A Comparison of Two Word-Recognition Tasks in Multitalker Babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise Test (WIN)
Authors: Wilson Richard H. , Cates Wendy B. 
Published: March 2009

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.