Editing Dissociative identity disorder (section)

===20th century===
In the early 20th century, interest in dissociation and multiple personalities waned for several reasons. After Charcot's death in 1893, many of his so-called hysterical patients were exposed as frauds, and Janet's association with Charcot tarnished his theories of dissociation.<ref name="pmid7794202" /> [[Sigmund Freud]] recanted his earlier emphasis on dissociation and childhood trauma.<ref name="pmid7794202" />

In 1908, [[Eugen Bleuler]] introduced the term ''"schizophrenia"'' to represent a revised disease concept for Emil Kraepelin's ''[[dementia praecox]].''<ref name="Noll 2011">{{cite book|last=Noll | first = R | title = American Madness: The Rise and Fall of Dementia Praecox | year = 2011 | publisher= [[Harvard University Press]]|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts}}</ref> Whereas Kraepelin's natural disease entity was anchored in the metaphor of progressive deterioration and mental weakness and defect, Bleuler offered a reinterpretation based on dissociation or "splitting" (''Spaltung'') and widely broadened the inclusion criteria for the diagnosis. A review of the ''[[Index medicus]]'' from 1903 through 1978 showed a dramatic decline in the number of reports of multiple personality after the diagnosis of schizophrenia became popular, especially in the United States.<ref name="pmid7004385">{{cite journal | author = Rosenbaum M | title = The role of the term schizophrenia in the decline of diagnoses of multiple personality | journal = Arch. Gen. Psychiatry | volume = 37 | issue = 12 | pages = 1383–5 | year = 1980 | pmid = 7004385 | doi = 10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780250069008 }}</ref> The rise of the broad diagnostic category of dementia praecox has also been posited in the disappearance of "hysteria" (the usual diagnostic designation for cases of multiple personalities) by 1910.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Micale MS | title = On the disappearance of hysteria: A study in the clinical deconstruction of a diagnosis | journal = Isis | volume = 84 | issue = 3 | pages = 496–526 | year = 1993 | pmid = 8282518 | doi = 10.1086/356549 | s2cid = 37252994 }}</ref> A number of factors helped create a large climate of skepticism and disbelief; paralleling the increased suspicion of DID was the decline of interest in dissociation as a laboratory and clinical phenomenon.<ref name="putnam"/>

Starting in about 1927, there was a large increase in the number of reported cases of schizophrenia, which was matched by an equally large decrease in the number of multiple personality reports.<ref name="putnam"/> With the rise of a uniquely American reframing of dementia praecox/schizophrenia as a functional disorder or "reaction" to psychobiological stressors – a theory first put forth by [[Adolf Meyer (psychiatrist)|Adolf Meyer]] in 1906—many trauma-induced conditions associated with dissociation, including "shell shock" or "war neuroses" during World War I, were subsumed under these diagnoses.<ref name="Noll 2011"/> It was argued in the 1980s that DID patients were often misdiagnosed with schizophrenia.<ref name=putnam/>

The public, however, was exposed to psychological ideas which took their interest. [[Mary Shelley]]'s ''[[Frankenstein]]'', [[Robert Louis Stevenson]]'s ''[[Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde]]'', and many short stories by [[Edgar Allan Poe]] had a formidable impact.<ref name=pmid12094818/>

====''The Three Faces of Eve''====
In 1957, with the publication of the bestselling book ''The Three Faces of Eve'' by psychiatrists [[Corbett H. Thigpen]] and [[Hervey M. Cleckley]], based on a [[case study]] of their patient [[Chris Costner Sizemore]], and the subsequent popular [[The Three Faces of Eve|movie of the same name]], the American public's interest in multiple personality was revived. More cases of dissociative identity disorder were diagnosed in the following years.<ref name="Schacter, D. L. 2011">{{cite book |author1=Schacter, D.L. |author2=Gilbert, D.T. |author3=Wegner, D.M. |year=2011 |title=Psychology |edition=2nd |page=572 |place=New York, NY |publisher=Worth}}</ref> The cause of the sudden increase of cases is indefinite, but it may be attributed to the increased awareness, which revealed previously undiagnosed cases or new cases may have been induced by the influence of the media on the behavior of individuals and the judgement of therapists.<ref name="Schacter, D. L. 2011"/> During the 1970s an initially small number of clinicians campaigned to have it considered a legitimate diagnosis.<ref name="putnam"/>