“My Alters Told Me to Write This Paper” Decoding the Dissociative Identity Disorder Frenzy in TikTok and YouTube Rabbit Hole Under the Lens of Social Media Logic Concepts.

see end of work for notes

“My Alters Told Me to Write This Paper”

Decoding the Dissociative Identity Disorder Frenzy in TikTok and YouTube Rabbit Hole Under the Lens of Social Media Logic Concepts.

I.

Introduction: Mediatized Mentalities

The year was 2021. You might have been doom-scrolling through your TikTok feed watching trendy influencers like Addison Rae and Bella Poarch or you might have been binge-watching YouTube videos of Twitch VODS (past broadcasts) of your favorite Minecraft streamers and their uploads but then all of a sudden, you stumble upon  a strange video of an individual, clad in different costumes and make-up, donning different expressions, and varying speech styles every other cut in the minute-long video. One might think, “Oh is this one of those role-playing skits?” until they are bombarded with unfamiliar terms such as the likes of “alters”, “fictives”, “fronting”, “singlets”, and ultimately the daunting string of words— Dissociative Identity Disorder. Realization then follows that these people are no actors and role-players at all, rather people with mental disorders. 

Upon the arrival of the COVID-19 quarantine “era”, most people were stuck in their homes and the youth turned to social media for positive content (e.g., memes, entertainment, content creation) and negative content such as cyber-bullying, flawed sharing etiquette, and rant-postings. Needless to say, social media was considered to be a fantastic tool in uniting people regardless of demographic during the COVID-19 lockdowns  (Jincy, Enoch, and Jesmy 2024). Moreover, the usage of social media amidst a global crisis proved to exhibit rewarding qualities in terms of emotional, informational, and peer-support and allowed a more substantial level with dissemination of health-related information, making it more accessible to the people (Abbas et al. 2021).

Among the mental illnesses and disorders that started to gain more traction is the very complex, stigmatized, and relatively unknown  Dissociative Identity Disorder or DID. According to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), the defining trait of Dissociative Identity Disorder (formerly called “Multiple Personality Disorder”) is a disruption of identity, being characterized by two or more distinct personality states akin to that of a “possession” in some cultures. Additionally, it may also be accompanied by recurrent gaps in recalling everyday and past events, important personal information, trouble remembering certain traumatic events that are different from ordinary forgetting. Affected individuals may also exhibit traits of surprise upon discovering new capabilities out of nowhere, lapses in dependable memory and skills, sudden unexplained objects in their possessions, and finding themselves in another location with no memory of how they came to be there (American Psychiatric Association 2021). Today (and for some time now), DID has made its way into popular media such as television, film, books, and rather recently, social media. It was not long before a trend sparked among adolescents in several social media platforms, presenting en masse with DID symptoms (among others) which can be attributed to viewing related content by social media influencers (Giedinghagen  2023). According to a study by Pietkiewicz et al. (2021), one explanation for this phenomenon could be that these individuals, these adolescents try to figure out their emotional conflicts, attachment problems, and difficulties in establishing satisfactory relationships, as they may find the DID concept engaging. This sole factor incites a sense of “belongingness” in a community full of people who share the same puzzling and complicated experiences. Social platforms like TikTok and YouTube soon became a hotspot for information and general content concerning Dissociative Identity Disorder as observed by Landon (2024). 

At this point, you may or may not already be wondering about what the big deal is. A problem encountered in this boom of social media exposure in the topic of mental health were the myriad of cases of self-diagnosis and some questionable and mischaracterizing online portrayals of DID. As stated by Salter et. al (2025), the sudden propellance of self-diagnoses among younger audiences in social media platforms like TikTok and YouTube enabled clinical psychiatrists, mental health consumers, and trauma survivors to come together in challenging stereotypes, offering support, and educating the public more about the disorder. It was unforeseen, however that this growing awareness started a “trend” of young audiences to start diagnosing  themselves, not only with DID, but other mental disorders as well such as Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). During the 1980s, when DID was still called “Multiple Personality Disorder” in the DSM-3, it was debated amongst scientists whether the disorder was traumagenic or sociogenic. While several records show that chronic traumatic experiences were indeed linked with episodes of dissociation and therefore supports the traumagenic model and enforced the fact that DID was not due to socio-cultural influences and medical malpractice (iatrogenic) (Brand et. al 2016), it has long been acknowledged in clinical papers and literature about the potential of the disorder to be used in malingering, factitious, and imitative presentations due to personal gain, reduced legal sanctions or something else entirely. It was then observed that these feigners tend to miss other key DID signs such as depression and somatic symptoms (Coons & Milstein 1994).

Through analyzing this complex phenomena under the lens of social media logic concepts, this paper presents an argument that the public perception and engagement with Dissociative Identity Disorder were (and are still being) significantly shaped by large social media platforms like TikTok and Youtube with emphasis on its popularity, programmability, and connectivity. Occurrences such as these can be both helpful and detrimental as an increased awareness can always potentially give way to mispresentation and misrepresentation. 

II.

