> Hi David,

>

> Thanks for your comment. I haven't posted the data because they are

> unpublished and include human subjects so there are issues with sharing on

> a list serv, but I thought perhaps someone had encountered a similar

> problem and would already know the answer.

>

> I will reconsider whether my University's ethics approval would allow me to

> post the data and update the question if I think it is allowable.

>

> Michelle

>

> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018, 10:13 AM David Winsemius <

[hidden email]>

> wrote:

>

> >

> > > On Mar 22, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Michelle Kline <

> >

[hidden email]> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi,

> > >

> > > Thanks in advance for any help on this question. I'm running

> multinomial

> > > models using the MCMCglmm package. The models have 5 outcome variables

> > > (each with count data), and an additional two random effects built into

> > the

> > > models. The issue is that when I use the following code, the summary

> only

> > > gives me results for four of the outcome variables.

> > >

> > > Here is the code for my model:

> > >

> > > m3.random <- MCMCglmm(cbind(Opp_teacher , Dir_teacher, Enh_teacher,

> > > SocTol_teacher, Eval_teacher) ~ trait -1,

> > > random = ~ us(trait):other + us(trait):focal,

> > > rcov = ~ us(trait):units,

> > > prior = list(

> > > R = list(fix=1, V=0.5 * (I + J), n = 4),

> > > G = list(

> > > G1 = list(V = diag(4), n = 4),

> > > G2 = list(V = diag(4), n = 4))),

> > > burnin = burn,

> > > nitt = iter,

> > > family = "multinomial5",

> > > data = data,

> >

> > We have no way to debug this without the data. Perhaps you should contact

> > the maintainer and in your message attach the data?

> >

> > maintainer('MCMCglmm')

> > [1] "Jarrod Hadfield <

[hidden email]>"

> >

> >

> > An equally effective approach would be to post (again with data that

> > reproduces the error) on the R-SIG-mixed-models mailing list since

> > Hadfield is a regular contributor on that list. (To me it suggests not an

> > error since you got output but rather a warning. Generally warnings and

> > errors are properly labeled so you may not have included the full

> output.)

> >

> > --

> > David.

> > > pr=TRUE,

> > > pl=TRUE,

> > > DIC = TRUE,

> > > verbose = FALSE)

> > >

> > > And the summary of the main effects:

> > >

> > > post.mean l-95% CI u-95% CI eff.samp pMCMC

> > > traitOpp_teacher -3.828752 -4.616731 -3.067424 184.4305 5.263158e-05

> > > traitDir_teacher -3.400481 -4.041069 -2.813063 259.1084 5.263158e-05

> > > traitEnh_teacher -1.779129 -2.197415 -1.366496 624.9759 5.263158e-05

> > > traitSocTol_teacher -2.852684 -3.429799 -2.332909 468.7098 5.263158e-05

> > >

> > >

> > > It is not an issue of the suppressing the intercept, since I'm already

> > > doing that (see the -1 term. When I remove that term, the model

> solutions

> > > includes an intercept and only 3 additional main effects).

> > >

> > > The model does throw the following error, but after searching previous

> > > messages on this list, I've concluded that this error message doesn't

> > have

> > > to do with my current problem. Just in case: " observations with zero

> > > weight not used for calculating dispersion"

> > >

> > > I have also posted a similar question on stackoverflow about a week

> ago,

> > > but with no response, so I thought I would try here. Link in case

> people

> > > want to gain reputation points for a

> > > response:

> >

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49309027/missing-> term-in-mcmcglmm-multinomial-model-results-not-in-intercept-issue

> > > <

> >

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49309027/missing-> term-in-mcmcglmm-multinomial-model-results-not-in-intercept-issue

> > >

> > >

> > > And of course I've checked various other sources including the course

> > > notes, but can't make sense of why the 5th term is dropped from the

> > model.

> > > Any help is much appreciated.

> > >

> > > Best,

> > >

> > > Michelle

> > >

> > > --

> > > Michelle A. Kline, PhD

> > >

> > > Assistant Professor

> > > Department of Psychology

> > > Simon Fraser University

> > >

> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

> > >

> > > ______________________________________________

> > >

[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see

> > >

https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help> > > PLEASE do read the posting guide

> >

http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html> > > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

> >

> > David Winsemius

> > Alameda, CA, USA

> >

> > 'Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.'

> > -Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

>

> ______________________________________________

>

[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see

>

https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help> PLEASE do read the posting guide

http://www.R-project.org/> posting-guide.html

> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

>