{"id":39454,"date":"2017-06-22T09:24:39","date_gmt":"2017-06-22T08:24:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/?p=39454"},"modified":"2017-06-22T09:24:54","modified_gmt":"2017-06-22T08:24:54","slug":"neville-goodmans-metaphor-watch-i-want-a-negative-effect-on-impact","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2017\/06\/22\/neville-goodmans-metaphor-watch-i-want-a-negative-effect-on-impact\/","title":{"rendered":"Neville Goodman&#8217;s metaphor watch: I want a negative effect on impact"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2015\/02\/neville_goodman.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-33270\" src=\"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/files\/2015\/02\/neville_goodman-150x150.jpg\" alt=\"neville_goodman\" width=\"150\" height=\"150\" \/><\/a><em>Impact<\/em> is not an old word, unlike its close relative <em>effect<\/em>. The <em>OED<\/em> credits Chaucer with the first use of <em>effect<\/em>, at the end of the 14<sup>th<\/sup> century. <em>Impact<\/em> is four centuries later, and is a particular type of effect: a physical one. The first uses of <em>impact<\/em> were in the field of dynamics, in relation to momentum, and it came from the verb <em>impact<\/em>, which is much older. But after only 30 years as a noun, <em>impact<\/em> became just another word for <em>effect<\/em>. And in the last 30 years, both in general English and in medical English, <em>impact<\/em> has been gradually replacing <em>effect<\/em> (and <em>impact on<\/em> is replacing <em>affect<\/em>). As <em>impact<\/em> has a special meaning in dentistry and engineering relating to its literal meaning, its metaphorical meaning as just <em>effect<\/em> (the <em>OED<\/em> notes \u201c<em>fig<\/em>.\u201d) may cause a bit of confusion in those areas, but otherwise I suppose that\u2014much though I dislike it\u2014it makes little real difference that <em>impact<\/em> has usurped <em>effect<\/em> in \u201cthe impact of social network characteristics\u201d or \u201cto reduce the impact of these missing values\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Where the originally metaphorical <em>impact<\/em> has no place is in the awful phrase &#8220;have a negative impact.&#8221; It was almost unknown in English before 1960, but has become steadily more common since 1970. <em>Positive impact<\/em> has followed the same trajectory but is less common. Medical English mirrors this. In 2015, 0.2% of all PubMed\u00ae articles contained <em>negative impact<\/em>; 0.1% contained <em>positive impact<\/em>. The phrases are unknown in PubMed before 1973, when it first appeared as &#8220;could have a negative impact on fertility.&#8221; This means <em>could reduce fertility<\/em> but is four words longer, none of those words adding anything.<\/p>\n<p>Overall,<em> effect<\/em> is nearly four times more common than <em>impact<\/em> in PubMed, but this hides that in 1975 there were four effects to each impact whereas in 2016 there were only two. Oddly, though, this pattern is not followed for &#8220;negative effect&#8221; and &#8220;positive effect&#8221;, which, like their impact analogues, were almost unknown before 1970 and have more or less paralleled their rise. For what reason has <em>decrease<\/em> been replaced by <em>have a negative impact<\/em> (or <em>effect<\/em>) and <em>increase<\/em> by <em>have a positive impact<\/em>? Is there anyone who thinks these changes are for the better?<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019ve wandered from my metaphorical remit but, as my underlying aim is to make journals easier to read, I make no apology. Surely, <em>make it easier to select <\/em>is better than &#8220;<em>should have a positive impact on the selection of<\/em> proper antiviral medication for patients&#8221;? Would anyone say, &#8220;TENS appeared to have a positive effect on cognition&#8221; instead of &#8220;<em>TENS appeared to improve cognition&#8221;<\/em>? How easy is it to work out that &#8220;a strong negative effect on the growth recovery&#8221; means <em>growth recovered far less well<\/em>? Overactive bladder syndrome is a nuisance, but how many patients would agree that it &#8220;has <em>a negative impact on <\/em>quality of life&#8221; rather than <em>reducing<\/em> quality of life? Except that the patients are more likely to say that it <em>makes life less worth living<\/em>, a phrase that encapsulates the misery of incontinence far better than <em>having a negative impact on the quality of life<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p><em><strong>Neville Goodman<\/strong> is a retired consultant anaesthetist and a writer. He is co-author of a book on medical English.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><strong>Competing interests:<\/strong> I have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare that my only competing interest is my co-authorship of a book about medical English.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Impact is not an old word, unlike its close relative effect. The OED credits Chaucer with the first use of effect, at the end of the 14th century. Impact is four centuries later, and is a particular type of effect: a physical one. The first uses of impact were in the field of dynamics, in [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p><a class=\"btn btn-secondary understrap-read-more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/2017\/06\/22\/neville-goodmans-metaphor-watch-i-want-a-negative-effect-on-impact\/\">Read More&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5763],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-39454","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-metaphor-watch"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39454","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=39454"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39454\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39454"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39454"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/bmj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39454"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}