Affect dysregulation occupies a structurally central position in the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as a diagnostic criterion, a developmental outcome, a neurobiological signature, and a therapeutic target. The literature presents no single unified definition; rather, the term marks a convergence zone where attachment theory, developmental neuroscience, trauma studies, and psychoanalytic object-relations theory meet and occasionally contest one another. Allan Schore’s foundational contribution frames affect dysregulation as the cardinal consequence of insecure attachment: when early dyadic attunement fails, the orbitofrontal cortex — the hierarchical apex of the limbic system — is deprived of the regulatory scaffolding required for its maturation, producing lasting deficits in the capacity to modulate psychobiological state transitions. Van der Kolk, van der Hart, and their collaborators extend this framework into the trauma spectrum, arguing that dysregulation is not a discrete symptom but a continuum linking PTSD, dissociation, and complex personality pathology through a common mechanism of structurally disrupted self-regulatory circuits. Developmental trauma theorists, including Lanius and contributors to the Developmental Trauma Disorder literature, operationalize affect dysregulation as a formal diagnostic criterion — inability to modulate, tolerate, or recover from extreme affect states. Siegel situates it within integration theory, reading dysregulation as evidence of failed neural integration expressed as chaos or rigidity. The corpus reveals a persistent tension between neurobiological and relational accounts, with therapeutic implications that remain vigorously debated.