Tehran University of Medical Sciences Auditory and Vestibular Research 2423-480X 28 3 2019 06 18 173 181 Jamileh Fatahi Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Maryam Amiri Jahromi Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Fahimeh Hajiabolhassan Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Amirsalar Jafarpisheh Department of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran Nariman Rahbar Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Elham Faghihzadeh Department of Biostatistics, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 2018 11 19 2019 01 21 Background and Aim: The quick speech in noise (Q-SIN) test shows the difficulty of speech perception in noise by specifying signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss. Although the Persian version of Q-SIN has been already constructed, the high-frequency emphasis version of this test is not available. The present study aimed to construct six lists with high-frequency emphasis and implement it. Methods: We are going to prepare a high-frequency emphasis version of Q-SIN and then test it on a small sample. First, researchers designed the relevant sentences; then experts examined their content and face validity. According to the criteria for developing the Q-SIN test, six lists with high-frequency emphasis were prepared. The test was examined on 26 (13 male and 13 female), 18−35 years old individuals with normal hearing. To determine the test reliability, it was re-administered three weeks later with the same conditions. Results: Of 76 sentences prepared, 36 sentences received enough credit after determination of their content and face validity. These 36 sentences were used to make 6 lists. The mean value of SNR50 in the Persian language was obtained -4 dB. The mean values of SNR loss in 6 lists were -1.65, -1.8, -2.23, -1.61, -2.38 and -2.07. The results showed equivalency of lists 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. Examination of test-retest reliability indicated that all lists except the list 2were reliable. Conclusion: The lists of 1, 3, 4, and 6 are reli­able and equivalent and can be used in clinical application. https://avr.tums.ac.ir/index.php/avr/article/view/774 https://avr.tums.ac.ir/index.php/avr/article/download/774/331