Emotional Flashbacks: Meaning, Evidence, and Limits of the Term
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: October 9, 2026 · Editorial Policy
An emotional flashback is a popular descriptive term for a sudden, powerful emotional state that seems connected to an earlier frightening, humiliating, threatening, or overwhelming experience. People who use the phrase often describe feeling terrified, ashamed, helpless, abandoned, or intensely unsafe without seeing a clear mental image of the past. The feeling can be genuine and disruptive. The label itself is not a diagnosis, a separately validated PTSD symptom category, or proof that a particular traumatic event occurred.
The clinical question is whether the episode involves trauma-related re-experiencing, a learned emotional response to a reminder, a dissociative experience, an anxiety or mood symptom, an ongoing unsafe situation, or some combination. Those possibilities require context. Researchers have extensively studied PTSD intrusions, emotional memory, threat learning, and dysregulation; they have studied the independently defined construct emotional flashback much less. This difference determines what the evidence can support.
This article explains what people mean by emotional flashbacks, how the phrase differs from clinical PTSD flashbacks and ICD-11 complex PTSD, what researchers have established, how clinicians evaluate similar symptoms, and which supportive approaches have a credible evidence base.
What Are Emotional Flashbacks?
In everyday trauma discussions, emotional flashback usually means an abrupt, involuntary return of feelings associated with an earlier period of danger or distress. A present-day cue—criticism, silence, a raised voice, an argument, an unfamiliar smell, or a feeling of exclusion—may be followed by an intense emotional and bodily reaction. The person may be aware of the room they are in and still feel as if an older emotional reality has taken over.
The phrase has been influential in popular writing about childhood adversity and complex PTSD, especially through the work of psychotherapist Pete Walker. It is useful as a first-person description of what an experience feels like. Its historical popularity, however, should not be mistaken for a validated diagnostic category or for a scientific conclusion that the episode is a literal replay of an intact emotional memory.
People sometimes use emotional flashback to describe an emotion without an image, an emotion that feels disproportionately intense, or a sudden conviction such as 'I am powerless' that resembles an earlier experience. These are overlapping but not identical phenomena. A clear clinical description records what happened, how long it lasted, what the person perceived, whether the past felt present, and what followed, rather than treating the label as its own explanation.
A hypothetical example
A person receives a brief, impatient message from a colleague and suddenly feels overwhelming shame and fear of punishment. They may become tense, want to apologize repeatedly, or have difficulty concentrating. They recognize that the message was about an ordinary work matter yet remain emotionally distressed for some time. They might call the episode an emotional flashback. That description conveys the experience but does not establish its cause, diagnostic meaning, or whether any earlier event meets the clinical definition of traumatic exposure.
In a different case, a person hears a sound resembling an assault and briefly experiences the assault as occurring again. That sense of present-tense reliving is closer to the formal clinical concept of a traumatic flashback. The distinction matters because different experiences require different assessment questions.
What Do Emotional Flashbacks Feel Like?
Reports commonly include an abrupt surge of fear, shame, sadness, anger, panic, helplessness, loneliness, or a sense of being in trouble; a racing heartbeat, stomach tension, shaking, breath changes, numbness, or an urge to freeze; self-critical thoughts or a strong expectation of rejection; and withdrawal, appeasement, defensiveness, or a wish to escape. These are examples of experiences described with the popular term, not an officially recognized checklist for emotional flashbacks.
Episodes vary in duration and intensity. Some are brief and recognizable as reactions to a cue; others merge into prolonged distress, rumination, sleep difficulty, or interpersonal conflict. Their meaning depends on timing, circumstances, the person's broader symptoms, and whether there is an identifiable link to an experience or a present threat. Feeling 'young' or 'small' may be a vivid metaphor for helplessness, not literal regression to a past developmental state.
The absence of visual imagery is often emphasized in popular definitions. PTSD research does show that traumatic re-experiencing can involve strong emotional, bodily, sensory, and perceptual components. Ehlers, Hackmann, and Michael's analysis of intrusive re-experiencing describes trauma-related emotional responses that may feel detached from temporal context. Yet the absence of an image alone cannot establish that an event is a PTSD flashback, because many intense emotional responses have no imagery.
Is Emotional Flashback a Recognized Medical Diagnosis?
No. Emotional flashback is not a separate disorder in the DSM-5-TR or the ICD-11. Neither system provides a specific diagnostic code, a validated threshold, or a standardized assessment instrument for emotional flashback as an independent syndrome. The term is best identified as popular clinical language with plausible links to research on posttraumatic responses.
