Premium
Measuring hedonic capacity in depression: A psychometric analysis of three anhedonia scales
Author(s) -
Leventhal Adam M.,
Chasson Gregory S.,
Tapia Evelina,
Miller Elizabeth K.,
Pettit Jeremy W.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of clinical psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.124
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1097-4679
pISSN - 0021-9762
DOI - 10.1002/jclp.20327
Subject(s) - anhedonia , psychology , depression (economics) , psychometrics , clinical psychology , psychiatry , schizophrenia (object oriented programming) , economics , macroeconomics
The present study evaluated and compared the psychometric properties of three self‐report scales: the Snaith‐Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS; R. P. Snaith, M. Hamilton, S. Morley, & A. Humayan, 1995), Fawcett‐Clark Pleasure Capacity Scale (FCPS; J. Fawcett, D. C. Clark, W. A. Scheftner, & R. D. Gibbons, 1983), and the Revised Chapman Physical Anhedonia Scale (CPAS; L. J. Chapman, J. P. Chapman, & M. L. Raulin, 1976). These scales, designed to assess hedonic responsiveness, were administered to 157 college students. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a Hedonic Capacity factor that was largely defined by the SHAPS but also had a substantial loading from the FCPS. Hedonic Capacity was minimally correlated with constructs of Depression and Anxiety, which were assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory‐II and the Beck Anxiety Inventory. The CPAS (anhedonia) was not significantly related to Hedonic Capacity or Anxiety, but it did have a small positive loading on Depression. These findings suggest that further research is needed to clarify the meaning of and relationships among scales that are putative indicators of hedonic capacity and anhedonia. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol 62: 1545–1558, 2006.