism) is the medium of choice for discovering and exploring them.

Hysterical patients may be aware of part of a fixed idea, particularly certain statements, images, feelings and body movements. An example is feeling regret but not knowing why. A peculiar example concerned a 28-yearold woman, who repeatedly fell in the street. She had some awareness of throwing herself with force to the ground, and believed that dizziness was the cause. Under hypnosis, it became clear to Janet that her falling was part of a repetitive dream, in which she reenacted a suicide attempt in which she jumped into the river Seine.

In general, the conscious experiences are part of much more extensive fixed ideas-i.e., "dreams" or traumatic memories-which may be related in one person to an insult, to an accident in another, and in a third to the death of a family member. Janet noted that these dreams and memories "infiltrate" personal consciousness and disturb it. Thus, phenomena which today are called "flashbacks" and "intrusive thoughts" were regarded by Janet as dis­sociative phenomena, and as a part of subconscious fixed ideas.

Janet (1894b) made an important distinction between primary and secondary fixed ideas. A primary fixed idea is the total system or complex of images-visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc. -of a particular traumatic event together with the corresponding emotions and behaviors. Janet made a particularly deep analysis of these fixed ideas in the case of Justine (cf. van der Har and Friedman, 1989). For Justine, the primary fixed idea related to two cholera corpses she had seen at age 17.

Secondary fixed ideas are additional fixed ideas that have the same characteristics as primary fixed ideas. They are elements or fragments that have either detached themselves from a primary fixed idea, or have become linked to it by association. Thus in Justine's case, her intense fear of cholera led to a refusal to eat fruit or vegetables for fear of contamination, that persisted even after the original fixed idea had been therapeutically resolved. When only the secondary fixed idea is dealt with in treatment, the core of the problem continues to exist.

Trauma and Emotions

Janet has been repeatedly and mistakenly quoted as emphasizing hereditary factors in hysteria (cf. Zilboorg and Henry, 1941). Janet did refer to a congenital tendency to dissociate, and to the role of inebriation, physical illness, and exhaustion in producing hysterical symptoms (Janet, 1889, 1894a, b, 1897). He emphasized most forcefully, however, the role of vehement emotions such as terror in response to traumatic events. He focused on the subjective aspects of these events rather than on their objective aspects. Janet often observed that certain patients responded with extreme fear or anger to situations which were trivial for most other people.

Janet made a careful distinction between feelings, which he saw as regulators of behavior, and emotions. Emotions such as extreme fear or anger occur when the subject is not capable of carrying out well-adapted actions. Instead energy is discharged into disordered actions of much lower quality (Janet, 1909b). Vehement emotions exert a disintegrative effect on the mind. They impair the ability to synthesize and integrate new information, and in susceptible individuals they cause dissociations. Traumatic memories persist as fixed ideas, which may develop further subconsciously. They manifest themselves at times in dreams, flashbacks, and other dissociative episodes.

Janet gave many examples of emotional responses to trauma leading to hysteria (cf. Crocq and de Verbizier, 1988). A well-known case is that of Marie (Janet, 1889), a 20-year-old woman who suffered from seizures and spasms that always occurred after the onset of her menstruation. In her usual state, Marie remembered nothing of these attacks, except that she started trembling. In "artificial somnambulism," however, she became aware of the event that lay at the basis of the seizures: her first period, for which she was not prepared and of which she was terribly ashamed. To put a stop to the flow of blood, she jumped into a tub of cold water. Her menstruation stopped and she fell ill. This was the traumatic event that she relived with each new menstruation.

Janet noted that repeated vehement emotions also caused exhaustion, and with it a range of more general complaints such as abulia (lack of will power), inertia, emotionality, and a strong need for guidance and support. In modern terms we would characterize these responses as a post-traumatic decline (cf. Titchener, 1986). In general, the disintegrative effect of vehement emotions is most strongly exerted on the most recently formed and least stable aspects of the personality. The most recently formed, and least well organized memories are the first to be dissociated (Janet, 1909b). The per­sonality, Janet observed, seems to fall back to an earlier level, prior to the now eliminated synthesis. Later, in therapy the synthesis may, perhaps, be reestablished. But if these emotions recur repeatedly, they hinder the restorative process, and the subject continues to be "attached" to the trauma and the developmental stage that preceded it (Janet, 1919/25).

