The DOI matches its Crossref record.
XVIII. Contributions to the physiology of vision. —Part the first. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved, phenomena of binocular vision
Abstract
When an object is viewed at so great a distance that the optic axes of both eyes are sensibly parallel when directed towards it, the perspective projections of it, seen by each eye separately, are similar, and the appearance to the two eyes is precisely the same as when the object is seen by one eye only. There is, in such case, no difference between the visual appearance of an object in relief and its perspective projection on a plane surface; and hence pictorial representations of distant objects, when those circumstances which would prevent or disturb the illusion are carefully excluded, may be rendered such perfect resemblances of the objects they are intended to represent as to be mistaken for them; the Diorama is an instance of this. But this similarity no longer exists when the object is placed so near the eyes that to view it the optic axes must converge; under these conditions a different perspective projection of it is seen by each eye, and these perspectives are more dissimilar as the convergence of the optic axes becomes greater. This fact may be easily verified by placing any figure of three dimensions, an outline cube for instance, at a moderate distance before the eyes, and while the head is kept perfectly steady, viewing it with each eye successively while the other is closed. Plate XI. fig. 13. represents the two perspective projections of a cube; b is that seen by the right eye, and a that presented to the left eye; the figure being supposed to be placed about seven inches immediately before the spectator. The appearances, which are by this simple experiment rendered so obvious, may be easily inferred from the established laws of perspective; for the same object in relief is, when viewed by a different eye, seen from two points of sight at a distance from each other equal to the line joining the two eyes. Yet they seem to have escaped the attention of every philosopher and artist who has treated of the subjects of vision and perspective. I can ascribe this inattention to a phenomenon leading to the important and curious consequences, which will form the subject of the present communication, only to this circumstance; that the results being contrary to a principle which was very generally maintained by optical writers, viz. that objects can be seen single only when their images fall on corresponding points of the two retinæ, an hypothesis which will be hereafter discussed, if the consideration ever arose in their minds, it was hastily discarded under the conviction, that if the pictures presented to the two eyes are under certain circumstances dissimilar, their differences must be so small that they need not be taken into account.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Predictive coding explains binocular rivalry: an epistemological review
Hohwy, J., Roepstorff, A., & Friston, K. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.05.010 · Cited by 546
Binocular rivalry: frontal activity relates to introspection and action but not to perception
Frässle, S., Sommer, J., Jansen, A., Naber, M., & Einhäuser, W. (2014) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4403-13.2014 · Cited by 409
Single units and conscious vision
The American Association for Research into Nervous and Mental Diseases, & Logothetis, N. K. (1998) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1998.0333 · Cited by 375
Amygdala Responses to Fearful and Happy Facial Expressions under Conditions of Binocular Suppression
Williams, M. A., Morris, A. P., McGlone, F., Abbott, D. F., & Mattingley, J. B. (2004) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4977-03.2004 · Cited by 362
The “correlates” in neural correlates of consciousness
de Graaf, T. A., Hsieh, P.-J., & Sack, A. T. (2012) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.05.012 · Cited by 268
Metadata
- Authors
- Wheatstone, C.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1838-12-31
- Issue
- 128
- Pages
- 371-394
- ISSN
- 0261-0523 (ISSN-L)
- 2053-9223
- OpenAlex
- W2151923230
- Cited by
- 1,320
- References
- 0
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: XVIII. Contributions to the physiology of vision. —Part the first. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved, phenomena of binocular vision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstl.1838.0019
- The paper
- Wheatstone, C. (1838). XVIII. Contributions to the physiology of vision. —Part the first. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved, phenomena of binocular vision. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1838.0019
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.