The DSM-5-TR describes PTSD through a qualifying exposure history and a constellation of intrusion, avoidance, negative cognition and mood, and arousal/reactivity symptoms, with required duration, distress or impairment, and exclusion of relevant substance or medical explanations. Re-experiencing can include involuntary intrusive memories and dissociative reactions in which the individual feels or acts as if the traumatic event were recurring. Such reactions may exist along a continuum of intensity. The VA National Center for PTSD's overview provides a patient-facing explanation of these distinctions.
The ICD-11 uses a narrower PTSD formulation organized around re-experiencing the trauma in the present, avoidance, and persistent perceptions of current threat, together with functional impairment. The ICD-11 diagnosis of complex PTSD adds persistent disturbances in self-organization: affect regulation, negative self-concept, and relationships. VA's updated review of CPTSD classification documents both the formal ICD-11 diagnosis and its difference from DSM-based classification.
Consequently, a person can experience sudden surges of shame or fear without meeting criteria for PTSD or CPTSD. Conversely, someone who meets full diagnostic criteria may never use the phrase emotional flashback. Diagnosis follows the full clinical pattern; terminology chosen in an online community does not determine the diagnosis.
Emotional Flashback vs PTSD Flashback vs Trauma Trigger
Clinical PTSD flashback
A PTSD flashback is a form of involuntary re-experiencing associated with a traumatic event, characteristically involving a sense that the event is happening again in the present. Some episodes feature sights or sounds; others are dominated by bodily sensations and emotional distress. Visual images are common examples, not a requirement for every flashback description. The central feature is the quality of reliving, especially its here-and-now character. See the research review by Brewin (2015) and our detailed article on PTSD flashbacks.
Emotional flashback in popular usage
Someone using emotional flashback may primarily mean a recurrence of an old feeling, a powerful triggered reaction, or an episode of shame and threat without conscious recall. If there is no identifiable past event being relived in the present, clinicians should avoid silently translating this account into the formal PTSD flashback criterion. The popular label covers a wider and less precisely defined set of experiences.
Trauma reminder or trigger
A trigger is a cue that evokes a response because of its meaning, learned associations, or resemblance to an earlier experience. A cue may prompt emotion, bodily arousal, memory, avoidance, vigilance, or dissociation. A trauma reminder may lead to a flashback, but it can also produce distress without any feeling that the original event is occurring again. The VA's PTSD education materials distinguish reminders from reliving experiences, and our trauma-and-memory article explores related memory processes.
Dissociation
Dissociation describes disruptions in aspects of awareness, memory, identity, perception, or experienced connection to oneself or surroundings. Depersonalization and derealization are important examples; persistent dissociation may appear in different disorders. The DSM dissociative subtype of PTSD specifically involves persistent or recurrent depersonalization or derealization in a person who otherwise meets PTSD criteria. A sense of emotional disconnection or overwhelming feeling does not automatically establish that subtype or a separate dissociative disorder. VA's dissociative PTSD guidance and a systematic review of dissociation in PTSD show why careful assessment matters.
Why Might Present-Day Cues Evoke Older Emotional States?
Associative learning and threat cues
Emotional reactions can be learned in context. A sound, expression, environment, or interaction that repeatedly accompanied danger may later acquire a threatening meaning. Trauma-related cues can become associated with autonomic arousal and avoidance, while reminders of safety or changes in context may influence the response. This general account of learning is well supported; its application to any specific episode remains a clinical hypothesis until the person's circumstances and symptoms are assessed.
Autobiographical meaning and the sense of current threat
A person may interpret criticism as evidence that they are unsafe, unwanted, or incapable because those meanings have been reinforced by earlier experiences. Ehlers and Clark's cognitive model of PTSD explains how trauma-related appraisals, memory processes, and a perceived sense of current threat may maintain symptoms. The model is influential and research-informed, but its mechanisms should not be treated as a complete explanation of every intense emotional response.
Emotion, memory, and attention
The emotional tone of an experience can shape attention, recall, and interpretation. PTSD studies have found differences in emotional-memory processing, including biases involving negative material, although findings vary with tasks and populations. A systematic review of controlled studies on emotional memory in PTSD found heterogeneity and a modest evidence base rather than a single universal memory pattern. Memory research supports the possibility of emotion-driven reactions; it does not establish that a particular current feeling is a literal preserved fragment of a forgotten trauma.