DISCUSSION

A recent stimulus for the reappraisal of Janet's dissociation theory is Ernest Hilgard's neo-dissociation theory. Hilgard's model was directly inspired by Janet's dissociation theory (Hilgard, 1973, 1977). According to Hilgard, the most important difference between the two is that Janet regarded dissociative phenomena as only occurring in individuals suffering from hysteria. In Hilgard's view dissociative phenomena are universal experiences and not necessarily pathological in themselves. He also ascribed to Janet the view that dissociation only relates to a complete splitting between conscious and subconscious processes.

Hilgard's views do an injustice to Janet, who certainly distinguished lesser forms of dissociation occurring across a range of conditions and even in normal individuals. It is true, however, that Janet did focus in particular on the drastic dissociations which characterized his hysterical patients, and in many cases, he demonstrated the pathogenic role of trauma. It should be remembered that for Janet hysteria comprised all dissociative and related disorders.

Most modern studies of traumatic stress focus almost exclusively on post-traumatic stress disorder. Janet's work encourages us to seek the traumatic origins of a much wider range of disorders. Some such developments are already under way. Several studies in the field of dissociative disorders, in particular work on multiple personality disorder, indicate the traumatic origins in childhood of dissociative symptoms (cf. Gliss, 1986; Putnam et al., 1986; Ross and Norton, 1987; Shultz et al., 1985). Similar data have re­cently been reported with regard to borderline personality disorder (Herman et al., 1989).
Janet's dissociation theory should inspire us to develop a common theoretical approach to widely varying post-traumatic stress responses, thereby fostering a sense of unity in an otherwise highly fragmented field. One aspect of Janet's approach that may prove useful is his emphasis on the (sub)conscious nature of dissociative phenomena such as traumatic memories. Bearing this in mind may help therapists from becoming stuck in a symptom oriented or psychodynamic approach when dissociated fixed ideas need to be addressed.

Premature acceptance of Freud's idiosyncratic position vis-à-vis dissociation and consciousness probably delayed an appreciation of the alternative Janetian view. In their first paper on hysteria, Breuer and Freud (1893) clearly followed Janet's dissociation theory. They considered dissociated states of consciousness to be conscious.

We have become convinced that the splitting of consciousness which is so striking in the well known classical cases under the form of double conscience is present in a rudimentary degree in every hysteria, and that a tendency to such a dissociation, and with it the emergence of abnormal states of consciousness... is the basic phenomenon of neurosis. These hypnoid [or somnambulistic] states share with one another and with hypnosis one common feature: the ideas which emerge in them are very intense but are cut off from the associative communication with the rest of the content of consciousness. (SE 2: 12)

Two years later, however, Freud and Breuer introduced the concept of the unconscious, and Freud began to ignore dissociative phenomena and multiple nuclei of consciousness. When confronted with these questions he was anxious to sidestep the issue as soon as possible. Zemach (1986) quoted Freud thus;

Depersonalization leads us to the extraordinary condition of double consciousness, which is more correctly described as split personality. But all of this is so obscure and had been so little mastered scientifically that I must refrain from talking about it any more to you. (SE 22: 245).
Zemach found Freud's arguments for the existence of purely unconscious processes logically untenable, and Freud's reasons for rejecting the dissociation theory as invalid. Reconsideration of Janet's dissociation theory, and Breuer and Freud's early work consistent with it, will enhance our understanding of widely divergent post-traumatic stress states and increase our effectiveness in treating these states.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Based upon a plenary presentation at the Third International Conference on Multiple Personality/Dissociative States, Chicago, Illinois, September 18-21, 1986, and written while the first author was affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry, Free University Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands. The authors are grateful to Drs. Paul Brown and Frank Putnam for their helpful comments on an earlier draft.

