The Persian version of words-in-noise test for young population: development and validation

  • Yones Lotfi Mail Department of Audiology, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Samira Salim Department of Audiology, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Saiedeh Mehrkian Department of Audiology, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Tayebeh Ahmadi Department of Audiology, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Akbar Biglarian Department of Biostatistics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Keywords:
Speech perception in noise, words-in-noise test, validity, reliability

Abstract

Background and Aim: different tests have been developed to evaluate reduced ability of speech perception in noise, and the words-in-noise test is one of the easiest ones in terms of speech materials. This study aimed to develop and determine the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the words-in-noise (WIN) test for 7 to 12-year-old children.
Methods: This research is a tool-making, non-empirical study including three main stages: first, development of the Persian version of the WIN test (including 2 lists each one designed at each of 7 different signal to noise ratios), second, the assessment of its content validity, and third, its administration on sixty three 7-to 12-year-old normal hearing children (36 boys and 27 girls) with a mean age of 9.32 (SD=1.66) years old, in order to assess the reliability of the test (list equivalency). Participants were selected from the students of primary schools in Tehran.
Results: The content validity ratio for each item was above 0.62. List 1 and 2 of the WIN test were highly correlated (p<0.05). The test-retest correlations were statistically significant for both lists (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the scores of the left and right ears and gender (p>0.05). The Mean of speech in noise ratio (SNR) 50% for each list was also determined.
Conclusion: Based on the study results, it is concluded that the Persian version of the WIN test has acceptable content validity and reliability and can be used in clinical and research studies.

References

1. Wong PCM, Uppunda AK, Parrish TB, Dhar S. Cortical mechanisms of speech perception in noise. , J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51(4):1026-41.
2. Medwetsky L. Mechanisms underlying central auditory processing. In: Medwetsky L, Burkard R, Hood L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott William & Wilkins; 2009. p. 584-610.
3. Lewis D, Hoover B, Choi S, Stelmachowicz P. Relationship between speech perception in noise and phonological awareness skills for children with normal hearing. Ear Hear. 2010;31(6):761-8.
4. Crandell CC, Smaldino JJ. Classroom acoustics for children with normal hearing and with hearing impairment. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2000;31(4):362-70.
5. Klatte M, Lachmann T, Meis M. Effects of noise and reverberation on speech perception and listening comprehension of children and adults in a classroom-like setting. Noise Health. 2010;12(49):270-82.
6. Schafer EC. Speech perception in noise measures for children: a critical review and case studies. J Educ Audiol. 2010;16:4-15.
7. Nittrouer S, Caldwell-Tarr A, Tarr E, Lowenstein JH, Rice C, Moberly AC. Improving speech-in-noise recog┬Čnition for children with hearing loss: potential effects of language abilities, binaural summation, and head shadow. Int J Audiol. 2013;52(8):513-25.
8. Fallon M. Children's perception of speech in noise. Toronto: University of Toronto; 2001.
9. Wilson RH, Farmer NM, Gandhi A, Shelburne E, Weaver J. Normative data for the Words-in-Noise Test for 6- to 12-year-old children. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010;53(5):1111-21.
10. Wilson RH, Cates WB. A comparison of two word-recognition tasks in multitalker babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise test (WIN). J Am Acad Audiol. 2008;19(7):548-56.
11. Wilson RH, Watts KL. The Words-in-Noise test (WIN), list 3: a practice list. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012;23(2):92-6.
12. Wilson RH, Carnell CS, Cleghorn AL. The Words-in-Noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18(6):522-9.
13. Wilson RH, McArdle R. Intra- and inter-session test, retest reliability of the Words-in-Noise (WIN) test. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18(10):813-25.
14. Nematzadeh S. Identification of Iranian primary school students core vocabulary: a brief report of a national project. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2008;3(9):8-17.
15. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975;28(4):563-75.
16. Wilson RH. Development of a speech-in-multitalker-babble paradigm to assess word-recognition performance. J Am Acad Audiol. 2003;14(9):453-70.
17. Wilson RH, Abrams HB, Pillion AL. A word-recognition task in multitalker babble using a descending presentation mode from 24 dB to 0 dB signal to babble. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2003;40(4):321-7.
18. Wilson RH, McArdle RA, Smith SL. An evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN materials on listeners with normal hearing and listeners with hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50(4):844-56.
19. McArdle R, Wilson RH. Speech perception in noise: the basics. Perspect Hear Hear Disord Res Res Diagn. 2009;13(1):4-13.
20. Emami SF. Word recognition score in white noise test in healthy listeners. Sch. J. App. Med. Sci. 2015;3(1A):29-33.
Published
2016-12-05
How to Cite
1.
Lotfi Y, Salim S, Mehrkian S, Ahmadi T, Biglarian A. The Persian version of words-in-noise test for young population: development and validation. Aud Vestib Res. 25(4):194-200.
Section
Research Article(s)