The purpose of the present study was to determine if an automated speech perception task yields results that are equivalent to a word recognition test used in audiometric evaluations. This was done by testing 51 normally hearing adults using a traditional word recognition task (NU-6) and an automated Non-Word Detection task. Stimuli for each task were presented in quiet as well as in six signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) increasing in 3 dB increments (+0 dB, +3 dB, +6 dB, +9 dB, + 12 dB, +15 dB). A two one-sided test procedure (TOST) was used to determine equivalency of the two tests. This approach required the performance for both tasks to be arcsine transformed and converted to z-scores in order to calculate the difference in scores across listening conditions. These values were then compared to a predetermined criterion to establish if equivalency exists. It was expected that the TOST procedure would reveal equivalency between the traditional word recognition task and the automated Non-Word Detection Task. The results confirmed that the two tasks differed by no more than 2 test items in any of the listening conditions. Overall, the results indicate that the automated Non-Word Detection task could be used in addition to, or in place of, traditional word recognition tests. In addition, the features of an automated test such as the Non-Word Detection task offer additional benefits including rapid administration, accurate scoring, and supplemental performance data (e.g., error analyses) beyond those obtained in traditional speech perception measures.