The Cerebellum in Emotional Processing: Evidence from Human and Non-Human Animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The notion that the cerebellum is a central regulator of motor function is undisputed. There exists, however, considerable literature to document a similarly vital role for the cerebellum in the regulation of various non-motor domains, including emotion. Research from numerous avenues of investigation (i.e., neurophysiological, behavioural, electrophysiological, imagining, lesion, and clinical studies) have documented the importance of the cerebellum, in particular, the vermis, in affective processing that appears preserved across species. The cerebellum possesses a distinct laminar arrangement and highly organized neuronal circuitry. Moreover, the cerebellum forms reciprocal connections with several brain regions implicated in diverse functional domains, including motor, sensory, and emotional processing. It has been argued that these unique neuroanatomical features afford the cerebellum with the capacity to integrate information about an organism, its environment, and its place within the environment such that it can respond in an appropriate, coordinated fashion, with such theories extending to the regulation of emotion. This review puts our current understanding of the cerebellum and its role in behaviour in historical perspective, presents an overview of the neuroanatomical and functional organization of the cerebellum, and reviews the literature describing the involvement of the cerebellum in emotional regulation in both humans and non-human animals. In summary, this review discusses the importance of the functional connectivity of the cerebellum with various brain regions in the ability of the cerebellum to effectively regulate emotional behaviour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".