4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and

Random Effects

2.1 Linear Models

Let’s start with reviewing some linear modeling terminology.

units–observations; i , data points

x variable–predictor(s); independent variables
y variable–outcome, response; dependent variable
inputs–model terms; ≠ predictors; inputs ≥ predictors
random variables–outcomes that include chance; often described with
probability distribution
multiple regression–regression of > 1 predictor; not multivariate regression
(MANOVA, PCA, etc.)

The general components of a linear model can be thought of as any of the

following:

response = deterministic + stochastic

outcome = linear predictor + error
result = systematic + chance

The stochastic component makes these statistical models

Explanatory variables whose effects add together
Not necessarily a straight line!

2.1.1 Stochastic Component

Nature is stochastic; nature adds error, variability, chance

Always a reason, we might just not know it
Might not be important and including it risks over-parameterization

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 1/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Combined effect of unobserved factors captured in probability distribution

Often (default) is Normal distribution, but others common

Figure 2.1: Although hurricanes are not statistical models, they are a good example
of understanding something that cannot perfectly be modeled, and therefore has
some stochasticity inherent to it.

In a linear model, we need to identify a distribution that we assume is the data

generating distribution underyling the process we are attempting to model. Not only
is this distrubtion important in describing what we are modeling, but it is also
critically important because it will accomodate the errors that arise when we model
the data. So how do we know which distribution we need for a given model?

We can know possible distributions

We can know how data were sampled
We can know characteristics of the data
We can run model, evaluate, and try another distribution
Correct distribution is not always Y/N answer

Figure 2.2: Examples of different statistical distributions as seen by their

characterstic shape.

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 2/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

2.1.2 Distributions

Although many distributions are available, we will review three.

1. Normal distribution: continuous, −∞ to ∞

2. Binomial distribution: discrete, integers, 0 to 1

3. Poisson distribution: discrete, integers, 0 to ∞

The Normal distribution

The normal distribution is the model common distribution in linear modeling and
possible the most common in nature. In a normal distribution, measurements
effected by large number of additive effects (CLT). When effects are multiplicative,
the result is a log-normal distribution. There are 2 parameters that govern the
normal distribution: μ = mean and σ
2
= standard deviation.

A normal distribution can be easily simulated in R .

rnorm(n = 10, mean = 0, sd = 1)

## [1] -0.5954732 1.1289288 0.3290828 -0.8824579 -0.2629276 0.2449900

## [7] 2.0645695 0.7203280 0.4977901 0.5770971

The Binomial distribution

The binomial distribution always concerns the number of successes (i.e., a specific
outcome) out of a total number of trials. A single trial is a special case of the
binomial, and is called a Bernoulli trial. The flip of a coin once is the classic
Bernoulli trial. A binomial distribution might be thought of as the sum of some
number of Bernoulli trials. A binomial distibution has 2 parameters: p = success
probability and N = sample size (although N =1 in a Bernoulli trial, which means a
Bernoulli trial can be thought of as a 1-parameter distribution). N is the upper limit,
which differentiates from a binomial distribution from a Poisson distribution. The
binomial distribution mean is a derived quantity, where μ = N × p . the variance
= N × p × (1 − p) ; therefore, the variance is function of mean.

A binomial distribution can be simulated in R .

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 3/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

rbinom(n = 10, size = 5, prob = 0.3) # size = trials

## [1] 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 2 3 1

The Poisson distribution

The Poisson distribution is the classic distribution for (integer) counts; e.g., things
in a plot, things that pass a point, etc.) The Poisson distribution can approximate to
Binomial when N is large and p is small, and it can approximate to the normal
distribution when when λ is large. The Poisson distribution has 1 parameter: λ =
mean = variance. This distribution can be modified for zero-inflated data (ZIP) and
other distributional anomolies.

A Poisson distribution can be easily simulated in R .

rpois(n = 10, lambda = 3)

## [1] 2 1 8 6 2 4 4 2 2 2

2.1.3 Linear Component

Recall that the linear contribution to our model includes the predictors (explanatory
variables) with additive effects. Although this is a linear model, it need not be
thought of literally as a straight line. The linear component can accomodate both
continuous and categorical data. Conceptually,

linear predictor = design matrix + parameterization

R takes care of both the design matrix and the parameterization, but this is not
always true in JAGS , so it is worth a review.

