Statement:\nA research study recorded that the absolute number of unemployed educated youth equals the absolute number of unemployed uneducated youth. Researchers concluded that education does not increase the probability of employment among youth.\n\nWhich additional information is required to validate (or refute) this conclusion?

Introduction / Context:
The study compares counts of unemployed youths across two groups (educated vs. uneducated) and jumps to a conclusion about probabilities (risk rates) of unemployment. To validate such a claim, we must convert absolute numbers into relative measures (rates/percentages) using the appropriate denominators.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Observed: Unemployed(educated youth) = Unemployed(uneducated youth) in absolute numbers.
• Unknown: Sizes of the two populations—Educated youth population vs. Uneducated youth population.
• Goal: Test whether education affects the probability (rate) of employment/unemployment.

Concept / Approach:
Probabilities require dividing the number of unemployed by the size of the corresponding group. Equal numerators can conceal very different rates when denominators differ. Thus, risk comparison must use percentages (or rates), not raw counts.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Example: Suppose 900,000 educated youth and 100,000 uneducated youth. If 10,000 in each group are unemployed, rates are 1.11% vs. 10%—very different despite equal counts. Therefore, the raw equality of counts is insufficient.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing counts with rates; ignoring base population sizes; over-generalising from a single cross-section.

Final Answer:
The percentage of unemployment among educated youth versus among uneducated youth.