. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Sep 21.

Published in final edited form as: Ear Hear. 2019 Sep-Oct;40(5):1149–1161. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000691

Table 3.

Correlations Between Rapid Phonological Coding Scores and Simple and High-Variability Sentence Recognition Scores

	CI Sample	NH Sample
	Rapid Phonological Coding	Rapid Phonological Coding
	Nonword Repetition	Nonword Repetition
	R	R
Simple Sentence Recognition
Harvard-S	.81^* (.69^*)	.23 (.23)
High-Variability Sentence Recognition
PRESTO	.84^* (.75^*)	.27 (.24)
PRESTO-FAE	.87^* (.84^*)	.16 (.20)
High-Variability Sentence Recognition Controlling for Simple Sentence Recognition
PRESTO controlling for Harvard-S	.40^** (.42^*)	.15 (.10)
PRESTO-FAE controlling for Harvard-S	.57^* (.73^*)	.02 (.07)

Note: CI, cochlear implant; NH, normal-hearing; r values are Pearson correlation coefficients; values in parentheses are correlations using ranges for Nonword Repetition of equivalent sizes for CI (Nonword Repetition score range=30–60% words correct; N=23) and NH (Nonword Repetition range=70–100 % words correct; N=55) samples. Significant values after Holm-Bonferroni correction for each set of 5 correlations or partial correlations within sample are indicated by

^***

p ≤ 0.001

^**

p ≤ 0.01

p ≤ 0.05.