Marc Kery has succinctly summarized the design matrix:

“For each element of the response vector, the design matrix n index indicates
which effect is present for categorical (discrete) explanatory variables and what
amount of an effect is present in the case of continuous explanatory variables.”

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 4/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

(Kéry 2010)
In other words the design matrix is a matrix that tells the model if and where an
effect is present, and how much. The number of columns in the matrix are equal to
the number of fitted parameters. Ultimatly, the design matrix is multiplied with the
parameter vector to produce the linear predictor. Let’s use the simulated data in
Chapter 6 of Marc Kery’s book as an example (Kéry 2010).

Table 2.1: Replicated data from Kery (2010).

mass pop region hab svl

6 1 1 1 40

8 1 1 2 45

5 2 1 3 39

7 2 1 1 50

9 3 2 2 52

11 3 2 3 57

If you would like to code this dataset into R and play along, use the code below.

mass <- c(6,8,5,7,9,11)

pop <- c(1,1,2,2,3,3)

region <- c(1,1,1,1,2,2)

hab <- c(1,2,3,1,2,3)
svl <- c(40,45,39,50,52,57)

If we think about a model of the mean, it might look like this:

massi = μ + ϵi

This model has a covariate of one for every observation, because every
observation has a mass. This model is also sometimes referred to as an intercept
only model. The model describes individual snake mass as a (global) mean plus
individual variation (deviation or “error”).

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 5/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Increasing model complexity, we might hypothesize that snake mass is predicted

by region. Because region is a categorial variable (although it is input as numeric,
we don’t assume any ordination or relationship of the region numbers), the model
we are interested in is a t-test. A t-test is just a specific case of a linear model. To
represent the t-test, we can write the model equation as:

massi = α + β × regioni + ϵi

This model is considering snake mass to be made up of these components: the

mean snake mass, the region effect, and the residual error. Now is also a good
time to start thinking about the residuals, which we assume are normally distributed
with a mean of 0 and expresed as

2
ϵi ∼ N (0, σ )

Let’s pause for a moment on the t-test and think about how we write models. You
are familiar with the notation that I have thus used, where the model and residual
error are expressed as two separate equations. What if we were to combine them
into one equation? How would that look?

2
massi ∼ N (α + β × regioni , σ )

This notation may take a little while to get used to, but it should make sense. This
expression is basically saying that snake mass is thought to be normally distributed
with a mean that is the function of the mean mass plus region effect, and with
some residual error. Expressing models with distributional notation may seen odd
at first, but it may help you better understand how distributions are built into the
processes we are modeling, and what part of the process belongs to which part of
the distribution. We will stick with this notation (not exclusively) for much of this
course.

Back to the model matrix—how might we visualize the model matrix in R ?

model.matrix(mass ~ region)

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 6/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

## (Intercept) region
## 1 1 1
## 2 1 1
## 3 1 1
## 4 1 1

## 5 1 2
## 6 1 2
## attr(,"assign")
## [1] 0 1

But we said earlier the regions were not inherent quantities and just categories or
indicator variables. Above, R is taking the region variable as numeric because it
does not know any better. Let’s tell R that region is a factor.

model.matrix(mass ~ as.factor(region))

## (Intercept) as.factor(region)2
## 1 1 0
## 2 1 0
## 3 1 0

## 4 1 0
## 5 1 1
## 6 1 1
## attr(,"assign")
## [1] 0 1
## attr(,"contrasts")

## attr(,"contrasts")$`as.factor(region)`
## [1] "contr.treatment"

The model matrix yields a system of equations. And for the matrix above, the
system of equations we would have can be expressed 2 ways. The first way shows
the equation for each observation.

6 = α × 1 + β × 0 + ϵ1

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 7/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

8 = α × 1 + β × 0 + ϵ2

5 = α × 1 + β × 0 + ϵ3

7 = α × 1 + β × 0 + ϵ4

9 = α × 1 + β × 1 + ϵ5

11 = α × 1 + β × 1 + ϵ6

The second way adopts matrix (vector) notation to economize the system.

6 1 0 ϵ1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞

⎜ 8 ⎟ ⎜1 0⎟ ⎜ ϵ2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 5 ⎟ ⎜1 0⎟ α ⎜ϵ ⎟
3
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
= × ( ) +
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 7 ⎟ ⎜1 0⎟ β ⎜ ϵ4 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 9 ⎟ ⎜1 1⎟ ⎜ϵ ⎟
5

⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
11 1 1 ϵ6

In both cases the design matrix and parameter vector are combined. And using
least-squares estimation to estimate the parameters will result in the best fits for α

and β.