Arousal, avoidance, and interpersonal expectations
When a person feels threatened, bodily activation can narrow attention and make escape, confrontation, appeasement, or withdrawal seem urgent. Repeated avoidance can reduce distress in the short term while restricting opportunities to learn that a specific cue is now safe. Shame and expectations of rejection can also influence social interpretation. These processes may coexist, and their relative contributions vary across individuals. Current circumstances matter: sometimes the danger is real, and a proportionate safety response is needed.
What the Scientific Evidence Supports—and What It Does Not
Well-established evidence
PTSD and ICD-11 CPTSD have defined diagnostic criteria and substantial clinical research. Traumatic re-experiencing, intrusive memories, emotional distress, physiological arousal, avoidance, and trauma-related beliefs have been documented in clinical studies. PTSD-focused treatments have been evaluated in randomized trials and systematic reviews. The 2023 VA/DoD guideline, 2025 APA guideline, and NICE NG116 are authoritative syntheses of care evidence.
Related but indirect evidence
Experimental and observational research on associative learning, threat, autobiographical memory, emotion regulation, and dissociation provides plausible mechanisms for episodes described as emotional flashbacks. A review of re-experiencing and the cognitive account by Ehlers and Clark provide conceptual foundations. Neither body of work establishes a new syndrome defined by emotion without imagery.
Evidence that remains limited
As of October 2026, emotional flashbacks are not supported by a distinct, widely accepted diagnostic framework with validated case definition, prevalence estimate, reliable threshold, or randomized treatment trials targeting the term as an independent clinical condition. Searching for the phrase turns up many explanatory and self-help accounts; their descriptions should not be mistaken for validation research. There is likewise no clinically accepted 'emotional flashback test' that can determine whether someone has hidden trauma.
This distinction leaves room for the person's experience to be understood accurately. A descriptive word can help people communicate distress even when the psychological and medical explanation remains open. The most useful next question is what the specific experience consists of and which intervention, if any, improves functioning and safety.
Emotional Flashbacks and Complex PTSD
The emotional flashback label is frequently discussed in relation to complex PTSD, sometimes as if emotional flashbacks uniquely define the condition. The diagnostic evidence supports a more precise conclusion. ICD-11 CPTSD requires the PTSD features of re-experiencing, avoidance, and current threat plus severe and persistent difficulties in emotion regulation, self-concept, and relationships. None of those criteria is named emotional flashback; the label alone does not distinguish CPTSD from PTSD or other conditions.
Repeated interpersonal trauma and early adversity are associated with increased likelihood of complex posttraumatic symptoms, but no particular childhood history is required for ICD-11 CPTSD, and adversity does not automatically cause it. The VA explains these classification rules in its clinical CPTSD assessment guidance. For the full diagnosis, use our separately owned article on complex PTSD; for the exposure-specific research, see childhood trauma and PTSD.
Emotional dysregulation in CPTSD is more broadly assessed as a persistent disturbance involving the intensity, duration, or modulation of emotions. A single triggered episode is not equivalent to this enduring diagnostic domain. Negative self-concept and relational difficulty must also be assessed in the context of the full syndrome and impairment. Someone may find the language of emotional flashbacks helpful while their clinician uses a more specific account of intrusion, avoidance, dysregulation, or comorbidity.
Does an Emotional Flashback Mean There Is Repressed or Hidden Trauma?
No. An episode of fear, shame, nausea, helplessness, or emotional intensity cannot independently verify a past event. It may have links to remembered experiences, current stress, learned patterns, or other mental and physical conditions. It cannot provide dates, perpetrators, circumstances, or historical accuracy. No psychological symptom, bodily sensation, or personal metaphor can be used by itself to reconstruct an unknown event.
People can have incomplete autobiographical memory for many reasons, including ordinary childhood amnesia, interference, the passage of time, attention, sleep difficulties, depression, substance effects, and certain medical or dissociative conditions. PTSD memories can also be vivid in some respects and incomplete in others. An emotion experienced today is not a reliable forensic record of what happened in the past.
Clinical support should respect reported experiences without pressuring a person to recover a specific hidden memory, treating a guessed explanation as fact, or using suggestive practices that risk contaminating recollection. When memory questions matter, a clinician can ask open-ended questions about what is known and what remains uncertain. Our article on trauma and memory addresses this issue in detail.
Can Emotional Flashbacks Occur Without PTSD?
Yes, if the popular phrase is used to describe sudden painful feelings rather than a formal PTSD symptom. Such feelings can arise in people with anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, panic attacks, grief, attachment-related distress, emotion-regulation difficulties, chronic stress, trauma-related symptoms below diagnostic threshold, or reactions to genuine current interpersonal threat. A person may also experience intense emotion without having a psychiatric disorder.