Viral Identities of YouTube and Tiktok

Section A: TikTok

There are several video topics related to Dissociative Identity Disorder that can be found on the TikTok “For You” page. It ranges from videos that are mostly scientific and informative to “system showcases” or “alter intros”, displaying the uploader’s “alters” or different personalities with texts on screen including their name, age, role (e.g., caretaker, gatekeeper, protector, trauma-holder, host, little), pronouns, and their designated “sign-off emoji”. 

Figure 1: TikTok users doing an “alter showcase” featuring a unique case of “fictives”— personalities derived

from fictional pieces of media and introjections of real-life social media personalities.

Like any other social media in the web, TikTok uses hashtags that emphasizes content relevance and discoverability that branches out to other features that help a topic trend such as the usage of popular sounds and keywords in captions. As of today, #dissociativeidentitydisorder has around 266,100 posts on TikTok.

Discussing social media logic and how it is connected to the online portrayal of Dissociative Identity Disorder besides programmability with the help of the algorithm and the aforementioned hashtags among others,  starts with its popularity. DID content creators would often utilize attention-grabbing tactics such as making videos with captions highlighting their “dissociating” and putting in words such as “switch caught on cam” in the beginning of their videos. 

Figure 2: A TikTok user documenting how they “switch” into another personality following a time period of dissociating.

An ethnographic  by Greene et. al (2023) also talked about how there seemed to be a predominant focus in DID videos on displaying multiple marginalized identities, featuring alters who are part of the LGBTQIA+ spectrum, neurodivergent, and sometimes nonhuman (fairies, vampires, demons, animals, etc.). These types of videos seemed to focus on self-expression and DID identification rather than presenting educational facts and awareness, rendering the contents “unreliable”. 

Section B: YouTube 

There are quite a number of differences between YouTube’s approach with Dissociative Identity Disorder than that of TikTok’s. For starters, videos about DID have been around since the earlier days of YouTube. These were either documentaries or personal videos made by individuals who have the disorder. YouTube did not always use hashtags rather they tend to value the usage of keywords to aid them to be discovered. The watch time of YouTube compared to the minute(s)-long of TikTok allowed for a more varied, intricate approach on DID as more content would be produced. 

Figure 3: YouTube videos about Dissociative Identity Disorder dating back to the years 2010-2015 featuring informative and personal videos about the DID experience.

Attention-grabbing tactics were widely-utilized in this platform especially with the thumbnail features, usually exhibiting catchy words and different photos of how their alters present themselves. Known DID content creators such as MultiplicityAndMe and DissociaDID would garner a huge amount of followers in their careers making videos about their experiences and sharing facts about the mental disorder. 

Figure 4: A list of public Discord servers centered on cultivating a community for individuals with Dissociative Identity Disorder.

Audiences with DID and mental health consumers would then make up these fanbases, resulting in several social media communities to be created, allowing connectivity. 

Figure 5: A snapshot of the comments under Anthony Padilla’s 2020 YouTube video with an interview with DissociaDID .

III.

The Analysis

With hindsight, both platforms were generally accepting, especially with the amount of content being made available that helps destigmatize heavier topics of mental health like a selection of many disorders and illnesses. The creation of easier-to-digest TikTok and YouTube videos along with its flowery decors and enthusiastic demeanors of “host personalities” have attracted a larger audience overtime. However, the skepticism that arose pertaining to the disorder boomed in TikTok in pandemic times due to the popularity of “fictives” who were mostly based around characters of trending social media personalities (e.g., Dream, Technoblade, Wilbur Soot, Corpse Husband)  and anime characters at the time. There are certain users that claim to have over one hundred or more “introjects” and some that exhibit neurological disorders only on one alter. This skepticism tended to grow more hostile once people started demanding formal diagnoses on several content creators and often could not provide one especially in young teens, starting a debate on whether or not a self-diagnosis should be considered valid. As for the content, an assessment made by Munoz et. al (2023) found that DID videos from both social media sites were both low in quality and reliability. TikTok videos were labelled as “worse” as it commonly exhibited misinformation and false claims. 

The instances of social media users faking disorders such as this gave emphasis to another mental condition called “Munchausen’s Syndrome” called “Factitious Disorder” in the DSM-5. An ethnographic study done by Witney et. al (2015) confirmed the prevalence of MbI (Munchausen by Internet by Feldman et. al, 1998) was mostly due to social validation and gaining sympathy, as well as the developing “traumatophilia” in young individuals in distress. The optimistic portrayal of DID in social media while failing to highlight the disorder’s negative effects underplays the seriousness of traumagenic mental disorders (Mueller et. al 2012). 

IV.