2.1.4 Parameterization

Although parameters are inherent to specific models, there are cases in the linear
model where parameters can be represented in different ways in the design matrix,
and these different representations will have different interpretations. Typically, we
refer to either a means or effects parameterization. These two parameterizations
really only come into play when you have a categorical variable—the
representation of continuous variables in the model matrix includes the quantity or
magnitude of that variable (and defaults to an effects parameterization). A means
parameterization may be present or needed when categorical variables are
present. Let’s take the above t-test example with 2 regions. As we notated the
model above, α = μ for region 1, and β represented the difference in expected
mass in region 2 compared to region 1. In other words, β is an estimate of the
effect of being in region 2. As you guessed, this is an effects parameterization
because region 1 is considered a baseline or reference level, and other levels are
compared to this reference, hence the coefficients represent their effect. Effects
parameterization is the default in R (e.g., lm() ).

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 8/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

In a means parameterization, α has the same interpretation—the mean for the first
group. However, in a means parameterization, all other coefficients represent the
means of those groups, which is actually a simpler imterpretation than the effects
parameterization. Going back to our t-test, in a means parameterization β would
represent the mean mass for snakes in region 2. Thus, no addition or subtraction of
effects is required in a means parameterization. Both the means and effects
parameterization will yield the same estimates (with or without some simple math),
but it is advised to know which parameterization you are using. Additionally, as you
work in JAGS you may need to use one parameterization over another, and
understanding how their work and are interpreted is critically important.

Let’s look at one more model using the snake data. A simple linear regression will
fit one continuous covariate (x) as a predictor on y. Let’s look at the model for the
snout-vent length ( svl ) as the predictor on mass .

massi = α + β × svli + ϵi

The model matrix for this model (an effect parameterization) can be reported as
such.

model.matrix(mass ~ svl)

## (Intercept) svl

## 1 1 40
## 2 1 45
## 3 1 39
## 4 1 50
## 5 1 52

## 6 1 57
## attr(,"assign")
## [1] 0 1

And we see that each snake has an intercept (mean) and an effect of svl .

These examples using the fake snake data were taken from Kery (2010), in which
he provides more context and examples that you are encouraged to review.

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 9/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

2.2 Model Effects

To understand hierarchical models, we need to understand random effects, and to

understand random effects, we need to understand variance.

1. What is variance?
2. How do we deal with variance?
3. What can random effects do?
4. How do I know if I need random effects?
5. What is a hierarchical model? (later)

Variance was historically seen as noise or a distraction—it is the part of the data
that the model does not capture well. At times it has been called a nuisance
parameter. The traditional view was always that less variance was better. However:

“Twentieth-century science came to view the universe as statistical rather than as

clockwork, and variation as signal rather than as noise…”(Leslie and Little 2003)

The good news is that there is (often) information in variance. Two problems,
however, are that our models don’t always account for the information connected to
variance, and that variance is often ubiquitous and can occur at numerous places
within the model. For instance, variance can occur among observations and within
observations, along with how we parameterize our models and how we take our
measurements.

One way to deal with variance concerns how we treat the factors in our model.
(Recall that a factor is a categorical predictor that has 2 or more levels.)
Specifically, we can treat our factors as fixed or random, and the underlying
difference lies in how the factor levels interact with each other.

2.2.1 Fixed Effects

Fixed effects are those model effects that are thought to be separate, independent,
and otherwise not similar to each other.

Likely more common—at least in use—than random effects, if only for the fact
that they are a statistical default in most statistical softwares.

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 10/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Treat the factor levels as separate levels with no assumed relationship

between them. _ For example, a fixed effect of sex might include two factor
levels (male and female) that are assumed to have no relationship between
them, other than that they are different types of sex.
Without any relationship, we cannot infer what might exist or happen between
levels, even when it might be obvious.
Fixed effects are also homoscedastic, which means they assume a common
variance.
If you use fixed effects, you would likely need some type of post hoc means
comparison (including adjustment) to compare the factor levels.

2.2.2 Random Effects

Random effects are those model effects that can be thought of as units from a
distribution, almost like a random variable.

Random effects are less commonly used, but perhaps more commonly
encountered (than fixed effects).
Each factor level can be thought of as a random variable from an underlying
process or distribution.
Estimation provides inference about specific levels, but also the population-
level (and thus absent levels!)
Exchangeability
If n is large, factor level estimates are the same or similar to fixed effect
estimates.
If n is small, factor levels estimates draw information from the population-level
information.

