The argument tries to prove increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and it can last as long as at least tens of years. Yet this argument cannot stand close analysis and hence is unwarranted.
Firstly, the arguer makes a big mistake in misunderstanding distress the infants showed as shyness the teenagers showed.
As far as I am concerned, how to interpret the "shyness " revealed by infants is problematic. It is common that the infants ,when exposed to unfamiliar environment, in most times will show signs of upset. However, the shyness obviously embodies itself differently. Therefore, the assumption of the argument that infants share a feeling of shyness is open to doubt.
In addition, the capacity of sample is too small to obtain grounded conclusion statistically. As a common sense, we know that 25 infants is far less than the number required by a formal statistic. Moreover, quantitative data is needed to support the research. We are not informed whether the family living in the same region, whether the mothers show identical response to the decreased daylight.
Furthermore, during the thirteen years, each child grows in different environment. What influenced them during that time contributes a lot on their character and behavior. Given the importance of external environment during the infancy, it is unfair to neglect what happened during the next thirteen years.
Finally, to improve the argument, the author should first define the baby shyness, include more research object and carry out more quantitative experiments from
which
attain more data to support the claims.