Phelps, B. (March 22, 2000). "Dissociative Identity Disorder: The Relevance of Behavioral Analysis." The Psychological Record.
Dissociative Identity Disorder: The Relevance of Behavioral Analysis by Brady J. Phelps fails to establish any relevance at all for behavioral analysis either as a diagnostic or a therapeutic tool when it comes to the controversial subject of Multiple Personality Disorder, now referred to as Dissociative Identity Disorder.
Belaboring the obvious or retreating into obscure behavioral jargon ("a self or personality is at best a repertoire of behavior imparted by an organized set of contingencies"), Phelps brings little insight to anything, let alone DID. First he ploughs through a variety of definitions of personality. But since behaviorism recognizes only behavior as relevant for psychological observation, all those wonderful intangibles of personality from imagination to taste are left out. The definitions are hopelessly inadequate. One of them states that Dissociative Identity Disorder is "the existence within the individual of two or more distinct personalities, each of which is dominant at a particular time". Oh yeah? But what is personality?
The sterility of this branch of psychology is revealed clearly in this article when the author addresses how someone suffering from DID should be treated. "Therapy for persons displaying the behaviors in question must consist of extinguishing a reasonable share of the behavioral variability in the repertoire and reinforcing behavioral stability and generalization". The only success he can report for this type of therapy is to cite a study which claims "success at reintegrating the personalities in a dual personality individual by teaching assertiveness skills
via role playing". Not very impressive.
McHugh, P. (July 1, 1995). "Resolved: multiple personality disorder is an individually and socially created artifice." Journal of the American Academy of C...