Listeners value a level change as much or more than an equal-dB SNR change

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 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Listener ratings of speech benefit only become significant once SNR change reaches 4 dB; Listeners may judge SNR changes via perceived intelligibility rather than raw signal level — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5669; SNR must rise at least 3 dB before listeners tolerate one more conversation — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5697 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Pure level changes are rated as valuable as SNR changes despite not aiding intelligibility #corroborates (0.95)
• Listeners may judge SNR changes via perceived intelligibility rather than raw signal level #expands (0.85) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5669
• Listener ratings of speech benefit only become significant once SNR change reaches 4 dB #qualifies (0.82)
• Listeners’ SNR JNDs may actually be intelligibility JNDs, not signal-level ones. #expands (0.80)
• Improving the SNR by reducing noise helps speech more than raising the target. #qualifies (0.75)
• SNR must rise at least 3 dB before listeners tolerate one more conversation #corroborates (0.72) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5697