Weber, Jennifer E.

Committee Member

Bright, Kathryn

Committee Member

Mueller, Gustav H.


Audiology & Speech-Language Sciences


University of Northern Colorado

Type of Resources


Place of Publication

Greeley (Colo.)


University of Northern Colorado

Date Created



82 pages

Digital Origin

Born digital


The purpose of this capstone research project was to determine if the Hurley and Sells (2003) speech-in-quiet test NU-6 10- and 25-word lists could be used as predictors for speech-in-noise (SIN) abilities gauged by the quick speech-in-noise test (QuickSIN; Etymotic Research Inc., 2001) or Bamford-Kowal-Bench speech-in-noise test (BKB-SIN; Etymotic Research Inc., 2005). Most audiologists use monosyllabic speech-in-quiet word lists to predict speech recognition abilities and hearing aid candidacy (Lindley, 2015). By not evaluating speech in noise, many hearing aid users are fit with hearing aids and counseled incorrectly (Mueller, Ricketts, & Bentler, 2014). If a modified monosyllabic speech-in-quiet word list yields results correlated to QuickSIN or BKB-SIN signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss, the word lists could be used to predict speech-in-noise abilities. Twenty-six participants were included in this study, providing ear-specific data for 50 ears. Participants were aged 60 years and older with the mean age being 71 years old. Fifteen men and 11 women were included and represented any race and/or socioeconomic status. All data collection took place at the University of Northern Colorado Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology Clinic. Consent was provided and obtained from each participant prior to any testing. Otoscopic examination was conducted to rule out impacted cerumen or ear canal abnormalities. Form A of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB; Cox & Alexander, 1995) was administered and completed prior to any audiometric testing. Following the APHAB, the QuickSIN (Etymotic Research Inc., 2001), BKB-SIN (Etymotic Research Inc., 2005), NU-6 10-word list, and NU-6 25-word list were administered in a counter balance fashion for each participant. Both the QuickSIN (Etymotic Research Inc., 2001) and BKB-SIN (Etymotic Research Inc., 2005) displayed a significant negative correlation with the modified monosyllabic NU-6 word lists ( p < .01). A stronger relationship was found between the NU-6 10- and NU-6 25-word lists and the BKB-SIN (-.693 and -.703, respectively). The NU-6 25-word list and BKB-SIN also resulted in the most optimal sensitivity and specificity (79% and 82%, respectively). Significant correlations were seen between the APHAB (Cox & Alexander, 1995) ease of communication and reverberation subscales and the NU-6 10-word list, QuickSIN, and BKB-SIN. No significant correlation was found between the background noise subscale of the APHAB and any test administered. The NU-6 25-word list can be used as a predictor for both normal and abnormal SNR-loss scores in respect to the BKB-SIN (Etymotic Research Inc., 2005).

Degree type


Degree Name


Local Identifiers


Rights Statement

Copyright is held by the author.