Table 1 Recent studies on the Revised Social Anhedonia Scale (RSAS) and Revised Physical Anhedonia Scale (RPAS)

America

Chapman et al. (1976) [1]

505 normal adults & male schizophrenics

The first version of two Chapman scales-Physical Anhedonia Scale (PAS) and Social Anhedonia Scale (SAS). Both scales can measure anhedonia effectively among healthy adults and schizophrenics, but the PAS would appear more likely to reflect a biological defect schizophrenic anhedonia.

Cronbach α:

PAS: 0.74 (male); 0.66 (female)

SAS:0.85 (male); 0.82 (female)

The two scales correlated 0.60 for males and 0.51 for females.

Blanchard JJ et al. (1998) [35]

37 schizophrenia outpatients & 15 controls

Used PAS and SAS as a tool to measure anhedonia and to examine the relationship between anhedonia and the trait dimensions of positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) in schizophrenia. The first applied research of PAS and SAS in schizophrenia.

RSAS:

Cronbach α: 0.84

Test-retest: Schizophrenia:0.79; Control:0.82

RPAS

Cronbach α: 0.86

Test-retest: Schizophrenia:0.74; Control:0.86

Kwapil et al. (2008) [46]

6137 college undergraduates

Reported the dimensional structure of the Wisconsin Schizotypy Scales (WSS), which including the RPAS, RSAS and other two scales. Physical anhedonia (RPAS) and social anhedonia (RSAS) were recognized negative schizotypy factors of the WSS.

Two-factor model of WSS:

RMSEA:0.053; CFI:0.98; GFI:0.98

Leventhal et al. (2006) [52]

157 college students

To measure hedonic capacity in Depression.

The RPAS (anhedonia) was positively related to depression.

Cronbach α:0.93 (RPAS)

RPAS score was correlated with BDI (r = 0.16, p < o.o5)

Three-factor model:

RMSEA:0.07; CFI:0.97; TLI:0.94

Reise et al. (2011) [42]

2227 18-year-olds

Item response theory model in the RSAS: the RSAS responses cannot be modeled accurately by either unidimensional or bifactor IRT models. Although the scores on the RSAS are meaningful and valuable in this study, neither of the model could reflect the true relation between the items and the target latent trait.

Cronbach α: 0.84 (RSAS)

Unidimensional model:

RMSEA = 0.05; CFI = 0.88

Bifactor model:

RMSEA = 0.03; CFI = 0.97

Cicero et al. (2016) [45]

584 undergraduates (EFA)

932 undergraduates (CFA)

To examine factor structure of the RSAS and examine whether the RSAS has discriminant validity from social anxiety.

Two-factor model:

RMSEA = 0.03, CFI =0.93

Spain

Fonseca-Pedrero et al. (2009) [29]

728 Spanish university students

The psychometric properties of the RPAS and the RSAS in Spanish population. Both scales presented an essentially unidimensional solution.

RSAS: Cronbach α:0.95;

Unidimensional model: RMSEA =0.067; CFI =0.92

RPAS:Cronbach α:0.92;

Unidimensional model: RMSEA =0.028; CFI =0.99

Germany

Bailer et al. (2004) [37]

83 schizophrenic patients and 83 normal controls

To test reliability and validity properties of German versions of the WSS. The satisfactory internal consistency and high retest-reliability of the RPAS and RSAS were shown in both groups

Cronbach α: 0.73–0.87

Test-retest: 0.54–0.87

French

Loas (1993) [36]

61 normal subjects, 61 major depressive disorder

This work presents the validation of the French version of the Physical Anhedonia Scale (PAS). The scale’s validity, fidelity and reliability were studied in two groups

Cronbach α: 0.71–0.83(PAS)

PAS scores were correlated with Fawcett–Clark Pleasure Capacity Scale (FCPS) (r = − 0.53, p < o.o1)

China

Chan et al. (2012) [30]

887 college students

The RPAS and RSAS were used separately to measure trait ahnedonia in a non-clinical sample.

Cronbach α:

RSAS: 0.85; RPAS:0.86

Chan et al. (2015) [41]

1724 young adults

The factor structure and the measurement invariance across time of the WSS. Physical anhedonia (RPAS) and social anhedonia (RSAS) were recognized as negative schizotypy factors. Measurement invariance of the WSS across time was supported.

Cronbach α:(time1, time2, time1_parceled and time2_parceled)

RSAS:0.82;0.85;0.81;0.84

RPAS:0.83;0.87;0.83;0.87

Two-factor model:

RMSEA:0.049; CFI:0.98; TLI:0.97

Chan et al. (2016) [40]

196 schizophrenia patients, 197 non-psychotic first-degree relatives, 1724 non-clinical young adults

The structural invariance across goups of the WSS. Two-factor model was confirmed in three groups. Physical anhedonia (RPAS) and social anhedonia (RSAS) were recognized as negative schizotypy factors.

schizophrenia patients:

Cronbach α: 0.83–0.93

RMSEA:0.079; CFI:0.96; TLI:0.94

First-degree relatives:

Cronbach α: 0.82–0.94

RMSEA:0.09; CFI:0.95; TLI:0.93

College students:

Cronbach α: 0.75–0.89

RMSEA:0.059; CFI:0.97; TLI:0.96

Turkey

Cihan et al. (2015) [31]

266 s-grade university students

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test schizotypy dimensions. The Cronbach’s alpha, test–retest reliability and congruent validity of SAS were calculated.

Cronbach α: 0.84 (SAS)

Test-retest: 0.76

Two-factor model (positive–negative schizotypy):

RMSEA:0.07; CFI:0.96; GFI:0.94