The automatic speech quality assessment (SQA) has been extensively studied to predict the speech quality without time-consuming questionnaires. Recently, neural-based SQA models have been actively developed for speech samples produced by text-to-speech or voice conversion, with a primary focus on training mean opinion score (MOS) prediction models. The quality of each speech sample may not be consistent across the entire duration, and it remains unclear which segments of the speech receive the primary focus from humans when assigning subjective evaluation for MOS calculation. We hypothesize that when humans rate speech, they tend to assign more weight to low-quality speech segments, and the variance in ratings for each sample is mainly due to accidental assignment of higher scores when overlooking the poor quality speech segments. Motivated by the hypothesis, we analyze the VCC2018 and BVCC datasets. Based on the hypothesis, we propose the more reliable representative value N_low-MOS, the mean of the $N$-lowest opinion scores. Our experiments show that LCC and SRCC improve compared to regular MOS when employing N_low-MOS to MOSNet training. This result suggests that N_low-MOS is a more intrinsic representative value of subjective speech quality and makes MOSNet a better comparator of VC models.