Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27206249›Full record

ReviewAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences2016

Cerebellar contributions to motor control and language comprehension: searching for common computational principles.

Torgeir Moberget, Richard B Ivry

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Chiari I malformation.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Cerebellar contributions to action and cognition: Prediction, timescale, and continuity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. The cerebellar components of the human language network.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Torgeir MobergetNorwegian Centre for Mental Disorders Research (NORMENT), KG Jebsen Centre for Psychosis Research, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Norway.
Richard B IvryDepartment of Psychology, and the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
Oslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

Embodied Decision Making: The Influence of Action Errors on Reinforcement LearningR01NS092079 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI IVRY, RICHARD · 2015 to 2019
$1.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS092079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The past 25 years have seen the functional domain of the cerebellum extend beyond the realm of motor control, with considerable discussion of how this subcortical structure contributes to cognitive domains including attention, memory, and language. Drawing on evidence from neuroanatomy, physiology, neuropsychology, and computational work, sophisticated models have been developed to describe cerebellar function in sensorimotor control and learning. In contrast, mechanistic accounts of how the cerebellum contributes to cognition have remained elusive. Inspired by the homogeneous cerebellar microanatomy and a desire for parsimony, many researchers have sought to extend mechanistic ideas from motor control to cognition. One influential hypothesis centers on the idea that the cerebellum implements internal models, representations of the context-specific dynamics of an agent's interactions with the environment, enabling predictive control. We briefly review cerebellar anatomy and physiology, to review the internal model hypothesis as applied in the motor domain, before turning to extensions of these ideas in the linguistic domain, focusing on speech perception and semantic processing. While recent findings are consistent with this computational generalization, they also raise challenging questions regarding the nature of cerebellar learning, and may thus inspire revisions of our views on the role of the cerebellum in sensorimotor control.

Indexed as

LanguageCerebellumComprehensionHumansModels, NeurologicalMotor ActivityNerve Netcerebellumcognitioncomputational mechanismsinternal modelslanguagemotor control

Identifiers

PMID27206249
PMCPMC5260470
OpenAlexW2395308873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.