2

I saw the following sentence from Time, and have been wondering whether 'which could have had an impact' is the correct choice rather than 'which could have an impact'.

The first study did not control the intake of the participants, which could have an impact on their findings...

http://time.com/2838453/everything-you-know-about-breakfast-is-wrong/

  • I think Time dropped the ball here. The phrase you use should have been used. – anongoodnurse Jun 9 '14 at 4:18
  • They do not mean the same, and the author meant to say could have, not could have had. That's it. – Kris Jun 9 '14 at 5:22
  • 1
    The first (independent) clause is determined by historical and discourse context. If there isn't context such as 'The reviewers put forward the following argument. The first study had not controlled...' the past simple is the correct choice. // The choice of 'which could have an impact on their findings' is obviously required if the data hasn't yet been analysed. If it has been analysed, 'could have had' is licensed as they've done their 'finding' (ie drawn their conclusions), but so is 'could have an impact' (= influence, inform) as their findings are still around in the public domain. – Edwin Ashworth Jun 9 '14 at 6:32
1

"Which could have" in this case would indicate that the impact is still to come.

If the study has concluded then "Could have had" would be much more appropriate.

1

If the study is still in progress, could have an impact is correct. If, however, the study has ended and all information has been collected from the participants, you are correct in believing that which could have had an impact is the correct choice.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.