evaluating the significance

The savings pattern mentioned in the question stem is that "there has been no increase in the amount of money set aside by the general public in savings accounts" in spite of the economists' prediction that people would save more money because of the anticipation of hard times due to publicized layoffs.

We want to find the answer that would best explain why the prediction and the outcome differed.


What business sectors were most affected by the layoffs?
(we are concerned with the general population, so particular sectors aren't entirely relevant)

How much of their savings, on average, do laid-off employees deplete before finding new employment?
(we care about laid-off employees as well as employees who kept their jobs)

What has been the percent increase in the cost of necessities such as food, housing, and utilities during the period since the layoffs?
(bingo; if the cost of necessities has gone up, then it may not be possible for people to save money. If the cost has stayed the same or gone down, then people are choosing not to save money)

What percentage of people laid off have savings accounts?
(people can save money without savings accounts, and, as in B, we are not solely concerned with people who were laid off)

What has been the average salary during the period since the layoffs?
(we have no way of relating average salary to spending and saving rates)