IRJMSH Vol 13 Issue 8 [Year 2022] ISSN 2277 – 9809 (0nline) 2348–9359 (Print) International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity ( IRJMSH ) Page 20 www.irjmsh.com Relationship between Psychological Inflexibility, Alexithymia, Attachment Style and Symptom Severity of Dissociative Disorder Aarushi Dewan*; Dr Dweep Chand Singh** *PsyD Scholar; ** Professor and Director AIBHAS, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, NOIDA, India ABSTRACT Background: Dissociative Disorders are a group of clinical syndromes characterised by the disruption or disturbance in the integrated functioning of an individual’s memory, identity, consciousness and pe rceptions of the environment. It is reported to have a lifetime prevalence of 9-18% among psychiatric disorders. Psychological inflexibility can portend psychopathology, alexithymia has been associated with dysfunctional methods of affect regulation as deliberate and conscious avoidance of distressing wishes, experiences, or feelings, unconscious dissociation when distressed, and trouble recalling distressing events or unpleasant experiences, interactions with the primary caregivers could cause the infant to develop multiple internal representations of self and attachment figures instead of united or cohesive and secure attachments which can lead to dissociative psychopathology. Aim: To study the relationship between psychological inflexibility, alexithymia , attachment style and symptom severity of Dissociative Disorder. Method: A cross sectional, single group study design was utilised for the current study. A sample of 100 females with a diagnosis of dissociative disorders according to ICD 10 of the age group 18 years and above was taken for the study. Tools used were Brief Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES-B), Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II), Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire (PAQ), Adult Attachment Questionnaire (AAQ). Results: The descriptive statistics of the sample revealed that the mean score of symptom severity of dissociative disorder is 27.54 (1.96). Results suggested that psychological inflexibility, alexithymia and anxious attachment style are positively associated with symptom severity of dissociative disorder, and this association is statistically significant at p<.01 level. Conclusions: The findings revealed that psychological inflexibility, alexithymia, anxious attachment style are positively correlated with symptom severity of dissociative disorder. Keywords: Dissociative disorder, symptom severity, psychological inflexibility, alexithymia, attachment style. INTRODUCTION Dissociative Disorders The term ‘dissociation’ was first defined and systematically studied by Pierre Janet, a French philosopher and psychiatrist (Putnam et al., 1989). Pierre Janet conceptualised dissociation as “a deficit in the integration of different systems of ideas and functions that constitute personality’’. This limitation in the integrative capacity leads to the inability to integrate experiences and develop awareness of one’s reality, acceptance, and creative adaptation. Dissociative disorders are characterised by involuntary disruption or discontinuity in the normal integration of one or more of the following: identity, sensations, perceptions, affects, thoughts, memories, control over bodily movements, or behaviour. Disruption or discontinuity may be complete, but is more commonly partial, and can vary from day to day or even from hour to hour. The symptoms of dissociative disorders are not due the direct effects of a medication or substance, including withdrawal effects, are not better explained by another Mental, behavioural, or neuro- developmental disorder, a sleep-wake disorder, a disease of the nervous system or other health condition, and are not part of an accepted cultural, religious, or spiritual practice. The symptoms in dissociative disorders are sufficiently severe to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning (ICD -11, 2022). Psychological Inflexibility It involves the rigid dominance of psychological reactions, over chosen values and contingencies, in guiding action” (Bond et al., 2011).