Murdock:

not ecologically valid- word was flashed for a few secs and the words were random so u wont lern it lyk that in
reeal lyf
the words didn't mean anything to the participants, had they have meant something the results could differ - for
example, words of higher importance might have been learnt better

and also it depends on the level of difficulty of the words- if the words were more advanced and people failed to
know their meanings then they might have not recalled it as well as people who did

Bartlett:
no reliable scoring system - difficult to measure accuracy and compare it each time

well it could be comprehension that caused the difference in retelling as opposed to familiarity
the subject matter itself is ambiguous but this combined with the confusing nature of the story could cause the
difference in telling because it's really bloody confusing
not because it's unfamiliar

i made these up so they are weird. but i sed: the experimentet was a stranger- mightve been nerves and they
woudve been more aware of what they were saying- confusing story so hard to recall and increasing
nervouseness may have caused the alterations to what they heard