An anxiety episode may involve future-oriented apprehension; a panic attack may produce a sudden surge of fear and physical symptoms; depressive rumination may reactivate worthlessness; intrusive obsessional thoughts may involve uncertainty followed by compulsive reassurance; and dissociation may include altered reality or detachment. The boundaries are determined by the full clinical picture, not by one sensation or a proposed trigger. Co-occurrence is common, so differential assessment should allow more than one explanation.
Medical factors—including medication effects, stimulant use, sleep deprivation, endocrine conditions, neurological conditions, and some cardiac or respiratory problems—can contribute to sudden emotional and bodily episodes. New severe physical symptoms, loss of consciousness, seizure-like events, chest pain, or substantial confusion merit timely medical evaluation rather than automatic psychological attribution.
What Should a Clinician Ask During Assessment?
Assessment begins with a careful account of the episode: what the person noticed first; whether a cue was present; the emotions, body sensations, images and thoughts; whether a remembered event seemed to recur in the present; changes in orientation or awareness; duration; the degree of control; and consequences for daily life. Clinicians may ask whether reminders are avoided, whether there are nightmares or intrusions, how sleep and concentration are affected, and whether the person is currently safe.
For PTSD, evaluation also establishes whether a qualifying trauma exposure occurred, the relevant diagnostic symptom clusters, duration, impairment, and alternative explanations. The CAPS-5 clinician-administered interview is a structured measure for DSM-based PTSD assessment. The PCL-5 is a self-report measure that can support screening and monitoring but is not a stand-alone clinical diagnosis. For ICD-11 CPTSD, the International Trauma Questionnaire assesses the required symptom groups and impairment; it provides a provisional picture for clinical follow-up.
There is no validated emotional-flashback score that substitutes for this process. A responsible assessment uses patient history, symptom context, diagnostic criteria, clinical judgment, and, where appropriate, physical-health evaluation. It also asks about self-harm thoughts, substance use, ongoing violence, psychosis-like experiences, and significant dissociation when clinically indicated. Individual questionnaires and dramatic narratives online cannot resolve these questions.
What Can Help During an Intense Emotional Episode?
First establish present safety
Consider whether there is an immediate threat. If there is, prioritizing physical safety, leaving the situation when possible, and contacting appropriate local support are more important than trying to calm yourself within danger. If the environment is currently safe, it may help to orient to where you are and what is happening now, including noticing the date, room, and people around you.
Use grounding as a supportive option
Some people benefit from feeling their feet against the floor, noticing familiar objects, naming a few sounds or colors in the room, or slowing an activity until attention becomes steadier. Others prefer movement, contact with a trusted person, a drink of water, or a quieter setting. Choose practices that increase orientation rather than forcing sensations that make dissociation or panic worse. The World Health Organization's guide to coping with stress describes adaptable grounding and noticing exercises. These skills can be useful supportive practices, but evidence for grounding alone as a treatment for a putative emotional-flashback syndrome has not been established.
Describe the experience without assuming the cause
A simple account such as 'I felt sudden shame after the conversation; I wanted to disappear; it lasted twenty minutes; I was aware I was at work' gives a clinician more usable information than a fixed explanation. If it feels safe and useful, a brief note about intensity, duration, context, sleep, and subsequent avoidance can reveal patterns over time. There is no obligation to recall or disclose traumatic memories in the moment.
Reduce short-term harm
When highly distressed, postpone irreversible decisions if circumstances allow, reduce unnecessary conflict, and seek support from a trusted person who can stay calm without interrogating the experience. If a technique intensifies panic or detachment, stop and use a gentler alternative. Avoid using alcohol or other substances as the main way to shut down recurrent episodes.
Which Treatments Have Evidence?
Treatment evidence is organized around clinically assessed conditions and problems, not around the unvalidated emotional-flashback label. For a person meeting PTSD criteria, VA/DoD strongly supports specific trauma-focused psychotherapies, notably prolonged exposure, cognitive processing therapy, and EMDR; APA's 2025 recommendations and NICE also support evidence-based trauma-focused treatment. These approaches address PTSD through different structured procedures, clinician training, and evidence bases.
Prolonged exposure therapy works with avoided trauma memories and situations in a planned, supported therapeutic context. Cognitive processing therapy helps identify and revise trauma-related interpretations. EMDR involves a structured approach to trauma memories and bilateral stimulation. These are distinct interventions, not interchangeable self-help instructions. Their evidence for PTSD should not be recast as direct evidence for curing an independently defined emotional-flashback condition.
