Background: The Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) is a word-recognition instrument that
presents the 200 Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (NU-6) words binaurally
at 50 dB HL in a multitalker babble at a 9 dB signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) (Cord et
al, 1992). The SPRINT was developed by and used by the Army as a more valid predictor
of communication abilities (than pure-tone thresholds or word-recognition in quiet)
for issues involving fitness for duty from a hearing perspective of Army personnel.
The Words-in-Noise test (WIN) is a slightly different word-recognition task in a fixed
level multitalker babble with 10 NU-6 words presented at each of 7 S/N from 24 to
0 dB S/N in 4 dB decrements (Wilson, 2003; Wilson and McArdle, 2007). For the two
instruments, both the babble and the speakers of the words are different. The SPRINT
uses all 200 NU-6 words, whereas the WIN uses a maximum of 70 words.
Purpose: The purpose was to compare recognition performances by 24 young listeners with normal
hearing and 48 older listeners with sensorineural hearing on the SPRINT and WIN protocols.
Research Design: A quasi-experimental, mixed model design was used.
Study Sample: The 24 young listeners with normal hearing (19 to 29 years, mean = 23.3 years) were
from the local university and had normal hearing (≤20 dB HL; American National Standards
Institute, 2004) at the 250–8000 Hz octave intervals. The 48 older listeners with
sensorineural hearing loss (60 to 82 years, mean = 69.9 years) had the following inclusion
criteria: (1) a threshold at 500 Hz between 15 and 30 dB HL, (2) a threshold at 1000
Hz between 20 and 40 dB HL, (3) a three-frequency pure-tone average (500, 1000, and
2000 Hz) of ≤40 dB HL, (4) word-recognition scores in quiet ≥40%, and (5) no history
of middle ear or retrocochlear pathology as determined by an audiologic evaluation.
Data Collection and Analysis: The speech materials were presented bilaterally in the following order: (1) the SPRINT
at 50 dB HL, (2) two half lists of NU-6 words in quiet at 60 dB HL and 80 dB HL, and
(3) the two 35-word lists of the WIN materials with the multitalker babble fixed at
60 dB HL. Data collection occurred during a 40–60 minute session. Recognition performances
on each stimulus word were analyzed.
Results: The listeners with normal hearing obtained 92.5% correct on the SPRINT with a 50%
point on the WIN of 2.7 dB S/N. The listeners with hearing loss obtained 65.3% correct
on the SPRINT and a WIN 50% point at 12.0 dB S/N. The SPRINT and WIN were significantly
correlated (r = −0.81, p < .01), indicating that the SPRINT had good concurrent validity. The high-frequency,
pure-tone average (1000, 2000, 4000 Hz) had higher correlations with the SPRINT, WIN,
and NU-6 in quiet than did the traditional three-frequency pure-tone average (500,
1000, 2000 Hz).
Conclusions: Graphically and numerically the SPRINT and WIN were highly related, which is indicative
of good concurrent validity of the SPRINT.
Key Words
Auditory perception - hearing loss - speech perception - word recognition in multitalker
babble - Percepción auditiva - pérdida auditiva - percepción del lenguaje - reconocimiento
del lenguaje en balbuceo de hablantes múltiples