REFERENCES

  1. American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (third edition revised), American Psychiatric Press, Washington, D.C.
  2. Babinski, J. (1901). Definition de l'hystérie. Rev. Neurol. 9: 1074-1080.
  3. Babinski, J. (1909). Démembrement de l'hystérie traditionelle. Phitiathisme. Semaine Mid. 59: 3-8. Bernheim, H. (1886). De la suggestion et des applications à la thirapeutique, Doin, Paris. 
  4. Binet, A. (1980). Book Review of Janet, P., LA utomatisme Psychologique. Rev. Philos. 29(1): 198-200. 
  5. Bliss, E. L. (1986). Multiple Personality, Allied Disorders and Hypnosis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
  6. Breuer, J., and Freud, S. (1893). Über den psychischen mechanismus hysterischer Phänomene [On the psychical mechanism of hysterical phenomena]. Neurologischer Centralblatt 12: 4-10, 43-47. [Also in Breuer, J. and Freud, S. (1895)]. 
  7. Breuer, J., and Freud, S. (1955). Studies on Hysteria. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, The Hogarth Press, London: (Original Publication, 1895). 
  8. Briquet, P. (1859). Traite clinique et thirapeutique de 1 hysterie, J.-B. Bailliere et Fils, Paris.
    Carlson, E. T. (1986). The history of dissociation until 1880. In Quen, J. M. (ed.), Split Minds/Split Brains, New York University Press, New York.
  9. Charcot, J.-M. (1887). Lecons sur les maladies du système nerveux faites à la Salpêtriére, Progres Medical, Delahaye and Lecrosnie, Paris.
  10. Crocq, L., and de Verbizier, J. (1988). Le traumatisme psychologique dans l'oeuvre de Pierre Janet. Bulletin de Psychologie, Tome XL1, No. 385, 483-485.
  11. De la Tourette, G. (1887). L Hypnotisme et les états analogues au point de vue medico-liga!, Librairie Plon, Paris.
  12. Deleuze, J. P. F. (1813). Histoire critique du magnetisme animal (2 volumes), Mame, Paris. 
  13. Despine, P. (1880). Le somnambulisme, F. Savy, Paris.
  14. Fromm, E. (1965). Hypnoanalysis: Theory and two case excerpts. Psychotherapy: Theory Res. Pract. 2: 127-133.
  15. Goodwin, D. W., Powell, P., Bremer, D., Hoine, H., and Stern, J. (1969). Alcohol and recall: State-dependent effects in man. Science 163, 1358-1360.
  16. Gros Jean (1855). Lettre de Gross Jean à son évèque. (Cited by Janet, 1889).
  17. Herman, J., Perry, J. C., and van der Kolk, B. A. (1989). Childhood trauma and borderline personality disorder. Ame. J. Psychiat. 146: 490-495.
  18. Hilgard, E. R. (1973). A neodissociation theory of pain reduction in hypnosis. Psychological Rev. 80: 396-411.
  19. Hilgard, E. R. (1977). Divided consciousness: Multiple Controls in Human Though and Action, Wiley, New York.
  20. Janet, P. (1886). Les actes inconscients et le dédoublement de la personnalité. Rev. Philos., 22(2): 212-223.
  21. Janet, P. (1887). L'Anesthésie systematisée el la dissociation des phénomenes psychologiques. Rev. Philos., 23(l): 449-472.
  22. Janet, P. (1889). LA utomatisme psychologique, Felix Alcan, Paris (Reprint: Société Pierre Janet, Paris, 1973).
  23. Janet, P. (1894a). L 'Etat mental des hysteriques: Les accidents mentaux, Rueff and Cie, Paris. 
  24. Janet, P. (I 894b). Histoire dune ideefixe. Rev. Philos., 37(l): 121-168. [Also in Janet (1898).] 
  25. Janet, P. (1895). Les idées fixes de forme hystérique. Presse Medicale, 3: 201-203. [Also in Janet (1898).]
  26. Janet, P. (1897). L'Influence somnambulique et le besoin de direction. Rev. Philos., 43(l): 113-143. [Also in Janet (1898).]
  27. Janet, P. (1898). Névroses et idées fixes, Vol. 1. Felix Alcan, Paris.
  28. Janet, P. (1907). The Major Symptoms of Hysteria, Macmillan, London/New York. Second edition with new matter: 1920. Reprint of 1920-edition: Hafner, New York, 1965. 
  29. Janet, P. (1909a). Les névroses, Flammarion, Paris.
  30. Janet, P. (1909b). Problemes psychologiques de ('emotion. Rev. Neurol., 17(2): 1551-1672. 
  31. Janet, P. (1910). Une Félida artificielle. Rev. Philos., 69(1): 329-357). [Also in Janet (1911).]
  32. Janet, P. (1911). L 'État mental des hystériques (second edition), Félix Alcan, Paris. Reprint: Lafitte Reprints, Marseille, 1983.
