University of Nova Gorica

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

The University of Nova Gorica demonstrates a robust overall scientific integrity profile, reflected in a low global risk score of 0.159. The institution's primary strengths lie in its rigorous selection of publication venues and its commitment to external validation, showing exceptionally low risk in output published in discontinued journals or its own institutional journals, and prudent management of self-citation and redundant publications. These practices significantly outperform national averages. However, this strong foundation is contrasted by critical challenges in authorship practices, with a significant alert for hyper-authorship and medium-level risks related to hyper-prolific authors and a dependency on external collaborations for impact. These vulnerabilities require strategic attention to ensure they do not undermine the institution's mission to be a "research oriented" university built on a "harmonious relationship between students and researchers." The University's recognized excellence in thematic areas such as Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, and Earth and Planetary Sciences—where it ranks second in Slovenia according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data—provides a solid platform for this work. By addressing authorship and impact-dependency issues, the University can fully align its operational practices with its stated values of excellence and integrity, securing its long-term reputation and research sustainability.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The University of Nova Gorica has a Z-score of -0.104, slightly higher than the national average of -0.470. Although both values fall within a low-risk range, the institution's score suggests an incipient vulnerability that warrants monitoring. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, this slight upward trend compared to the national context could signal the early stages of strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through “affiliation shopping.” A proactive review of affiliation policies is advisable to ensure that all declared affiliations reflect substantive and transparent collaborations.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.475, the institution demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of retracted publications, performing better than the national average of -0.299. This low-profile consistency indicates that the institution's internal quality control and supervision mechanisms are robust and effective, aligning with or exceeding the national standard. The absence of significant risk signals in this area suggests that research is conducted with high methodological rigor, and that pre-publication checks are successfully preventing systemic errors or malpractice, thereby safeguarding the institution's scientific credibility.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution exhibits a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.562, which is significantly lower than the national average of -0.022. This indicates that the University manages its citation practices with more rigor than the national standard, effectively avoiding the risks of scientific isolation. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but this low value demonstrates that the institution's work is validated by the broader scientific community, not just within an internal 'echo chamber.' This commitment to external scrutiny reinforces the global recognition of its academic influence and mitigates any risk of endogamous impact inflation.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The University of Nova Gorica shows a Z-score of -0.419, reflecting a near-total absence of publications in discontinued journals and performing even better than the low-risk national average of -0.338. This operational silence is a strong indicator of excellent due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It confirms that the institution's researchers are well-informed and avoid channeling their work through media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards. This practice protects the University from severe reputational risks and demonstrates an efficient use of resources, steering clear of 'predatory' or low-quality publishing.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of 6.101, the institution presents a significant risk level that sharply contrasts with the medium-risk national average of 0.595. This value indicates a severe accentuation of a national vulnerability, positioning the University as a critical outlier. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science' disciplines, such an extreme score demands an urgent investigation into authorship practices. It raises a red flag for potential author list inflation, which dilutes individual accountability and transparency. It is crucial to distinguish between necessary massive collaboration and 'honorary' or political authorship practices that could compromise the integrity of the institution's research record.

Gap between Impact of total output and the impact of output with leadership

The institution has a Z-score of 1.875, indicating a higher exposure to this risk compared to the national average of 0.586. While both operate within a medium-risk context, the University's wider gap suggests a greater dependency on external partners for achieving high-impact research. This signals a potential sustainability risk, as its scientific prestige may be more exogenous than structural. This finding invites a strategic reflection on whether the institution's excellence metrics stem from its own internal capacity and intellectual leadership or from its positioning in collaborations where it plays a secondary role. Strengthening internal research leadership is key to ensuring long-term scientific autonomy.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The University of Nova Gorica shows a Z-score of 0.703, a medium-risk signal that represents a moderate deviation from the low-risk national standard of -0.712. This discrepancy suggests the institution is more sensitive to risk factors related to extreme productivity than its national peers. While high productivity can reflect leadership, publication volumes that challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution warrant a review. This indicator alerts to potential imbalances between quantity and quality, pointing to risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation—dynamics that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution demonstrates a clear preventive isolation from a risk that is present at the national level, where the average score is 1.334. This outstanding result shows that the University does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment. By avoiding dependence on in-house journals, the institution effectively sidesteps conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. This commitment to independent, external peer review ensures that its scientific production is validated through competitive international channels, enhancing its global visibility and credibility.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution maintains a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.379, well below the national average of -0.044. This demonstrates that the University manages its publication strategy with more rigor than the national standard, actively discouraging data fragmentation. The low incidence of bibliographic overlap suggests a focus on producing substantive, coherent studies rather than artificially inflating productivity by dividing research into 'minimal publishable units.' This practice reflects a commitment to generating significant new knowledge and respecting the scientific review system.