Thats a grand myth according to
this , but thats visual (dont understand why that should matter actually, visual vs imaging, if its wobby then it moves around visually and blurs images).
Do you mean large aperture is affected more by local disturbances (eg thermal) or seeing generally?.
In a simple way I thought it was image scale that should be matched to seeing, not aperture, sounds odd..
I havent imaged with a tiny aperture, I wouldnt want to in a fit. But wouldnt the seeing on a large aperture just show up more due to its higher optical res? (with the same end result).