When emotion regulation, dissociation, severe depression, substance use, or current instability are prominent, treatment may require coordinated care, a tailored pace, safety planning, and attention to those difficulties. ICD-11 CPTSD treatment research is growing, but the VA's current evidence review reports that the superiority of compulsory phase-based programs over standard PTSD treatment has not been established. Skills work can be valuable for particular patients without being a mandatory universal preliminary stage.
Medication can be considered when a person has a diagnosed condition for which it is indicated, taking into account benefits, adverse effects, preferences, and other health problems. Medication choice for PTSD belongs to a qualified prescribing clinician and follows disorder-specific guidance. No medication has an evidence-based indication for emotional flashbacks as a distinct diagnosis. General wellness advice, supplements, unstructured exposure, and online 'memory recovery' routines should not be represented as replacements for assessment and appropriate clinical treatment.
If symptoms are recurrent, interfere with work or relationships, lead to persistent avoidance, or cause substantial distress, professional evaluation is reasonable even without certainty about the label. A person can ask for help with the experience itself before deciding which diagnostic terminology fits. The broader question of restoring everyday functioning is covered in trauma recovery.
Relationships, Childhood Experiences, and Ongoing Stress
Interpersonal situations can carry meanings learned through earlier relationships. A small disagreement, silence after a message, or perceived criticism can evoke uncertainty or shame without proving that the present partner, colleague, or family member resembles a past abuser. In some circumstances the relationship really is coercive or unsafe; careful interpretation considers both personal history and present behavior.
Descriptions of emotional flashbacks often center on childhood experiences because early relationships can influence emotion regulation and expectations. However, the childhood-specific evidence belongs to questions about developmental exposure and outcomes, not to the definition of this popular term. For those subjects, consult childhood trauma triggers and childhood trauma and dissociation.
Helpful support avoids shaming the person, prescribing a single explanation, or demanding immediate disclosure. A supporter can ask what helps during episodes, respond to actual safety needs, and respect the person's limits. Where current violence or coercion is present, access to safety and specialist services matters independently of any psychological diagnosis.
Common Myths and Overstatements
'Every intense emotional reaction is a flashback' is too broad: intensity alone does not establish re-experiencing. 'If there is no image, it must be an emotional flashback' is also too broad: emotions without imagery have many origins. 'Emotional flashbacks prove forgotten abuse' is unsupported, because symptoms do not verify historical events. 'They diagnose complex PTSD' is incorrect: ICD-11 CPTSD has specific PTSD and self-organization criteria.
'Trauma is stored as a literal emotion in the body' is a metaphor that may reflect stress physiology or conditioned responses, but no single bodily sensation identifies a stored historical episode. 'Everyone must go through fixed recovery stages' is likewise unsupported as a universal sequence. 'You must relive the trauma by yourself to heal' can be unsafe: exposure-based PTSD therapy involves clinical assessment, a rationale, preparation, appropriate pacing, and professional support.
The reliable approach is to name experiences precisely, examine causes without imposing a story, and select care according to evidence and clinical need.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can emotional flashbacks happen without pictures or clear memories?
People can experience sudden trauma-related emotions without mental images, and popular writers often use emotional flashback to describe this. In formal PTSD assessment, clinicians look for the specific quality of re-experiencing along with the full diagnostic pattern. No-image distress alone does not prove PTSD or an earlier event.
How do I know whether it is an emotional flashback or a panic attack?
Panic attacks involve a sudden surge of intense fear or discomfort with recognizable bodily and cognitive features. The two descriptions can overlap, and panic may be cued or unexpected. A clinician looks at sensations, sense of reliving, exposure history, duration, recurrent concerns, avoidance, and other symptoms rather than relying on the label.
Are emotional flashbacks the same as intrusive memories?
No. Intrusive memories are involuntary recollections; some contain pictures, sounds, physical sensations, and emotion. In popular usage emotional flashback may refer to emotion without explicit recall. A true PTSD flashback emphasizes the sense of the event happening again in the present. Research on re-experiencing helps explain the distinction.
Are emotional flashbacks a required symptom of complex PTSD?
No. ICD-11 CPTSD requires specific PTSD symptoms plus persistent difficulties in emotion regulation, self-concept, and relationships. The popular phrase emotional flashbacks does not appear as a separately required criterion. See the VA's CPTSD explanation.
