The Self-Frame: Default Mode Network Reconfiguration Across Persona States and Its Breakdown in Dissociative Identity Disorder

People switch between selves dozens of times daily — transitioning from professional to parent,switching languages and cultural frames, entering pre-performance routines — yet thesetransitions have never been theorized as instances of a single neural phenomenon. This articleintroduces the self-frame model, which proposes that the default mode network (DMN) is not amonolithic self-network but a dynamic coalition of subnetworks whose membershipreconfigures when an individual adopts a different self-frame: the integratedcognitive-affective-behavioral configuration governing perception, prediction, action, andself-presentation within a given context. Drawing on precision functional mapping (Braga &Buckner, 2017; Gordon et al., 2017), cultural self-construal priming (Wang et al., 2013; Sui &Han, 2007), narrative processing (Simony et al., 2016; Yeshurun et al., 2021), and dissociativeidentity disorder (DID) neuroimaging (Schlumpf et al., 2014; Reinders et al., 2012; Lebois etal., 2021), we develop three core claims. First, self-frame switching involves qualitativereconfiguration of DMN subnetwork coalitions — changes in which subnetworks are coupled,not merely changes in activation magnitude — a mechanism distinct from attentionalreorientation, arousal modulation, or flow/zone states. Second, in healthy individuals,non-active self-frames are maintained through low-level background coupling that preservesself-continuity and cross-frame memory access, with the hippocampal long axis providing astate-dependent memory bridge between self-frames. Third, pathology arises from distinctfailure modes of this system, situated along two dimensions — reconfiguration capacity andintegration capacity: autism spectrum disorder (ASD) represents impaired reconfigurationcapacity; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) represents directionally biased reconfiguration,with the defensive self-frame's attractor basin pathologically expanded; and DID representsimpaired integration capacity. PTSD-DS occupies an intermediate position between PTSD andDID. The mechanisms underlying these parameter shifts — potentially involving changes insynaptic efficacy, neuromodulatory tone, or activity-dependent plasticity — remain to bedetermined. We address the sampling-to-ontology fallacy underlying recent DID skepticism,distinguish self-frame reconfiguration from cross-frequency coupling and flow/zonephenomena, and derive five testable predictions for precision neuroimaging research.