Lastly, the Discussion is satisfactory in the way it interprets the findings of the study and relates them to the researcher's purpose for conducting the study in the first place. That is, Frick-Horbury agreeably makes generalizations based on the data. She shows how some of her hypotheses were verified, while others were not. Now I will be able to use some of these generalizations / conclusions to make hypotheses concerning my research topic. This is another sign that this research study contributes to the overall body of knowledge in the field of communication. recall more words than the other group (the uncued group). She also predicts that the low-verbal-skilled groups will remember less than the high-verbal-skilled groups throughout the immediate to the delayed retrieval intervals.

Furthermore, she makes an assumption that gestures will cue concrete words at a more consistent rate than will abstract words, and that loss of retrieval ability will be more prominent in those with uncued verbal skills. These hypotheses clearly manifest themselves from the findings of previous research studies that targeted a similar topic with a similar purpose for execution. It is obvious that Ms. Frick-Horbury has performed ample background research on which to base her studhypotheses were verified, while others were not. She also predicts that the low-verbal-skilled groups will remember less These hypotheses clearly manifest themselves from the findings of previous research studies that targeted a similar topic with a similar purpose for execution. This is another sign that this research study contributes to the overall body of knowledge in the field of communication. recall more words than the other group (the uncued group). knowledge in the field of communication. recall more words than the other group (the uncued group). Now I will be able to use some of these generalizations / conclusions.