Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 3, 2026

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry
14:34

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry

Published on: November 10, 2010

76.5K

Ocular Equivocation: The Rivalry Between Wheatstone and Brewster.

Nicholas J Wade1

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Dundee, Nethergate, Dundee DD1 4HN, UK.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)
|November 19, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

In praise of anaglyphs.

i-Perception·2026
Same author

Textured surface stereoscopy.

i-Perception·2025
Same author

Revealing the Concealed in Monocular and Binocular Vision.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Stereoscopic depth without monocular recognition.

i-Perception·2025
Same author

Malcolm Bruce Macmillan (1929-2024).

Journal of the history of the neurosciences·2025
Same author

Malcolm Bruce Macmillan (1929-2024).

Journal of the history of the neurosciences·2025

This study explores the historical rivalry between Wheatstone and Brewster, focusing on their differing theories of ocular equivocation (binocular contour rivalry). Their personal and scientific disputes shaped early stereoscopic vision research.

Area of Science:

  • Vision Science
  • History of Science
  • Perceptual Psychology

Background:

  • Charles Wheatstone and David Brewster were key figures in 19th-century vision research.
  • Their work on stereoscopic vision and binocular contour rivalry led to significant scientific and personal disagreements.
  • Both researchers had distinct backgrounds in optics and subjective visual phenomena.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To examine the historical rivalry between Wheatstone and Brewster regarding ocular equivocation.
  • To contrast their differing interpretations of binocular contour rivalry and stereoscopic vision.
  • To highlight the evolution of stereoscopic technology and theories through their disputes.

Main Methods:

  • Historical analysis of scientific publications and correspondence between Wheatstone and Brewster.
Keywords:
BrewsterChimentiWheatstonebinocular rivalry

More Related Videos

Doppler Optical Coherence Tomography of Retinal Circulation
10:46

Doppler Optical Coherence Tomography of Retinal Circulation

Published on: September 18, 2012

19.2K
Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres
06:35

Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres

Published on: February 2, 2015

17.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 3, 2026

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry
14:34

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry

Published on: November 10, 2010

76.5K
Doppler Optical Coherence Tomography of Retinal Circulation
10:46

Doppler Optical Coherence Tomography of Retinal Circulation

Published on: September 18, 2012

19.2K
Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres
06:35

Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres

Published on: February 2, 2015

17.7K
  • Examination of early stereoscopic devices (mirror and lenticular stereoscopes) and visual stimuli.
  • Review of perceptual portraits and anaglyphs illustrating binocular contour rivalry.

    • Main Results:

    • Wheatstone and Brewster had diverging theories on the processing of binocular contour rivalry (central vs. peripheral).
    • Their personal and professional rivalry influenced the development and reception of stereoscopic technologies.
    • Disputes over priority and the interpretation of visual phenomena characterized their scientific interactions.

    Conclusions:

    • The rivalry between Wheatstone and Brewster significantly impacted the early understanding of stereoscopic vision and binocular rivalry.
    • Their differing approaches to visual processing laid groundwork for future research in the field.
    • Historical analysis of their interactions provides insights into the nature of scientific progress and collaboration.