F(2.6,82.2) = 24.55, p < 0.001 and Line F(1,31) = 4.23, p = 0.048 as well as a Delay × Line interaction F(2.6,82.2) = 5.19, p = 0.004. To follow up on this interaction, we assessed whether there were line differences at each delay, again using Bonferroni-corrected t-tests. The 0 delay was found to differ t(33) = 3.38, p = 0.002, but the lines did not differ at the other delays (ps > 0.046). In experiment 2 there was a main effect of Delay, F(3.5,114.1) = 9.95, p < 0.001, but no main effect or interaction with Line (ps > 0.343). In experiment 2, Delay was less potent in decreasing consumption than in experiment 1. These data are shown in Table 2. The pattern of results suggests that at longer delays, impatience impairs the ability of the mice to correctly choose the delayed reward and that at least between HAP2 and LAP2 mice, the steeper discounting curve observed did result in a loss of ability to obtain the reinforcer.
