Me too, and I've been at this a while. Pixels captures detail, I think what I'm learning is some feel smaller pixels can move less relative to details and that movement can be perceived as greater blur.
Here is an example.. If 4(2x2) large pixels are used to capture a feature (bugs eye, or speck of dust on a bugs eye), with the smaller pixels it takes 16 (4x4) for the same coverage, when the eye "moves" relative to camera shake, details can slide around the larger pixel 2x2 and show less blur than the same movement applied to 4x4? (really?)
My thoughts: If the cameras moves there is blur, smaller pixels may show more of the movement (relative to 1 pixel doing the work of 4 smaller ones). Keep in mind the 4 are already sharper (capturing greater detail) than the 1, so it's a push.
Robland Seattle Washington area Insert "catch phrase" here