Cited by 49Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyMental Health and Psychiatry

Can the DSM-5 differentiate between nonpathological possession and dissociative identity disorder? A case study from an Afro-Brazilian religion

Open access
Delmonte, Romara, Lucchetti, Giancarlo, Moreira-Almeida, Alexander, Farias, Miguel·2016·Journal of Trauma & Dissociation

Abstract

The aim of this article is to examine whether the diagnostic criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), are able to differentiate between nonpathological religious possession and dissociative identity disorder (DID). We use the case study of an individual who leads an Afro-Brazilian religious group (Umbanda), focusing on her personal development and possession experiences from early childhood to the present, spanning a period of more than 40 years, and examine these data following DSM-5 criteria for DID (300.14). Her experiences of possession can be broken into 2 distinct stages. In the 1st stage (childhood and early adulthood), she displayed intrusive thoughts and a lack of control over possession states, which were associated with a heightened state of anxiety, loneliness, amnesia, and family conflict (meeting all 5 criteria for DID). In the 2nd stage (late 20s up to the present), she regularly experienced possession states but felt in control of their onset and found them religiously meaningful. In this 2nd stage, she only fulfilled 3 criteria for DID. We question the accuracy of diagnosing this individual with DID in her earlier life and suggest that the DSM-5 criteria fail to address the ambiguity of affect surrounding possession experiences (positive at the individual level, negative at the interpersonal level) and lack a clearer acknowledgment of the prevalence of possession and other unusual experiences in general populations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15299732.2015.1103351

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Almeida, A, M. (2004). Fenomenologia das experiências mediúnicas, perfil e psicopatologia dos médiuns espíritas. Unpublished PhD thesis, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo.
  2. Claridge, G. (Ed.) (1997). Schizotypy: Implications for Illness and Health. Oxford University Press.
  3. Ethnic Health Initiative (2015). Spirit Possession and Mental Health Conference, London, 9th March. Retrieved from http://www.bmehealth.org/
  4. Martins, J. R. (2011). Encantaria na umbanda. MA thesis, Faculty of Philosophy, Sciences and Letters de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto.
  5. Souza, A. (Ed.) (2004). Encantaria Brasileira: O livros dos mestres, caboclos e encantados. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Pallas.
  6. Schmidt, E. B. (2011). The re-Africanisation of the Brazilian religion Candomblé and the holy war against the Orixá (God) in Brazil. Paper presented at CESNUR's International Conference.
  7. Zangari, W. (2005). Uma leitura psicossocial do fenômeno de incorporação na Umbanda. Boletim da Academia Paulista de Psicologia, 3(5), 70-88.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Delmonte, R., Lucchetti, G., Moreira-Almeida, A., & Farias, M.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (BR)
  • Coventry University (GB)
Corresponding author
Delmonte, Romara
Venue
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation
Published
2015-10-13
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
322-337
ISSN
  • 1529-9732 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-9740
OpenAlex
W1765141723
Cited by
49
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Trauma & Dissociation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Coventry University Open Collections (Coventry university) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • The Open Collections (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
dissociative identity disorder, Umbanda, Afro-Brazilian religions, DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, diagnostic validity
MeSH terms
Brazil, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Dissociative Identity Disorder, Religion and Psychology, Superstitions, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review