Developmental and Sex Differences in Depersonalization and Derealization among Trauma-exposed Adolescents - 03/05/26

Doi : 10.1016/j.ejtd.2026.100693

Yajie Bi ^a,^d,^e, Yun Pan ^a,^f, Chengqi Cao ^b,^c, Ruojiao Fang ^b,^c, Wei Chen ^a, Yu Liu ^g, Ping Liu ^d,^e, Shu Luo ^d,^e, Ying Tang ^h, Jing Huang ⁱ, Li Wang ^a,^b,^c,^⁎

^a School of Psychology, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China

^b Laboratory for Traumatic Stress Studies, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

^c Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

^d Department of Psychosomatics, Deyang People’s Hospital, Deyang, Sichuan Province, China

^e Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Neurological Disease, Deyang, Sichuan Province, China

^f Guizhou Education University, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China

^g Deyang Educational Examination Authority, Deyang, Sichuan Province, China

^h Deyang Institute of Education Science, Deyang, Sichuan Province, China

ⁱ Guanghan Research and Training Center, Deyang, Sichuan Province, China

^⁎ Correspondence should be addressed to: Li Wang, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16 Lincui Road, Beijing, 100101, China, Fax: +86-010-6487-2070, Tel: +86-010-6483-6985 Institute of Psychology Chinese Academy of Sciences 16 Lincui Road Beijing 100101 China

Sous presse. Manuscrit accepté. Disponible en ligne depuis le Sunday 03 May 2026
Cet article a été publié dans un numéro de la revue, cliquez ici pour y accéder

Abstract

Objective

The literature investigating the differences between depersonalization (DP) and derealization (DR) was limited . This study aimed to explore differences in the prevalence, functional impairment, and risk factors (especially developmental stage and sex) between DP ¹ and DR ² .

Method

A total of 57,973 junior and senior high school students were recruited. DP, DR, and functional impairment variables were assessed using the Global Psychotrauma Screen for Teenagers (GPS-T). Adolescents were categorized into four groups: early adolescence (ages 11–12), middle adolescence (ages 13–15), late adolescence (ages 16–18), and emerging adulthood (ages 19–20).

Results

The prevalence of DP was significantly lower than that of DR across all stages of adolescence (all p s < 0.001). Prevalence of DP and DR significantly differ across adolescent stages ( χ ²= 10.84, p < 0.05; χ ² = 11.59, p < 0.01). Functional impairment in each group was as follows: non-symptom < DP < DR < combined DP and DR (CDD) ³ (all p s < 0.001). Individuals in middle and late adolescence were at lower risk for experiencing DP ( OR = 0.52, p < 0.05; OR = 0.48, p < 0.01), while the risk for DR did not vary across adolescent stages. Boys were at higher risk for experiencing DP ( OR = 1.11, p < 0.05), whereas they were at lower risk for experiencing DR ( OR = 0.59, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that DP and DR might represent distinct psychopathological dissociative experiences, and informed that assessment and intervention strategies for DP and DR would be addressed separately.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : developmental stage, sex, difference, depersonalization, derealization, adolescents