## 3 Results
### Recording Distance: 0.6 m
The results of post-hoc tests on the effects of masks on the ACC for the male speakers at a recording distance of 0.6 m are shown in Figure 5; their median values under noises are reported in Table 3. For the recording distance of 0.6 m, no significant effects of wearing a mask with no noise and restaurant noise on ASR for male speakers were found (\(p>0.058\)). The medians of ACC with no noise for male speakers were all 100%, except for the condition of M5 for ASRT, where the median was 94.70%. Despite the lack of significance, the ACC of ASRD under restaurant noise in the M1 condition for male speakers was 14.4 pp less than that in the M0 condition, in the M2 condition it was 20.3 pp less than that for M0, and in the M4 condition it was 13.6 pp less than that for M0. In addition, the ACC of ASRT under restaurant noise in the M2 condition for male speakers was 14.7 pp less than that in the M0 condition, in the M4 condition it was 13.8 pp less than that for M0, and in the M5 condition it was 9.7 pp less than that for M0. Under speech-shaped noise, there were significant main effects of mask-wearing for male speakers on ASRD (H = 12.987, \(p\) = 0.043) and ASRT (H = 27.560, \(p\) = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the ACC of ASRD for male speakers under speech-shaped noise with or without a mask in the pairwise comparison tests. Despite the lack of statistical significance, the ACC of ASRD under speech-shaped noise for male speakers in the M1 condition was 12.9 pp less than that in the M0 condition (H = 28.610, \(p\) = 0.156), and in the M4 condition it was 17.5 pp less than that for M0 (H = 35.620, \(p\) = 0.078). For ASRT, the ACC under speech-shaped noise for male speakers in the M2 condition was 22.9 pp less than that in the M0 condition (H = 67.360, \(p\) = 0.001), and in the M5 condition it was 20.6 pp less than that for M0 (H = 57.290, \(p\) = 0.005). Strangely, the ACC values under noises for male speakers in the M6 condition were all higher than that in the M0 condition. Specifically, compared to that in the M0 condition, for male speakers in the M6 condition the ASRD ACC was 10.9 pp higher under restaurant noise and 4.7 pp higher under speech-shaped noise, and the ASRT ACC was 2.6 pp higher under restaurant noise and 11.2 pp higher under speech-shaped noise. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Mask Condition**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ASR\({}_{\text{D}}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ASR\({}_{\text{T}}\)**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Restaurant Noise** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Speech-Shaped Noise** \\ \end{tabular} & **Restaurant Noise** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Speech-Shaped Noise** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline M0 & 74.34 & 42.86 & 92.58 & 80.91 \\ \hline M1 & 55.05 & 34.17 & 90.45 & 74.46 \\ \hline M2 & 52.94 & 30.38 & 83.33 & 50.00 \\ \hline M3 & 60.00 & 38.46 & 90.00 & 66.67 \\ \hline M4 & 59.55 & 29.41 & 84.62 & 63.64 \\ \hline M5 & 63.07 & 39.23 & 84.62 & 61.32 \\ \hline M6 & 72.08 & 43.93 & 90.91 & 80.00 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Median ACC (%) for all speakers under noises at a recording distance of 0.6 m.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Mask Condition**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ASR\({}_{\text{D}}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ASR\({}_{\text{T}}\)**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Restaurant Noise** & \ \begin{tabular}{c} **Speech-Shaped Noise** \\ \end{tabular}  & **Restaurant Noise** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Speech-Shaped Noise** \\ \end{tabular}