Anhedonia and altered reward responsiveness: Relations to psychosocial functioning

Journal of mood and anxiety disorders Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-22 DOI:10.1016/j.xjmad.2026.100169
Molly H. Sapperstein , Michelle Thai , Yuen-Siang Ang , Diego A. Pizzagalli
{"title":"Anhedonia and altered reward responsiveness: Relations to psychosocial functioning","authors":"Molly H. Sapperstein ,&nbsp;Michelle Thai ,&nbsp;Yuen-Siang Ang ,&nbsp;Diego A. Pizzagalli","doi":"10.1016/j.xjmad.2026.100169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Anhedonia—a core symptom of Major Depressive Disorder—is associated with poorer clinical outcomes, lower quality of life, and disrupted reward processing. However, putative relationships among self-reported anhedonia, well-being and anhedonic phenotypes (specifically, reward learning) remain largely unexplored. The main goal of the current study was to fill this gap in a large online adult community sample (N = 478).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>To evaluate how different approaches to assessing anhedonia may capture these relationships, we administered the Probabilistic Reward Task (PRT) to probe reward learning and two clinical scales: the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) and the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS). In a first step, the SHAPS was administered to identify anhedonic vs. non-anhedonic individuals, who then performed an online PRT.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both scales were significantly associated with lower self-reported quality of life (QoL), as measured by the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (QLESQ-SF), with the SHAPS showing a stronger relationship to both QoL and reward learning. Follow-up computational modeling indicated the anhedonic group showed a significantly higher level of uncertainty while completing the PRT compared to the non-anhedonic group. Moreover, trial-by-trial analyses revealed group differences in PRT response patterns, such that anhedonic individuals were less likely to incorrectly indicate that they had seen the more frequently rewarded “rich” stimulus on trials that actually presented the less frequently rewarded “lean” stimulus.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Findings highlight the utility of combining subjective and behavioral measures to better understand the impact of anhedonia on daily functioning and reinforcement learning processes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73841,"journal":{"name":"Journal of mood and anxiety disorders","volume":"13 ","pages":"Article 100169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of mood and anxiety disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950004426000040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Anhedonia—a core symptom of Major Depressive Disorder—is associated with poorer clinical outcomes, lower quality of life, and disrupted reward processing. However, putative relationships among self-reported anhedonia, well-being and anhedonic phenotypes (specifically, reward learning) remain largely unexplored. The main goal of the current study was to fill this gap in a large online adult community sample (N = 478).

Methods

To evaluate how different approaches to assessing anhedonia may capture these relationships, we administered the Probabilistic Reward Task (PRT) to probe reward learning and two clinical scales: the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) and the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS). In a first step, the SHAPS was administered to identify anhedonic vs. non-anhedonic individuals, who then performed an online PRT.

Results

Both scales were significantly associated with lower self-reported quality of life (QoL), as measured by the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (QLESQ-SF), with the SHAPS showing a stronger relationship to both QoL and reward learning. Follow-up computational modeling indicated the anhedonic group showed a significantly higher level of uncertainty while completing the PRT compared to the non-anhedonic group. Moreover, trial-by-trial analyses revealed group differences in PRT response patterns, such that anhedonic individuals were less likely to incorrectly indicate that they had seen the more frequently rewarded “rich” stimulus on trials that actually presented the less frequently rewarded “lean” stimulus.

Conclusions

Findings highlight the utility of combining subjective and behavioral measures to better understand the impact of anhedonia on daily functioning and reinforcement learning processes.
快感缺乏和奖赏反应改变:与社会心理功能的关系
背景:快感是重度抑郁症的核心症状之一,它与较差的临床结果、较低的生活质量和中断的奖励处理有关。然而,自我报告的快感缺乏症、幸福感和快感缺乏症表型(特别是奖励学习)之间的推定关系在很大程度上仍未被探索。当前研究的主要目标是在一个大型在线成人社区样本中填补这一空白(N = 478)。方法为了评估评估快感缺乏的不同方法如何捕捉这些关系,我们使用了概率奖励任务(PRT)来探索奖励学习,并使用了两种临床量表:snaiths - hamilton快乐量表(SHAPS)和维度快感缺乏评定量表(DARS)。在第一步,SHAPS被用于识别缺乏快乐和非缺乏快乐的个体,然后他们进行了在线PRT。结果两种量表都与较低的自我报告生活质量(QoL)显著相关,通过生活质量享受和满意度问卷简短形式(QLESQ-SF)测量,SHAPS与生活质量和奖励学习表现出更强的关系。随访计算模型显示,与非快感缺乏组相比,快感缺乏组在完成PRT时表现出明显更高的不确定性。此外,试验分析揭示了PRT反应模式的组间差异,例如,快感缺乏的个体不太可能错误地指出他们看到了更频繁奖励的“丰富”刺激,而实际上是较少奖励的“精益”刺激。结论:研究结果强调了主观和行为测量相结合的效用,可以更好地理解快感缺乏对日常功能和强化学习过程的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of mood and anxiety disorders
Journal of mood and anxiety disorders Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Clinical Psychology, Psychiatry and Mental Health, Psychology (General), Behavioral Neuroscience
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书