ArticleJournal of mood and anxiety disorders2026
Anhedonia and altered reward responsiveness: Relations to psychosocial functioning.
Article in Journal of mood and anxiety disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research agenda to advance anhedonia assessment, understanding and treatment: an ECNP-GALENOS expert meeting report.BMJ mental health · 2026Review
- Emotional Eating and Its Associations with the Prevalence of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.