Vissia and co‐workers claim that DID is trauma‐based. But how strong is their evidence?

Vissia et al (2016) claim that the etiology of Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) is traumabased.But how strong is their evidence?In one study of many enfolded in the long-running controversy regarding the genesis of dissociative identity disorder (DID), Vissia et al. (1) administered self-report measures of trauma and fantasy to small subsamples (all n's < 18) of DID patients, DID simulating actors, healthy comparison participants, and PTSD patients.Using Bonferroni-corrections, which further diminished their already low statistical power, they concluded that their data "consistently" support the Trauma Model of DID rather than the Sociocognitive Model (2), which holds that conspicuous dissociative symptoms (e.g., identity alterations) typically seen in DID are the byproducts of sociocultural expectations, often induced by iatrogenic psychotherapy, interacting with patients' imaginative capabilities.Vissia et al.'s conclusion is less than compelling.First, the authors seriously misrepresent the Sociocognitive Model.Like many others, they erroneously equate role-enactment, which is largely unconscious, with "simulation", which is not.The Sociocognitive Model does not imply that people who consciously mimic the features of DID and attempt to role-play different personality states will resemble DID patients in most, let alone all, important respects, as this model acknowledges that DID patients genuinely believe that they harbor multiple indwelling identities and act accordingly.Still, researchers have found few or no differences between