| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
0.225 | -0.073 |
|
Retracted Output
|
1.300 | -0.152 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.511 | -0.387 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.469 | -0.445 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.508 | 0.135 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.308 | 0.306 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.187 | -0.151 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.227 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.299 | -0.003 |
The Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (UQTR) presents a scientific integrity profile marked by significant strengths and specific, critical areas for strategic intervention. With an overall integrity score of 0.123, the institution demonstrates robust control in most areas, particularly in avoiding predatory publishing, hyperprolific authorship, and academic endogamy. These strengths provide a solid foundation for its research enterprise, which excels in key thematic areas according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, including top national rankings in Physics and Astronomy, Energy, Psychology, and Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics. However, this strong performance is contrasted by a significant alert in the Rate of Retracted Output and a moderate deviation in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations. These vulnerabilities directly challenge the core of UQTR's mission to ensure the quality and integrity of the "production, transfer and dissemination of knowledge." To fully align its practices with its mission of excellence and social responsibility, the institution must address these integrity gaps. By leveraging its clear areas of good governance, UQTR can implement targeted quality control and affiliation policies, thereby reinforcing its reputation as a world-class institution rooted in its community.
The institution's Z-score of 0.225 indicates a moderate deviation from the national standard, where the Z-score is -0.073. This suggests that UQTR shows a greater sensitivity to risk factors associated with multiple affiliations than its Canadian peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the higher rate at the institution warrants a closer look. It is important to ascertain whether this pattern reflects a vibrant, collaborative network that aligns with its mission to be "resolutely connected to the world," or if it signals strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through practices like “affiliation shopping.” A review of affiliation policies could ensure that all declared connections represent substantive contributions.
A Z-score of 1.300 in this indicator represents a severe discrepancy from the national context, which has a low-risk score of -0.152. This risk activity is highly atypical for the country and requires a deep integrity assessment. Retractions are complex events, but a rate this significantly higher than the average alerts to a critical vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture. It suggests that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically, indicating possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that goes beyond isolated, honest errors. This finding demands immediate qualitative verification by management to diagnose the root causes and protect the credibility of the institution's research output.
UQTR demonstrates a prudent profile in this area, with a Z-score of -0.511 that is even lower than the national average of -0.387. This indicates that the institution manages its citation practices with more rigor than the national standard. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but UQTR's low rate confirms that its research is being validated externally and is not confined to an 'echo chamber.' This practice avoids the risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence is genuinely recognized by the global community rather than being oversized by internal dynamics.
The institution exhibits integrity synchrony with the national environment, with its Z-score of -0.469 being in total alignment with the country's score of -0.445. This shared position at a very low-risk level demonstrates a robust and widespread due diligence in the selection of dissemination channels. This alignment confirms that UQTR's researchers, like their peers across Canada, are effectively avoiding media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards. This protects the institution from reputational risks and ensures that research efforts are not wasted on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.
With a Z-score of -0.508, UQTR shows strong institutional resilience compared to the national Z-score of 0.135. This suggests that while there may be a systemic tendency towards hyper-authorship in the country, the institution's internal control mechanisms appear to successfully mitigate this risk. In fields outside of 'Big Science,' extensive author lists can dilute individual accountability. UQTR's low score indicates a healthy research culture that effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship practices, thereby preserving transparency and accountability.
The institution's Z-score of 0.308 is nearly identical to the national average of 0.306, reflecting a systemic pattern common throughout the Canadian research landscape. This indicates that, like its peers, a notable gap exists where the institution's overall impact is higher than the impact of the research it leads directly. This dynamic suggests that a portion of its scientific prestige is dependent and exogenous, stemming from collaborations where UQTR does not exercise primary intellectual leadership. This invites a strategic reflection on how to bolster internal capacity to ensure that excellence metrics are increasingly driven by structural, home-grown research leadership.
The institution's Z-score of -1.187 demonstrates a low-profile consistency, as the complete absence of risk signals aligns perfectly with the low-risk national standard (Z-score: -0.151). Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may point to imbalances between quantity and quality. UQTR's exceptionally low score in this area indicates a research environment that prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record over the inflation of productivity metrics, successfully avoiding risks such as coercive or unmerited authorship.
UQTR's Z-score of -0.268 shows integrity synchrony with the national score of -0.227, indicating total alignment with an environment of maximum scientific security in this regard. This demonstrates a shared national practice of not relying on in-house journals, which can create conflicts of interest where an institution acts as both judge and party. By favoring external, independent peer review, UQTR avoids the risk of academic endogamy, enhances the global visibility of its research, and ensures its scientific production undergoes standard competitive validation.
The institution maintains a prudent profile, with a Z-score of -0.299 that is significantly lower than the national average of -0.003. This suggests that UQTR manages its publication processes with more rigor than the national standard. A high rate of bibliographic overlap can indicate 'salami slicing,' where studies are fragmented to artificially inflate productivity, a practice that distorts scientific evidence. UQTR's low score points to an institutional culture that values the publication of coherent, significant new knowledge over sheer volume, thereby upholding the integrity of the scientific record.
