Re: using !MVINCLUDE with missing random effects

From: damianCollins <asremlforum_at_VSNI.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:10:13 +0000

Dear Craig,
(NB. Arthur is away at present)

I think in the first model you mean "SOME MISSING MUM VALUES AND !MVINCLUDE SPECIFIED" ?

If so, then I think I know where the problem is.

From the V3 user guide , p113 (p139)
"Where the factor level is zero (or missing and the !MVINCLUDE qualifier is specified), no level is assigned to the factor for that record. These effectively defines an extra level (class) in the factor which becomes a reference level."

In your first model, using !mvinclude, ASReml effectively imputes one extra "mum" (class) for *all* the missing values.

In your second model, you have imputed your own unique dummy codes, a separate one for each missing value.

So the first model fits one additional level of mum, the second model fits m additional levels of mum (where m here is the number of missing values). I think this explains the difference between the two outputs.

Hope this helps,

Damian Collins, Biometrician, I&I NSW
ph: 02 4640 6451

-------------------- m2f --------------------

Sent using Mail2Forum (

Read this topic online here:

-------------------- m2f --------------------
Received on Fri Jan 29 2010 - 09:10:13 EST

This webpage is part of the ASReml-l discussion list archives 2004-2010. More information on ASReml can be found at the VSN website. This discussion list is now deprecated - please use the VSN forum for discussion on ASReml. (These online archives were generated using the hypermail package.)