The issue is what kind of accuracy you are referring to.
If lateral accuracy, the best geometry is to have satellites distant and just above the horizon. In general, this offers the best solutions for lateral positioning.
If altitude accuracy, it is helpful to have satellites more above you, or at least not near the horizon.
Attitude of the aircraft will impact the reception from one or more satellites, and can cause a change in signal reception which will have the GPS seeking different satellites for it's solution, which might result in short term changes in accuracy.
Furthermore, high altitudes provide more satellites with stronger signals, less terrain masking of distant satellites, and less error inducing signals like multi-path. Lower altitudes tend to have not only more multi-path and similar interference but also terrain interference, where flying near or below terrain will interfere with reception, particularly of distant near horizon satellites. In that case there may be more positional "errors" or less accuracy.
With normal aircraft installations, unshielded by terrain, and with normal constellation visibility, there is little practical difference in normal flight operations.
This answer is a general, aviation oriented answer. There are literally hundreds of peer reviewed papers on this topic, rich with substantiation of various phenomena, models and theories.