The snaith-hamilton pleasure scale (SHAPS) and dimensional anhedonia rating scale (DARS) diverge in measuring anhedonia in a community sample of young adults

Anhedonia, the reduced capacity to experience pleasure, is a central feature of several psychiatric conditions but also varies within non-clinical populations. This study compares two widely used self-report measures of anhedonia: the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), which assesses consummatory pleasure, and the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS), which captures anticipatory, motivational, and consummatory aspects across personalised activity domains. A sample of 300 German-speaking young adults (aged 18-30) completed both instruments as part of an online survey. We examined scale sensitivity, internal consistency, factor structure, and convergent and divergent validity. The DARS demonstrated greater variability, indicating higher sensitivity to subtle differences. Both instruments showed excellent internal consistency (α > .90). Principal component analysis revealed a unidimensional structure for the SHAPS, while the DARS exhibited a four-factor structure representing hobbies, sensory experiences, social interaction, and food. The SHAPS explained less variance (48 %) than the DARS (73 %). Convergent validity analyses showed positive correlations with depression and behavioural activation, with the SHAPS showing slightly stronger associations. Divergent validity was supported for the DARS by weak or non-significant correlations with the theoretically unrelated constructs behavioral inhibition and neuroticism. Overall, the SHAPS showed less specificity. These findings indicate that although SHAPS and DARS share some overlap (ρ = .38, p < .001), they capture distinct facets of anhedonia. The DARS may be particularly useful for detecting nuanced hedonic deficits in non-clinical populations due to its multidimensional and personalised approach, while the SHAPS remains a practical tool for concise assessment in clinical contexts.