Listeners may judge SNR changes via perceived intelligibility rather than raw signal level

Evidence

That is, a change in level without a change in SNR was considered as good as—indeed if not better than—a change in SNR. While this finding does not coincide with their role in intelligibility, it is coincident with detectability of level and SNR changes (JNDs of 1.5 and 3.0 dB, respectively). — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5669

That both differences were non-zero was unexpected; it indicates that one cannot be certain whether the 3 dB SNR JND is indeed the JND for SNR or instead the JND for Intelligibility. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5669

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to level JND literature for older hearing-impaired listeners (Whitmer and Akeroyd 2011) and to the broader distinguishability of level vs relative-level perception. — connects to: A 3 dB detectable SNR change is far too small to motivate intervention-seeking behavior; Measured SNR JNDs may actually reflect intelligibility rather than SNR discrimination — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5683; Pure level changes are rated as valuable as SNR changes despite not aiding intelligibility (+4 more)
• QUESTION: This ambiguity — listeners judging SNR discriminability may actually be responding to intelligibility change — is worth chasing into the hearing-perception literature.
• corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5669

Broader Connections

• Measured SNR JNDs may actually reflect intelligibility rather than SNR discrimination #corroborates (0.92) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5683
• Pure level changes are rated as valuable as SNR changes despite not aiding intelligibility #exemplifies (0.75)