Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy social science: towards codes of practice for appropriate methods and research design

A series of weaknesses in creativity, research design, and quality of writing continue to handicap energy social science. Many studies ask uninteresting research questions, make only marginal contributions, and lack innovative methods or application to theory. Many studies also have no explicit research design, lack rigor, or suffer from mangled structure and poor quality of writing. To help remedy these shortcomings, this Review offers suggestions for how to construct research questions; thoughtfully engage with concepts; state objectives; and appropriately select research methods. Then, the Review offers suggestions for enhancing theoretical, methodological, and empirical novelty. In terms of rigor, codes of practice are presented across seven method categories: experiments, literature reviews, data collection, data analysis, quantitative energy modeling, qualitative analysis, and case studies. We also recommend that researchers beware of hierarchies of evidence utilized in some disciplines, and that researchers place more emphasis on balance and appropriateness in research design. In terms of style, we offer tips regarding macro and microstructure and analysis, as well as coherent writing. Our hope is that this Review will inspire more interesting, robust, multi-method, comparative, interdisciplinary and impactful research that will accelerate the contribution that energy social science can make to both theory and practice

Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease

A meta-analysis was conducted on 35 trials involving 10,703 individuals who had experienced a myocardial infarction and were randomised to an intervention involving some form of psychological therapy. Ten of these studies involved individuals with confirmed psychiatric diagnoses. Moderate quality evidence found no reduction of risk for total mortality or revascularisation procedures in comparison to usual care. Low quality evidence found no risk reduction for non-fatal MI although there was a 21% reduction in cardiac mortality. There was also some evidence of benefit on measures of psychological morbidity including anxiety, depression, and stress. It is concluded that psychological interventions may reduce cardiac mortality, although stronger evidence is required before this can be definitively concluded. It is also not clear who benefits most from psychological interventions