Validity and Reliability of The Turkish Version of Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2020
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Anhedonia is a core feature of many psychiatric disorders and its reliable evaluation is needed for the dimensionalunderstanding of psychiatric disorders. Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) is one of the most widely used scalesto assess anhedonia. Here, we aimed to search the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of SHAPS. Translationof the original scale was completed in a two-step procedure. 188 healthy controls, 56 patients with a depressive disorder(F32-F34, excluding F34.0 cyclothymic disorder, according to ICD-10), and 52 patients with anxiety, stress-related orsomatoform disorder diagnoses (F40-49 diagnosis according to ICD-10) were recruited, and evaluated with the Turkishversion of SHAPS, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Symptom Checklist-90-R(SCL-90-R). For the Turkish version of SHAPS, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found 0.87. The item-total itemcorrelation indices ranged from 0.39 to 0.64. Principal components analysis extracted two factors and explained 46.57 %of total variance. The most significant correlation of SHAPS was found with BDI and depression subscale of SCL-90-Rscores. SHAPS also weakly but significantly correlated with obsessive compulsive and anxiety subscales of SCL-90-R, andweakly but non-significantly with BAI and somatization, interpersonal sensitivity, hostility and psychoticism subscales ofSCL-90-R. Depressive group had significantly higher SHAPS scores compared to controls and anxious group. Anxiousgroup and control group were not significantly different for SHAPS scores. The current study shows that the Turkishversion of the SHAPS has good psychometric properties. SHAPS scores may correlate with depression, somatization, andinterpersonal sensitivity scores, and it may help to differentiate depressive patients from anxious patients and controls.