I am not sure it is as clear cut as about half the forum preferring hi res and half not, as suggested above. The following references to the forum are my impressions and recollections, not a formal study:
Some people say hi res sounds better, though of those I get the impression that it is not consistently so. “Better” most commonly seems to be described along the lines of “the music has more air around it”. When I have compared and heard a difference myself it has usually been subtle, and just a general almost indescribable feeling of, perhaps, greater naturalness (I.e. better). Maybe that is the same as “more air”. And most people who do at times report hi res sounding better also seem agree that it is not universally the case. Some people say they don’t hear a difference. And some music simply sounds different, rather than better of worse, while other music sounds worse - but then the mastering may be different, effectively different versions rather than the 16/44 simply being a downsampled version of a hi res file. And some supposedly hi res music has apparently even been found to be fake, upsampled from 16/44!
You will gather from thus that it is not universal, undoubtedly depends on the system (including acoustics of room) and the listener’s ears, and on the music itself, the recording and mastering. A bit of a minefield! Which wouldn’t matter if hi res was same cost as 16/44, but more often than not it is sold at a premium price. Some people mostly but 16/44, others mostly buy hi res. I tend to pick hi res when available provided not excessively more expensive, when I’ll just buy 16/44. Sadly it is rarely possible to try and compare before buying.
The 2L.no website has a “HiRes Test Bench” from where you can download sample recordings in different resolutions derived from the same highest res master and so assess for yourself in your system. It doesn’t mean other recordings from other sources will show the same differences, but having been prepared from well recorded masters it gives an idea of what may be the best you can expect.
Meanwhile there is a current thread that is interesting in this context: Microtime: the key to analogue versus digital debates?
All the above relates to non-lossy files, simply considering sampling frequency and bit depth. Lossy formats like mp3 and even MQA are a different subject. That doesn’t mean they can’t sound good, though mp3, even at 320bps I think is agreed by most people to sound inferior to 16/44 in a hifi system (maybe not so obvious in a more limited system like mobile use).