Can criticism, rejection, or arguments trigger these feelings?
They can evoke intense emotions, especially when associated with earlier threatening or humiliating situations. The reaction may involve learned expectations, present interpersonal conditions, anxiety, or trauma reminders. A trigger does not by itself establish a diagnosis or identify a past event.
How long do emotional flashbacks last?
There is no scientifically validated duration criterion for the popular term. Similar episodes can be brief or prolonged, and timing depends on the phenomenon involved. Duration is one of several details worth discussing during assessment; prolonged distress does not make the label more diagnostic.
Can you have them if you cannot remember childhood trauma?
Intense emotions without clear autobiographical memories can occur for many reasons. The experience cannot establish forgotten abuse or reveal the facts of a hidden event. Care should address present symptoms and known history without pressuring memory reconstruction.
Can grounding stop emotional flashbacks?
Grounding may help some people orient to the present or reduce distress. Responses differ, and techniques can be adapted or stopped if they worsen symptoms. Research supports some stress-management skills as supportive tools; there are no specific clinical trials establishing grounding as a cure for an independently defined emotional-flashback syndrome.
Should I see a therapist if the episodes recur?
Consider an assessment if episodes cause substantial distress, avoidance, relationship disruption, work impairment, sleep difficulties, dissociation, or questions about current safety. A trauma-informed clinician can examine both trauma-related and other possible causes. You do not need to prove a specific diagnosis before seeking care.
What if an episode includes suicidal thoughts or severe disorientation?
Seek immediate help when there is imminent risk of self-harm, inability to remain safe, severe confusion, or an acute medical emergency. Contact local emergency services or an appropriate crisis service, and involve a trusted person when possible. A website description is not a substitute for urgent assessment.
Conclusion
Emotional flashback is a meaningful description used by some people for sudden emotions that feel connected to an earlier period of threat or helplessness. Evidence on PTSD confirms that traumatic re-experiencing may involve strong emotion and bodily reactions, and research on memory and threat provides plausible explanations for cue-related distress. The independent label emotional flashback, however, has no established diagnostic criteria or validated treatment pathway.
The most useful response combines accurate description, appropriate attention to current safety, careful differential assessment when symptoms are significant, and interventions supported for the condition actually present. A person's experience merits attention without requiring an invented certainty about its cause.
Related Articles
PTSD Flashbacks: What They Feel Like and Why They Happen — clinical re-experiencing and the present-tense quality of flashbacks.
Complex PTSD (CPTSD): Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Treatment — ICD-11 criteria, disturbances in self-organization, and treatment.
Trauma and Memory: Intrusive Memories, Gaps, and Evidence — what memory science establishes and why symptoms cannot verify hidden events.
Trauma Recovery: Rebuilding Safety and Function After Trauma — recovery processes and practical priorities.
Childhood Trauma and PTSD: What Is the Connection? — the developmental-exposure evidence and its limitations.
References
American Psychological Association. (2025). Clinical Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Adults. Official guideline.
Atchley, R., & Bedford, C. (2021). Dissociative symptoms in posttraumatic stress disorder: A systematic review. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 22(1), 69–88. PubMed; DOI 10.1080/15299732.2020.1760410.
Brewin, C. R. (2015). Re-experiencing traumatic events in PTSD: New avenues in research on intrusive memories and flashbacks. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 6, 27180. DOI 10.3402/ejpt.v6.27180.
Durand, F., Isaac, C., & Januel, D. (2019). Emotional memory in post-traumatic stress disorder: A systematic PRISMA review of controlled studies. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 303. DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00303.
Ehlers, A., & Clark, D. M. (2000). A cognitive model of posttraumatic stress disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(4), 319–345. DOI 10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00123-0.
Ehlers, A., Hackmann, A., & Michael, T. (2004). Intrusive re-experiencing in post-traumatic stress disorder: Phenomenology, theory, and therapy. Memory, 12(4), 403–415. DOI 10.1080/09658210444000025.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2018). Post-traumatic stress disorder (NG116): Recommendations. Official guideline.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (n.d.). Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Clinical assessment resource.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (n.d.). Dissociative subtype of PTSD. Clinical reference.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (n.d.). International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ). Clinical assessment resource.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (n.d.). Complex PTSD: Assessment and treatment. Clinical synthesis.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (n.d.). Complex PTSD: History and definitions. Clinical classification reference.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense. (2023). VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Disorder. Official guideline.
World Health Organization. (2020). Doing what matters in times of stress: An illustrated guide. Official stress-management guide.