Cited by 54Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTreatment of Major DepressionMental Health Research Topics

Evaluation of anhedonia with the snaith-hamilton pleasure scale (SHAPS) in adult outpatients with major depressive disorder

Open access
Nakonezny, Paul A., Morris, David W., Greer, Tracy L., Byerly, Matthew J., Carmody, Thomas J., Grannemann, Bruce D., Bernstein, Ira H., Trivedi, Madhukar H.·2015·Journal of Psychiatric Research

Abstract

Anhedonia or inability to experience pleasure not only is a core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD), but also is identified as an important component of the positive valence system in the NIMH Research Domain Criteria. The Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) has been developed for the assessment of hedonic experience or positive valence, but has not been well-studied in depressed outpatient populations. The current study examined the reliability and validity of the SHAPS using a sample of adult outpatients with treatment resistant MDD. Data for the current study were obtained from 122 adult outpatients with a diagnosis of MDD and non-response to adequate treatment with an SSRI and who participated in Project TReatment with Exercise Augmentation for Depression (TREAD). A Principal Components Analysis was used to define the dimensionality of the SHAPS. Convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated via correlations of the SHAPS total score with "gold standard" measures of depression severity and quality of life. The SHAPS was found to have high internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient α = .82). A Principal Components Analysis suggests that the SHAPS is mainly "unidimensional" and limited to hedonic experience among adult outpatients with MDD. Convergent and discriminant validity were assessed by examining the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient between the SHAPS total score and the HRSD17 (rs = 0.22, p < .03), IDS-C30 (rs = 0.26, p < .01), IDS-SR30 (rs = 0.23, p < .02), QIDS-C16 (rs = 0.22, p < .03), QIDS-SR16 (rs = 0.17, p < .10), QLES-Q (rs = -0.32, p < .002), and the pleasure/enjoyment item (sub-item 21) of the IDS-C (rs = 0.44, p < .0001) and IDS-SR (rs = 0.38, p < .0002). The self-administered SHAPS showed modest sensitivity (76%) and specificity (54%) with the self-administered pleasure/enjoyment single item (sub-item 21) of IDS-SR30. The current study shows that the SHAPS is a reliable and valid instrument to assess hedonic experience or positive valence in adult outpatients with MDD and provides a broader assessment of this important domain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.03.010

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Anhedonia and low energy level can manifest as reduced physical activity, which can be measured using GPS and motion sensors embedded in smartphones or wearable sensors.

    “Anhedonia and low energy level can manifest as reduced physical activity (19, 20), which can be measured using GPS and motion sensors embedded in smartphones or wearable sensors.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nakonezny, P. A., Morris, D. W., Greer, T. L., Byerly, M. J., Carmody, T. J., Grannemann, B. D., Bernstein, I. H., & Trivedi, M. H.
Affiliations
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Trivedi, Madhukar H.
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-06
Volume
65
Pages
124-130
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2119230895
Cited by
54
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
anhedonia, Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale, major depressive disorder, treatment-resistant depression, positive valence, hedonic experience, psychometric validation, reliability and validity, quality of life, quality of life scale, self-administered questionnaire
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outpatients, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Principal Component Analysis, Self Report, Anhedonia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review