Comparing Effects Consider A is a fixed effect and B is a random effect, each

with 5 levels. For A, inferences and estimates for the levels are applicable only to
those 5 levels. We cannot assume to know what a 6th level would look like, or what
a level between two levels might look like. Contrast that to B, where the 5 levels
are assumed to represent an infinite (i.e., larger numbers) number of levels, and
our inferences therefore extend beyond the data (i.e., we can use estimates and
inferences predictively to interpolate and extrapolate).

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 11/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

When are Random Effects Appropriate?

You can find your own support for what you want to do, which means modeling
freedom, but also you should be prepared to defend your model structure.

“The statistical literature is full of confusing and contradictory advice.” (Gelman and
Hill 2006)

You can probably find a reference to support your desire

Personal preference is Gelman and Hill (2006): “You should always use
random effects.” (use = consider)
Several reasons why random effects extract more informationvfrom your
data and model
Built-in safety: with no real group-level information, effects revert back to a
fixed effects model (essentially)
Know that fixed effects are a default, which does not make them right

Random effects may not be appropriate when…

Factor levels are very low (e.g., 2); it’s hard to estimate distributional
parameters with so little information (but still little risk).
Or when you don’t want factor levels to inform each other.
e.g., male and female growth (combined estimate could be meaningless and
misleading)

Summarizing Kery 2010:

“…as soon as we assume effects are random, we introduce a hierarchy of effects.”

1. Scope of Inference: understand levels not in the model

2. Assessment of Variability: can model different kinds of variability
3. Partitioning of Variability: can add covariates to variability
4. Modeling of Correlations among Parameters: helps understand correlated
model terms
5. Accounting for all Random processes in a Modeled System:
acknowledges within-group variability
6. Avoiding Pseudoreplication: better system description
7. Borrowing Strength: weaker levels draw from population effect
8. Compromise between Pooling and No Pooling Batch Effects
9. Combining information

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 12/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Do I need a random effect (hierarchical model)?

If you answer Yes to any of these, consider random effects.

1. Can the factor(s) be viewed as a random sample from a probability

distribution?
2. Does the intended scope of inference extend beyond the levels of a factor
included in the current analysis to the entire population of a factor?
3. Are the coeffcients of a given factor going to be modeled?
4. Is there a lack of statistical independence due to multiple observations from
the same level within a factor over space and/or time?

Random Effects Equation Notation There will be a much more extensive treatment
of model notation and you will need to become familari with notation to successfully
code models; however, now is as good a time as any to introduce some basics of
random effects statistical notation. (Note that statistical notation and code notation
are different, but may be unspecified and unclear when referring to model
notation.)

SLR, no RE:

y i = α + β × xi + ϵ i

SLR, random intercept, fixed slope:

y i = α j + β × xi + ϵ i

SLR, fixed intercept, random slope:

y i = α + β j × xi + ϵ i

SLR, random coefficients:

y i = α j + β j × xi + ϵ i

MLR, random slopes:

1 1 2 2
yi = α + β × x + β × x + ϵi
j i j i

For the most part, we will use subscript i to index the observation-level (data) and
subscript j to index groups (and indicate a random effect).

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 13/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

2.3 Hierarchical Models

Because random effects are used to model variation at different levels of the data,
they add a hierarchical structure to the model. Let’s start with non-hierarchical
models and review how data inform parameters. Consider a simple model with no
hierarchical strucure (Figure 2.3). The observations (yi . . . yn ) all inform one
parameter and the data are said to be pooled.

Figure 2.3: Diagrammatic representation complete pooling, a model structure in

which all observations inform one parameter.

Perhaps we want to group the data in some logical way. We might add a fixed
effect, and then assign certain observations to different parameters (Figure 2.4). In
this case, our parameters, θ are subscripted to indicate that they are different
levels within a factor. Despite this apparent connection, the data and the
parameters inherent to one group inform only that group, and there is said to be no
pooling or sharing of information.

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 14/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Figure 2.4: Diagrammatic representation no pooling, a model structure in which

separate observations inform separate parameters.
Hierarchical models are a middle ground or compromise approach to dealing with
data and parameters. Often we want groups or factor levels in our data because
they represent real differences in the information we are trying to understand.
However, often the groups that we want to include are not completely independent
of each other. In cases like these, we can structure a model where the data inform
factor level parameters, but those factor level parameters are then governed by
some additional parameter (Figure 2.5).

