Skip to content

MCMCglmm different random effects specifications

1 message · Jarrod Hadfield

#
Hi Ian,

Your interpretation of the models makes sense. Note that mc1 is a  
special case of mc2 when all cells of the mc2 covariance matrix are  
identical (i.e. homogeneous variances and correlations of 1). In  
general I would fit mc3 rather than mc2 to be on the safe side:  
especially if different observers take measurements in different years  
(and vary in how good they are). The 2x2 covariance matrix of  
intercepts and slopes in mc2a can also be turned into a year by year  
covariance matrix as in mc2/mc3. Have Y as the year x year covariance  
matrix and V as the intercept/slope covariance matrix. Y[i,j] =  
V[1,1]+(year[i]+year[j])*V[1,2]+year[i]*year[j]*V[2,2]. As you point  
out mc4 would be pushing the data a little hard  - a double  
hierarchical model would probably be used in this instance where the  
individual-level variances are assumed to come from some distribution  
such as gamma or log-normal.

Cheers,

Jarrod




Quoting Ian Cleasby <i.r.cleasby at gmail.com> on Fri, 24 May 2013  
10:53:21 +0100: