Origins of Plurality and Levels of Dissociation

Posted on October 8th, 2022.

Important Notes: We are not professional researchers. This is not a substitute for professional research. We are trying to fill in the lack of professional research with our own as a temporary solution.

This study cannot with certainty prove or disprove the existence of plurality formed from sources other than trauma. This was an attempt to gain insight into the situation through looking at how DES scores compare between different origins.

The DES is not a diagnostic tool, but it can aid in receiving a diagnosis. This survey is only to track any potential differences in scores between different self identified origins of plurality and what that may mean.

The survey was started during the COVID-19 pandemic in late 2021 and was finished in early 2022. The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing, long term, collective trauma. There is a strong link between stress, trauma, and dissociation. The scores we received are most likely influenced by the current world events at varying levels.

Terminology used in this study:

Plurality- The experience of being or having more than one self-aware entity within a single body. Plurality is a spectrum of many different experiences.

Traumagenic- Plurality that is attributed to trauma. This often includes the diagnoses Dissociative Identity Disorder and Other Specified Dissociative Disorder 1. While all DID and OSDD 1 is caused by trauma, trauma may not be the origin of the system itself.

Endogenic- Plurality that exists for reasons not related to trauma.

Quoigenic- The origins are unknown or unspecified.

Parogenic/willogenic- Plurality that was created intentionally through an imaginative process. It is also known as tulpamancy.

Metagenic/Spirigenic- Plurality that is attributed to a spiritual cause.

Neurogenic- Plurality that is caused by a mental condition other than DID/OSDD 1.

Mixed Origins- Plurality that has more than one cause.

Introduction

Plurality is the experience of being or having more than one self-aware entity within a single body. What these entities are varies. This can include, but is not limited to: having dissociated parts, multiple selves, facets, and sharing a body with others. Plurality is a label that one can choose to identify themselves as if they feel like it fits them. People diagnosed with Dissociative Identity Disorder or Otherwise Specified Dissociative Disorder 1 often (but not always) identify as plural or multiple. These disorders are known to be caused by dissociation from trauma, and are currently the only scientifically acknowledged examples of plurality.

Some claim to experience plurality that is not based in trauma and pathological dissociation and is not disordered. There are many reported causes of this within the plural community, but there is little research done on it. We conducted this survey to determine if self identified origins had any correlation to levels of dissociation.

Dissociation is an involuntary mental process that creates a failure to fully integrate information. It creates a sense of disconnection between the self and the dissociated material. Pathological levels of dissociation often occur as a way to cope with overwhelming stress.

According to the DSM-5, “Dissociative disorders are characterized by a disruption of and/or discontinuity in the normal integration of consciousness, memory, identity, emotion, perception, body representation, motor control, and behavior.”¹

Pathological levels of dissociation are heavily linked to trauma, meaning that plurals who report a non-traumagenic origin and show lower levels of dissociation than seen in DID or OSDD 1 may indicate the possibility of plurality having more than one cause.

Background

The existence of plurality outside of trauma based dissociation is widely debated within the community, largely due to the absence of evidence for such a thing. The most clinically acknowledged origin of plurality is based in the theory of structural dissociation of the personality. This theory states that we all have separate self states or parts of the personality. During childhood, these parts merge into one more unified whole at around 6-9 years of age. Trauma can disrupt this process and prevent these parts from merging. In DID and OSDD 1, these parts become so separate that they often develop their own sense of self. This is an adaptive mechanism to better survive in a scary and unpredictable environment. These dissociated parts contain different experiences and responses in order to prevent the trauma from being too overwhelming.

We would like to clarify that if someone reports their plurality having non-traumagenic origins, it does not mean that they have never experienced trauma or dissociation. It means that they believe their plurality did not originate from their trauma.

Method

We conducted a community survey to gather data on self identified origins of plurality and their levels of dissociation. We collected responses from various online plural communities, such as those on Reddit, Tumblr, and forums. The survey was started on Dec. 1st, 2021 and closed around February 7th, 2022 once we received 400 responses. One response turned out to be a duplicate.

We collected DES scores from the DES II, as well as some other information that may provide insight, such as diagnosis. We collected no identifying information from this survey.

Everyone had the option to select more than one origin. The four primary groups we are focusing on are endogenic, traumagenic, quoigenic, and mixed endogenic and traumagenic origins. We will primarily be focusing on differences between those who selected traumagenic and those who did not.

Endogenic systems can have mixed origins, but for the mixed origins we are primarily focusing on those who have both traumagenic and endogenic origins. Those who have mixed endogenic origins are sorted as endogenic instead of mixed origins to simplify our results. This is not to erase or simplify their experiences as mixed origin, it is to simplify our data to make it easier to work with. We counted many things, such as tulpamancy, under the endogenic label to simplify our results.

We received other responses from people who either didn’t fit one of these labels or felt the need to specify further. We tried our best to work with this data by matching it up to one of the broader categories we listed, because we didn’t know what else to do with some of these responses. We hope this doesn’t offend anyone.

Results

Makeup Of The Respondents

We received a variety of answers on which origins the respondents identified with.

Most respondents were traumagenic, and most of those traumagenic respondents (59.70%) were not of mixed origin.

We also found that those who selected an endogenic origin were more likely to pick more than one origin. This is partly be because we listed endogenic as an origin, along with several endogenic origins.

Diagnosis and Treatment

We wanted to measure how much of our respondents have DID or OSDD 1, since the term traumagenic is not synonymous with DID and OSDD 1². It is a common misunderstanding that they mean the same thing.

Only 40.5% of respondents reported that they have been diagnosed with DID or OSDD 1, or believe they would qualify for a diagnosis based on the criteria. We expected this number to be higher.