Figure 2.5: Diagrammatic representation partial pooling, a model structure in which

different observations inform different latent parameters, which are then governed
by additional parameters.

Example A simple example of rationalizing a hierarchical model might be modeling

the size of birds. Our y values would be some measure of bird size. But we know
that different species inherently attain different sizes; i.e., observations are not
independent as any two size measurements from the same species are much more
likely to be similar than to a measurement from an individual of another species).
Therefore it makes sense to group the size observations by species, θj . However,
we also know that there may still be relatedness among species, and as such
some additional parameter, ϕ , can be added to govern the collection of species
parameters. (To continue with the example, ϕ might represnt a taxonomic order.)

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 15/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

Once you understand some examples of how hierarchical structures reflect the
ecological systems we seek to model, you will find hierarchical models to be an
often realistic representation of the system or process you want to understand—or
at least more realistic than the traditional model representations.

2.3.1 Definitions of Hierarchical Models

There is a lot of terminology.

From Raudenbush and Bryk (2002)

multilevel models in social research

mixed-effects and random-effects models in biometric research
random-coeffcient regression models in econometrics
variance components models in statistics
hierarchical models (Lindley and Smith 1972)

Some useful definitions are:

“…hierarchical structure, in which response variables are measured at the lowest

level of the hierarchy and modeled as a function of predictor variables measured at
that level and higher levels of the hierarchy.” Wagner, Hayes, and Bremigan (2006)

“Multilevel (hierarchical) modeling is a generalization of linear and generalized

linear modeling in which regression coeffcients are themselves given a model,
whose parameters are also estimated from data.” Gelman and Hill (2006)

“The existence of the process model is central to the hierarchical modeling view.
We recognize two basic types of hierarchical models. First is the hierarchical model
that contains an explicit process model, which describes realizations of an actual
ecological process (e.g., abundance or occurrence) in terms of explicit biological
quantities. The second type is a hierarchical model containing an implicit process
model. The implicit process model is commonly represented by a collection of
random effects that are often spatially and or temporally indexed. Usually the
implicit process model serves as a surrogate for a real ecological process, but one
that is diffcult to characterize or poorly informed by the data (or not at all).” Royle
and Dorazio (2008)

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 16/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

“However, the term, hierarchical model, by itself is about as informative about the
actual model used as it would be to say that I am using a four-wheeled vehicle for
locomotion; there are golf carts, quads, Smartcars, Volkswagen, and Mercedes, for
instance, and they all have four wheels. Similarly, plenty of statistical models
applied in ecology have at least one set of random effects (beyond the residual)
and therefore represent a hierarchical model. Hence, the term is not very
informative about the particular model adopted for inference about an animal
population.” Kéry and Schaub (2011)

References

Gelman, Andrew, and Jennifer Hill. 2006. Data Analysis Using Regression and
Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge university press.

Kéry, Marc. 2010. Introduction to Winbugs for Ecologists: Bayesian Approach to

Regression, Anova, Mixed Models and Related Analyses. Academic Press.

Kéry, Marc, and Michael Schaub. 2011. Bayesian Population Analysis Using
Winbugs: A Hierarchical Perspective. Academic Press.

Leslie, Paul W, and Michael A Little. 2003. “Human Biology and Ecology: Variation
in Nature and the Nature of Variation.” American Anthropologist 105 (1). Wiley
Online Library: 28–37.

Lindley, Dennis V, and Adrian FM Smith. 1972. “Bayes Estimates for the Linear
Model.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 34 (1).
Wiley Online Library: 1–18.

Raudenbush, Stephen W, and Anthony S Bryk. 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models:

Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Vol. 1. Sage.

Royle, J Andrew, and Robert M Dorazio. 2008. Hierarchical Modeling and Inference
in Ecology: The Analysis of Data from Populations, Metapopulations and
Communities. Elsevier.

Wagner, Tyler, Daniel B Hayes, and Mary T Bremigan. 2006. “Accounting for
Multilevel Data Structures in Fisheries Data Using Mixed Models.” Fisheries 31 (4).
Taylor & Francis: 180–87.

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 17/18
4/5/24, 6:39 PM Chapter 2 The Model Matrix and Random Effects | Bayesian Hierarchical Models in Ecology

https://bookdown.org/steve_midway/BHME/Ch1.html 18/18