or Line (p = 0.12), nor was there an interaction of Delay and Line (p = 0.62). In experiment 2, main effects of Delay F(3.4,113.7) = 5.40, p = 0.001, Line F(1,33) = 6.96, p = 0.013 and an interaction of Delay × Line F(3.4,113.7) = 3.09, p = 0.024 were detected. Data were stratified by Line, and a main effect of Delay was detected in HAP1 F(4,68) = 4.49, p = 0.003 and HS/Ibg F(4,64) = 4.02, p = 0.006 such that HAP1s generally completed fewer trials at intermediate delays, and HS/Ibgs completed more trials at longer delays. Additionally, follow-up t-tests confirmed that HAP1s and HS/Ibgs differed at 0 and 1-second delays ts(33) > 3.05, ps < 0.005 using a Bonferroni corrected α of 0.01. These data are summarized in Table 2. The general pattern showed more trials completed by high-alcohol drinkers, but this effect was marginal, and did not reveal a consistent relationship between genetic differences in alcohol preference. An additional analysis was performed to assess whether there was any correlation between trials completed and k values, our central measure of impulsivity. We ascertained this correlation by determining the mean number of trials completed by each mouse from
