ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
The cerebellar components of the human language network.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The cerebellum's capacity for neural computation is arguably unmatched. Yet despite now ample evidence of cerebellar contributions to cognition, including language, its precise role in language processing remains debated. Here, we systematically characterize cerebellar language-responsive regions using precision fMRI. We identify four cerebellar regions that respond to language across modalities (Experiments 1a-b, n=754). One region-spanning Crus I/II/lobule VIIb-is selective for language relative to diverse non-linguistic perceptual, cognitive, and motor tasks (Experiments 2a-f, n=732), and the rest exhibit mixed-selective profiles, responding strongly to language but also to one or more of the non-linguistic conditions. Similar to the neocortical language system, the language-selective region is engaged by sentence-level meanings during comprehension and production (Experiments 3a-b, n=100) and shows fine-grained sensitivity to linguistic processing difficulty (Experiment 3c, n=5). Further, this region's response to language is not due to the frequent presence of social content in language, as it is strongly engaged by both social and nonsocial sentences (Experiment 3d, n=10). Finally, all four regions, but especially Crus I/II/VIIb, are functionally connected to the neocortical language system (Experiment 4, n=85). We propose that these cerebellar regions constitute components of the extended language network, with one region supporting linguistic semantic processing and closely mirroring the selectivity of the neocortical language network, and the other three plausibly integrating information from diverse neocortical regions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.