Check your posterior distributions, the one corresponding to GENDER seems to
be skewed.

Ardo.

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:33 AM, m.fenati@libero.it <m.fenati@libero.it>wrote:

> As suggested by Ben Bolker, I re-post the following question in this list.
> Thanks
>
> >Dear R users,
> >I’d like to pose aquestion about pMCMC and HDP.
> >I have performed a mixed logistic regression by MCMCglmm (a very good
> package)
> >obtaining the following results:
> >
> >Iterations = 250001:799901
> >Thinning interval = 100
> >Sample size = 5500
> >
> > DIC: 10.17416
> >
> >G-structure: ~ID_an
> >
> > post.mean l-95% CI u-95% CIeff.samp
> >ID_an 0.7023 0.0001367 3.678 2126
> >
> > R-structure: ~units
> >
> > post.mean l-95% CIu-95% CI eff.samp
> >units 1 1 1 0
> >
> > Location effects: febbreq~ as.factor(sex)
> >
> > post.mean l-95% CIu-95% CI eff.samp pMCMC
> >(Intercept) -3.6332 -5.6136 -1.7719 3045 <2e-04 ***
> >as.factor(sex)M -2.9959 -6.0690 0.1969 2628 0.0455 *
> >---
> >Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
> >
> >
> >As you can see, pMCMC for gender is just less than 5%, but the credible
> >interval (HPD) is wide and includes the 0 value.
> >How can I interpret these different results?
> >
> >Thank you in advance
> >
> >Massimo
> >
> >-----------------------
> >Massimo Fenati
> >DVM
> >Padova - Italy
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-mixed-models@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mixed-models
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]