Conclusion

This paper has illustrated how the relationships of social media logic with TikTok and YouTube  shaped the public and online discourse concerning Dissociative Identity Disorder. As the pandemic catapulted an openness to mental health discussions online, though both powerhouses, TikTok and YouTube still possessed key distinctions from one another when it comes to tackling the complex subject that is DID in terms of disseminating information and portraying a once lesser-known disorder to a wider audience. TikTok leaned heavily into trends that severely impacted the public view on DID meanwhile the longer videos of YouTube gave way to more comprehensive content in understanding the disorder in both scientific and personal manner. Despite this, the sites were still not an exemption when it came to profound aspects of reliable information. While the digital age has provided billions of people better access to medical information and even telemedicine, self-diagnoses were expected to emerge. Personally speaking to add onto this existing discourse, I do not think the act of self-diagnosis is inherently bad, in fact it is actually helpful to identify your symptoms early on before going to a medical professional. The last part however tends to be usually overlooked as some would be satisfied with the answers the internet provides, especially on the topic of mental disorders and illnesses. That for me is the grave part of self-diagnosis. This paper will hopefully serve as a reminder of the polarity social media or the digital age brings into significant factors in human life such as medicine and the innate sense of community.

Word Count: 2,029

References: 

Abbas, Jaffar, Dake Wang, Zhaohui Su, and Arash Ziapour. 2021. “The Role of Social Media in the Advent of COVID-19 Pandemic: Crisis Management, Mental Health Challenges and Implications.” Risk Management and Healthcare Policy Volume 14 (May): 1917–32. https://doi.org/10.2147/rmhp.s284313.

American Psychiatric Association. 2021. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Bauer, Michael, Tasha Glenn, Scott Monteith, Rita Bauer, Peter C. Whybrow, and John Geddes. "Ethical perspectives on recommending digital technology for patients with mental illness." International journal of bipolar disorders 5 (2017): 1-14.

Binet, Eric. 2024. “Claims of Dissociative Identity Disorder on the Internet: A New Epidemic of Munchausen Syndrome?” European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, October, 100470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2024.100470.

Brand, Bethany L., Eline M. Vissia, Sima Chalavi, Ellert RS Nijenhuis, A. R. Webermann, Nel Draijer, and Antje ATS Reinders. "DID is trauma based: further evidence supporting the trauma model of DID." Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 134, no. 6 (2016): 560-563.

Coons, Philip M., and Victor Milstein. "Factitious or malingered multiple personality disorder: Eleven cases." Dissociation: Progress in the Dissociative Disorders (1994).

Gleaves, David H., and Bennett AA Reisinger. "Stigma regarding dissociative disorders." Journal of Trauma & Dissociation 24, no. 3 (2023): 317-320.

Greene, Amanda K., Elana K. Maloul, Hannah N. Norling, L. P. Palazzolo, and Lisa M. Brownstone. "Systems and selves: An exploratory examination of dissociative identity disorder on TikTok." Qualitative Psychology 10, no. 3 (2023): 420.

Jincy, T. C., A. Enoch, and P. J. Jesmy. 2024. “Social Media Use and Psychosocial Implications of Covid-19 Pandemic Among Adolescent Students.” Research and Education, no. 10 (January): 103–23. https://doi.org/10.56177/red.10.2024.art.6.

Landon, Astrid, MS. 2024. “TikTok Posts on the Rare Illness Known as Dissociative Identity Disorder Has Exploded Among Teens. What’s Behind the Fixation?” MindSite News, October. https://mindsitenews.org/2024/10/24/tiktoks-fixation-on-dissociative-identity-disorder-chronicle-of-a-trauma-foretold/.

Mueller-Pfeiffer, Christoph, Kaspar Rufibach, Noelle Perron, Daniela Wyss, Cornelia Kuenzler, Cornelia Prezewowsky, Roger K. Pitman, and Michael Rufer. "Global functioning and disability in dissociative disorders." Psychiatry Research 200, no. 2-3 (2012): 475-481.

Munoz, Isreal Bladimir, Jasmine Liu-Zarzuela, Navin Oorjitham, and Devon Jacob. 2023. “YouTube and TikTok as a Source of Medical Information on Dissociative Identity Disorder.” Journal of Affective Disorders Reports 15 (December): 100707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadr.2023.100707.

Pietkiewicz, Igor Jacob, Anna Bańbura-Nowak, Radosław Tomalski, and Suzette Boon. "Revisiting false-positive and imitated dissociative identity disorder." Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021): 637929.

Salter, Michael, Bethany L. Brand, Matt Robinson, Rich Loewenstein, Joyanna Silberg, and Marilyn Korzekwa. "Self-Diagnosed Cases of Dissociative Identity Disorder on Social Media: Conceptualization, Assessment, and Treatment." Harvard Review of Psychiatry 33, no. 1 (2025): 41-48.

Witney, Cynthia, Joyce M. Hendricks PhD, and Vicki C. Cope Ms. "Munchausen by internet and nursing practice: An ethnonetnographic case study." (2015). 

reflections:

this is a paper for my communication studies class. i was going to write about cicada 3301 but chose this topic instead. while doing my research, i noticed that a lot of the references were very very recent which is honestly interesting since i have been out of touch from society ever since stopping my chronically online habits when quarantine ended. you may or may not have thought it already but i was describing myself in the intro paragraph... except i wasnt watching addison or bella at all,,, but rather anime shit ig? alt tiktok and gay shit. and ik dissociadid is a controversial figure now, just chose to not include it in the paper since that's not sth i wish to focus on... but it is rather interesting nonetheless. anyways, my minor is psychology so yeah. the pics look better in pdf.

- Julien Maynard Ronove. 

蠱