The traditional view on the cerebellum is that it controls motor behavior. Although recent work has revealed that the cerebellum supports also nonmotor functions such as cognition and affect, only during the last 5 years it has become evident that the cerebellum also plays an important social role. This role is evident in social cognition based on interpreting goal-directed actions through the movements of individuals (social “mirroring”) which is very close to its original role in motor learning, as well as in social understanding of other individuals’ mental state, such as their intentions, beliefs, past behaviors, future aspirations, and personality traits (social “mentalizing”). Most of this mentalizing role is supported by the posterior cerebellum (e.g., Crus I and II). The most dominant hypothesis is that the cerebellum assists in learning and understanding social action sequences, and so facilitates social cognition by supporting optimal predictions about imminent or future social interaction and cooperation. This consensus paper brings together experts from different fields to discuss recent efforts in understanding the role of the cerebellum in social cognition, and the understanding of social behaviors and mental states by others, its effect on clinical impairments such as cerebellar ataxia and autism spectrum disorder, and how the cerebellum can become a potential target for noninvasive brain stimulation as a therapeutic intervention. We report on the most recent empirical findings and techniques for understanding and manipulating cerebellar circuits in humans. Cerebellar circuitry appears now as a key structure to elucidate social interactions.

Emotion processing is known to be mediated by a complex network of cortical and subcortical regions with evidence of specialized hemispheric lateralization within the brain. In light of prior evidence indicating that lateralization of cognitive functions (such as language) may depend on normal visual development, we investigated whether the lack of prior visual experience would have an impact on the development of specialized hemispheric lateralization in emotional processing. We addressed this issue by comparing performance in early blind and sighted controls on a dichotic listening task requiring the detection of specific emotional vocalizations (i.e., suggestive of happiness or sadness) presented independently to either ear. Consistent with previous studies, we found that sighted individuals showed enhanced detection of positive vocalizations when presented in the right ear (i.e., processed within the left hemisphere) and negative vocalizations when presented in the left ear (i.e., right hemisphere). It is interesting to note that although blind individuals were as accurate as sighted controls in detecting the valance of the vocalization, performance was not consistent with any pattern of specialized hemispheric lateralization. Overall, these results suggest that although the lack of prior visual experience may not lead to impaired emotion processing performance, the underlying neurophysiological substrate (i.e., degree of special hemispheric lateralization) may depend on normal visual development. (PsycINFO Database Record

Introduction: Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a promising neuromodulatory intervention for addressing motor, cognitive, and socio-affective deficits across a range of clinical populations. Materials and Methods: This systematic review aimed to synthesize recent evidence (2015–2025) on the efficacy, safety, and methodological characteristics of multi-session cerebellar TMS protocols used in rehabilitation settings. Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed and Scopus was conducted to identify peer-reviewed studies applying multi-session cerebellar TMS in clinical populations for motor, cognitive, or affective rehabilitation. A total of 1750 records were screened, and 46 studies met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction included sample characteristics, study design, TMS protocol, targeted symptoms, outcomes, and risk of bias. Results: The results show that repeated sessions of cerebellar TMS are safe, well-tolerated, and associated with functional improvements primarily in motor disorders—such as spinocerebellar ataxia, Parkinson’s disease, multiple system atrophy, essential tremor, and post-stroke deficits—as well as in psychiatric populations, particularly patients with schizophrenia. Discussion: Evidence regarding the effects of cerebellar TMS on cognitive functions remains limited, though promising. Despite overall positive findings, the literature is limited by variability in stimulation parameters, protocol designs, and outcome measures, small sample sizes and potential publication bias. Conclusions: The review highlights the need for further large-scale and well-controlled trials to refine stimulation protocols, explore long-term effects, and clarify the underlying mechanisms of cerebellar TMS across motor, cognitive, and affective domains. This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD420251067308).

The link between emotional experience and motor body responses has long been acknowledged. A well-established approach to exploring the effect of the perception of emotional stimuli on the motor system is measuring variations in the excitability of the corticospinal tract (CSE) through motor-evoked potentials (MEP) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Previous evidence has indicated a selective increase in MEP amplitude while participants view emotional stimuli, such as emotional facial expressions, compared to neutral cues. However, it is still not clear whether this effect depends on the specific emotional meaning conveyed by the stimulus. In the present study, we explored whether viewing faces expressing the primary emotions compared to faces with a neutral expression affects individuals’ CSE, measured using TMS-elicited MEPs. Specifically, we elicited MEPs from the left motor cortex (M1) while participants passively viewed the same faces expressing either anger, fear, disgust, happiness, sadness, surprise, and no emotion (in different blocks). We found that the observation of fearful, angry, disgusted, and happy facial expressions was associated with a significant increase in the MEPs’ amplitude compared to neutral facial expressions, with a comparable enhancement in the CSE occurring across these emotions. In turn, viewing sad and surprised faces did not modulate the CSE. Overall, our findings suggest that only facial expressions that signal (real or potential) danger or a rewarding stimulus, but not emotional facial expressions per se, are capable of activating action-related mechanisms.