CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 230Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchIdentity, Memory, and Therapy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Multidimensional Inventory of Dissociation (MID): A Comprehensive Measure of Pathological Dissociation

Dell, Paul F.·2006·Journal of Trauma & Dissociation
DOI 10.1300/j229v07n02_06
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article describes the development and validation of the Multidimensional Inventory of Dissociation (MID). The MID is a 218-item, self-administered, multiscale instrument that comprehensively assesses the phenomenological domain of pathological dissociation and diagnoses the dissociative disorders. The MID measures 14 major facets of pathological dissociation; it has 23 dissociation diagnostic scales that simultaneously operationalize (1) the subjective/ phenomenological domain of pathological dissociation and (2) the hypothesized dissociative symptoms of dissociative identity disorder (Dell, 2001a). The MID was designed for clinical research and for diagnostic assessment of patients who present with a mixture of dissociative, posttraumatic, and borderline symptoms. The MID demonstrated internal reliability, temporal stability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and construct validity. The MID also exhibited incremental validity over the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) by predicting an additional 18% of the variance in weighted abuse scores on the Traumatic Experiences Questionnaire (TEQ). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) did not support a one-factor model of the MID's clinical scales (i.e., the 14 facets and the 23 diagnostic symptoms). In contrast, however, CFA of the MID's factor scales (Dell & Lawson, 2005) has strongly supported a one-factor model. It was concluded that both the MID's 168 dissociation items and the construct of pathological dissociation have a second-order, unifactorial structure.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1300/j229v07n02_06

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Briere , J. 2002 . Multiscale Dissociation Inventory professional manual. , Lutz, FL : Psychological Assessment Resources. .
  2. Carlier , E. IV , Van Uchlen , J. J. , Lamberts , R. D. and Gersons , B. P. R. 1996 . Een korte screeningstest voor de diagnose posttraumatische stress-stoornis . Tijdschrift voor Psychiatrie , 8 : 624 – 629 .
  3. Dell , P. F. 1997 . Self-Injury Dissociation Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript
  4. Dell , P. F. and Lawson , D. 2005 . Investigating the domain of pathological dissociation with the Multidimensional Inventory of Dissociation (MID). Submitted for publication
  5. Dell , P. F. “ (in press). The subjective/phenomenological view of pathological dissociation. ” . In Dissociation and the dissociative disorders: DSM-V and beyond. Edited by: Dell , P. F. and O'Neil , J.
  6. Foa , E. B. 1995 . Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale: Manual. , Minneapolis, MN : National Computer Systems. .
  7. Gast U. Rodewald F. Dehner-Rau C. Kowalewsky E. Engl V. Reddemann L. and Emrich H. M. November). Validity and reliability of the German version of the Multidimensional Inventory of Dissociation (MID-D)-preliminary results. Paper presented at the conference of the International Society for the Study of Dissociation Chicago IL
  8. Steinberg , M. 1994 . Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Dissociative Disorders (SCID-D), Revised. , Washington, DC : American Psychiatric Press .
  9. World Health Organization . 1992 . The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. , Geneva : Author. .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 230

Related

Metadata

Authors
Dell, P. F.
Affiliations
Trauma Recovery Center
Corresponding author
Dell, Paul F.
ORCID
Dell, Paul F.
Venue
Journal of Trauma & Dissociation
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2006-06-05
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
77-106
ISSN
  • 1529-9732 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-9740
DOI
10.1300/j229v07n02_06
OpenAlex
W2077291977
Cited by
230
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Trauma & Dissociation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
Keywords
pathological dissociation, dissociative disorders, dissociative identity disorder, dissociation assessment, Dissociative Experiences Scale, factor structure, second-order factor model, posttraumatic stress symptoms, borderline symptoms
MeSH terms
Adult, Dissociative Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results

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