Framing effects are one type of bias in which "decision makers respond differently to different but objectively equivalent descriptions of the same problem" (Levin et al. 1998). Framing effects have been demonstrated in many domains, like in choices about monetary outcome and in questions pertaining to the loss of human lives. Valence framing is one type of framing effects in which people can be biased to make different judgments when a situation is framed positively versus negatively. One of the few studies about the neural correlates of framing effects found that increased susceptibility to framing effects was specifically associated with increased amygdala activity. In contrast, ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPC) activity predicted a reduced susceptibility to the framing effect. In our study we will use the lesion method to examine whether these brain regions are critically involved in framing effects. We will survey framing effects in subjects with amygdala damage (AMY group) and subjects with VMPC damage (VMPC group), as well as brain damaged (BDC group) and neurologically normal (NC group) comparison subjects. We will use a within-subjects design: across two visits, we will present subjects with 24 scenarios in each visit, with each scenario being framed differently (positively or negatively) in the two visits. We will specifically probe Goal, Risk, Attribute, Anchoring and Visual framing effects. We hypothesize that the AMY group will present decreased valence framing effects compared to the comparison groups and that the VMPC group will present increased valence framing effects compared the comparison groups. A decreased susceptibility to the framing effects in patients with amygdala damage would indicate that the amygdala is a critical brain structure for generating framing effects, and that framing effects are due to emotional responses. Patients with VMPC damage presenting an increased susceptibility to framing effects would suggest that the VMPC is a critical brain structure for resisting framing effects, perhaps due to the function of this region in associating an emotional response with a specific stimulus content. An increased ability to make such associations may allow a subject to recognize that mere wording is generating a negative emotional response that is likely to influence decision-making.