The attentional problem theory makes more sense to me than the defense mechanism one, though I guess they're not exclusive. What do you think?
Hard to say. There are aspects of the defence mechanism theory that make it undesirable.
Firstly, the defence mechanism theory implies that the nature of the disorder is positive, that it is there to serve you. While this statement may be a source of solace for many, a positive experience is far from what the patients describe this condition to be.
Secondly, even though the theory is a reasonable proposition that kickstarted the current research into the disorder, by now it has become increasingly
irrelevant. With the fronto-limbic model being proposed in 2016, any explanatory claim (which the defence mechanism theory is) regarding DPDR has virtually become insignificant. Granted by the currently available research we are now able to discuss the disorder from more of a descriptive point of view, and so it isn't necessary for us or even for the researchers to discuss it from an explanatory point of view. We don't need to know why this disorder exists, we just need to know what is happening in the brain and the body so that we can look into how to treat it.
Also, the defence mechanism theory doesn't account for all the symptoms of DPDR. Given the fronto-limbic model, we now know to a greater degree of certainty that part of this disorder entails an inhibition of limbic structures by the prefrontal cortex (it is debated where exactly, it may be different on an individual basis) resulting in emotional numbing. So until this point, the theory seems reasonable. However, patients do not just report emotional numbing, but an array of other symptoms that are visual and auditory in nature, or are related to cognition such as memory. We also now are beginning to see (and this is why the French trial was conducted) that the prefrontal cortex does not just inhibit limbic structures responsible for the conscious perception of our emotions such as the insula, but that in its chain of commands the angular gyrus is also involved-a non-limbic structure... and so heres where the defence mechanism theory becomes inadequate. The AG is "involved in a number of processes related to language, number processing and spatial cognition, memory retrieval, attention, and theory of mind." [
link]. It is highly unlikely that a region as such is dampened due to a protective mechanism. It seems more reasonable at this point to describe the disorder as a disrupted system of
attention.