Listeners value loudness increases as much as SNR improvements they provide

Evidence

For the remaining 30 participants, the results are very similar to those for SNR, though ΔLs of 4–8 dB were rated modestly higher than ΔSNRs of 4–8 dB. 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…, 5686

Six participants exhibited varying negative reactions to the greatest levels, finding a particular non-maximal level rated highest (e.g., 66 and 74 dB A). For the remaining 30 participants, the results are very similar to those for SNR, though ΔLs of 4–8 dB were rated modestly higher than ΔSNRs of 4–8 dB. 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…, 5684

Categorization

• XREF: Relates to the broader theme bridging detectability thresholds (JNDs) to meaningfulness judgments in signal processing.
• DEEPTHINKING: This is a genuinely counterintuitive dissociation: perceived value tracks detectability rather than intelligibility contribution, suggesting what subjects rate as ‘meaningful benefit’ is not what actually helps them understand speech.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5686; Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5684