  33. Janet, P. (1919). Les medications psychologiques (3 volumes). Felix Alcan, Paris. Reprint: Soci6t6 Pierre Janet, Paris, 1984. English edition: Psychological healing (2 volumes), Macmillan, New York, Reprint: Arno Press, New York, 1976. 
  34. Janet, P. (1920/l). La tension psychologique, ses degrés, ses oscillations. Brit. Psycho. (Medical Section), l(1-15): 144-164, 209-224. 
  35. Janet, P. (192óa). De l ángoisse a 1 extase, Vol. 1: Un delire religieux, la croyance, Felix Alcan, Paris.
  36. Janet, P. (1926b). Psychologie experimental: Les stades de 1 evolution psychologique, Chahine, Paris.
  37. Janet, P. (1927). La pensee intérieure et ses troubles, Chahine, Paris.
  38. Janet, P. (1928). De l ángoisse à 1 extase, Vol. 2: Les sentiments fondamentaux, Félix Alcan, Paris. 
  39. Janet, P. (1929). L Évolution psychologique de la personnalité, Chahine, Paris. Reprint: So-ci6t6 Pierre Janet, Paris, 1984.
  40. Janet, P. (1932). La force et la faiblesse psychologiques, Maloine, Paris. 
  41. Janet, P. (1935). Les débuts de !'intelligence, Flammarion, Paris.
  42. Janet, P. (1936). L'Intelligence avant le langage, Flammarion, Paris.
  43. Ludwig, A.M. (1983). The psychobiological functions of dissociation. Am. J. Clin. Hypn. 26: 93­99.
  44. Ludwig, A.M. (1984). Intoxication and sobriety: Implications for the understanding of multiple personality. Psychiatric Clin. of North Am. 7: 161-169. 
  45. Moreau de Tours, J.J. (1845). Du hachisch et de l aliénation mentale: Études psychologiques. Fortin, Masson and Cie, Paris, English edition: Hashish and mental illness. Raven Press, New York, 1973. 
  46. Moreau de Tours J. J. (1865). De la folie hystérique et de quelques phénomènes nerveux propres à 1 hysterie (convulsive), a l hysterie-epilepsie et à l epilepsie, Victor Masson et Fils, Paris. 
  47. Moreau de Tours, J. J. (1869). Traite pratique de la folie névropathique (vulgo hysterique), Germer Bailliere, Paris. 
  48. Myers, F.W.H. (1887). Multiplex personality. Proceeding Society of Psychical Research, 496-514. Overton, D. A. (1978). Major theories of state dependent learning. In Ho. B. T. et al. (eds.), Drug Discrimination and State Dependent Learning, Academic Press, New York. 
  49. Pinel, P. (1808). Traite medico -philosophique sur !'alienation mental ou la manie (second edition), Doin, Paris. 
  50. Putnam, F. W., J. J., Guroff, E. K., Silberman, L., Barban and Post, R. M. (1986). The clinical phenomenology of multiple personality disorder. J. Clin. Psychiat. 47: 285-293. 
  51. Richet, C. (1884). L 'Homme et !'intelligence, Felix Alcan, Paris.
  52. Ross, C. A. and Norton, G. R. (1987). Multiple personality disorder: An analysis of 236 cases; Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Multiple Personality/ Dis­sociative States, Chicago, Ill.
  53. Rush, B. (1812). Medical Inquiries upon the diseases of the Mind, Kimber and Richardson, Philadelphia.
  54. Sherrington, C. S. (1906). The Integrative Action of the Nervous System, Yale University Press, New York.
  55. Shultz, R., Braun, B. G., and Kluft, R. P. (1985). Creativity and the imaginary companion phenomenon: Prevalence and phenomenology in MPD, Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Multiple Personality/Dissociatioe States, Chicago, Ill., October.
  56. Spiegel, D., Hunt, T., and Dondershine, H. E. (1988). Dissociation and hypnotizability in post-traumatic stress disorder. Am. J. Psychiat. 145: 301-305.
  57. Taine, H. (1878). De !'intelligence (third edition), Librairie Hachette and Cie, Paris. 
  58. Titchener, J. L. (1986). Post-traumatic decline: A consequence of unresolved destructive drives. In Figley, C. (ed.), Trauma and Its Wake, II, Brunner/Mazel, New York.
  59. van der Hart, O., and Friedman, B. (1989). A reader's guide to Pierre Janet on dissociation: A neglect intellectual heritance. Dissociation, 2(1): in press.
  60. Weingartner, H. (1978). Human state dependent learning. In: Ho, B. T. et al., (eds.), Drug Discrimination and State Dependent Learning, Academic Press, New York. 
  61. Zemach, E. (1986). Unconscious mind or conscious minds? Midwestern Studies Philos. X: 121-149. 
  62. Zilboorg, G., and Henri, G. W. (1941). A History of Medical Psychology, Norton, New York.