The amount who said yes is less than those who reported being traumagenic. Those who reported being traumagenic only were the most likely to say yes. Some of those who reported being traumagenic only responded with maybe and rarely no, but never with no longer fitting the criteria.

Those who had traumagenic and endogenic origins were more likely to respond with something other than yes, but still said yes more often than the endogenic and quoigenic groups.

Those who were endogenic were the most likely to say no out of all the groups.

Treatment and how well it is progressing can affect DES scores. We also wanted to gauge how many respondents were in treatment or felt they needed treatment for DID or OSDD.

The amount currently in therapy was surprisingly low. Only 7% report being in treatment for symptoms of DID and OSDD 1 and that it is going well.

8.3% selected other. Their answers included various situations such as starting treatment soon, therapists not being understanding, being in therapy for things other than DID/OSDD 1, being in therapy for trauma and dissociation but not DID, and not trusting therapists.

Unsurprisingly, those who selected an endogenic origin were much more likely to report that they do not need treatment. Almost all of them answered that they did not need treatment. Three respondents said that they are in therapy, but they are undiagnosed. The quoigenic group (excluding mixed origins) was the second mostly likely to say that they did not need treatment.

DES Scoring

We will first go over general statistics, and then we will go over the data based on specific origins.

The majority of respondents either have not taken the DES before this survey or were unsure if they had.

This is how the respondents scored on the DES. We didn’t think many would score above 70, but we were incorrect in our judgment. We got responses in the 80s and 90s.

Most (64.6%) were surprised by their score. This is likely because most respondents have never taken the test before.

Almost half (45%) expected their score to be lower, but only 7.5% thought they would score higher.

DES Scores Compared to Origins

The survey was started during the COVID-19 pandemic in late 2021 and was finished in early 2022. The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing, long term, collective trauma. There is a strong link between stress, trauma, and dissociation. The scores we received for all of the groups are most likely influenced by the current world events at varying levels. There may be other factors for the scores we received. We cannot determine exactly why these scores are so much higher with certainty.

It is also worth noting that some questions on the DES are plurality specific or could be very relatable to plurals regardless of how dissociative they are.

Traumagenic Origins Only:

Average score: 58.64

Highest score: 99.67

Lowest score: 14.29

Median score: 60

Most commonly scored range: 61-70

The average DES score for DID patients is a 48, and the average for OSDD is a 36.³ The average score we calculated for the traumagenic group, which includes both DID and OSDD, exceeds both of these averages.

The survey was started during the COVID-19 pandemic in late 2021 and was finished in early 2022. The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing, long term, collective trauma. There is a strong link between stress, trauma, and dissociation. The scores we received are most likely influenced by the current world events at varying levels. There may be other factors for the scores we received. We cannot determine exactly why these scores are so much higher with certainty.

We gave scores in the 80’s and 90’s their own categories to calculate the most commonly scored range due to how many scored above 70. If we had not done that, the most commonly scored range would have been 70+ for the traumagenic group.

Endogenic Origins Only:

Average: 29.21

Highest score: 70

Lowest score: 4.29

Median score: 25

Most commonly scored range: 21-30

The endogenic group scored around 30 on average. They scored higher than the average person (5), but lower than the traumagenic group. Only 1% of DID patients score below 30.⁴

Mixed Traumagenic and Endogenic Origins:

Average score: 50.53

Highest score: 98.93

Lowest score: 12.5

Median score: 47.415

Most commonly scored range: 41-50

Quoigenic/Unknown origins, including mixed origins:

Average: 46.85

Median: 45.333

Lowest Score: 6.79

Highest Score: 96.79

Most commonly scored range: 41-50

Mixed origins here does not mean traumagenic and endogenic origins, but instead quoigenic and one or more others.

Quoigenic/Unknown origins only:

Average: 45.61

Median: 45.333

Lowest Score: 6.79

Highest Score: 86

Most commonly scored range: 41-50

The last three groups are lower than the traumagenic group, but higher than the endogenic group. The average scores are still clinically significant and are higher than the recorded average for DID.

Potential Flaws of the Study

Scoring. Scoring for the adolescent DES could be incorrect due to the self scoring.

We assumed that scores over 100 were from those who took the adolescent version and forgot to multiply their score by ten, divide it by 30, and move the decimal over one. We did this ourselves on those scores. Another explanation could be typos.

Self reporting. Some may be incorrect about their origins. We do trust that those who participated were honest about their identified origin(s) and their scores.

Sample size. We only collected 399 responses. Most responses were from traumagenic plurals. This left us with fewer data than we would have liked for endogenic plurals or plurals of other origins.

Conclusion

Plurality may be a phenomenon that is not exclusively caused by trauma, unlike what was previously believed about its development. Further research would help to clarify what is happening in the brains of non-traumagenic plurals. Studies on a larger scale done by more experienced researchers could potentially validate what was shown here.

This survey alone cannot definitely prove the existence of plurality without trauma, but it does show that those who report having no trauma involved in their origins often experience less dissociation than those who do.

Sources

1. American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. p-291.

2. Power To The Plurals. 2019. Origin of Endogenic System and Traumagenic System Terminology. Accessed September 25th, 2022. https://powertotheplurals.com/origin-of-endogenic-and-traumagenic-system-terminology-guest-post-by-the-trashcan-collective/

3. Carlson, E.B. & Putnam, F.W. 1993. An update on the Dissociative Experience Scale. Dissociation 6(1), p. 16-27.

4. TraumaDissociation.com. Dissociative Experiences Scale - II. Accessed September 25th, 2022. http://traumadissociation.com/des.