Francisk Skorina Gomel State University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Francisk Skorina Gomel State University presents a profile of pronounced contrasts, marked by areas of exceptional scientific integrity alongside critical vulnerabilities that require immediate attention. With an overall integrity score of 0.136, the institution demonstrates significant strengths in preventing questionable publication practices, such as the use of discontinued journals, hyperprolific authorship, and excessive reliance on institutional journals, where it performs significantly better than the national average. These strengths are foundational to its notable academic achievements, particularly its high national ranking in Mathematics as per SCImago Institutions Rankings data. However, this positive performance is severely counterbalanced by significant risks in Institutional Self-Citation and Redundant Output (Salami Slicing), which are alarmingly high. These practices directly threaten any institutional mission centered on academic excellence and social responsibility, as they suggest a focus on inflating metrics over generating genuine, externally validated knowledge. To secure its reputation and build upon its disciplinary strengths, the university is advised to leverage its robust governance in certain areas to implement targeted interventions that address the critical issues of self-referentiality and publication fragmentation.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution exhibits a Z-score of 0.122, which represents a moderate deviation from the national context where the average Z-score is -0.749. This suggests the university shows a greater sensitivity to risk factors related to affiliation practices than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the observed divergence from the national norm warrants a review. It is important to ensure that this trend reflects genuine collaboration rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or "affiliation shopping," which could misrepresent the university's research footprint.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.193, the university demonstrates a low-risk profile that contrasts favorably with the country's medium-risk average of 0.304. This indicates a notable degree of institutional resilience, where internal quality control mechanisms appear to be successfully mitigating the systemic risks observed elsewhere in the country. This strong performance suggests that the university's pre-publication review processes are effective and that its integrity culture promotes responsible supervision, allowing for the honest correction of errors without escalating to a level that would indicate systemic malpractice.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university's Z-score for this indicator is 3.025, a significant-risk value that sharply accentuates the medium-risk vulnerability already present in the national system (Z-score of 0.846). This disproportionately high rate signals a critical risk of scientific isolation and the formation of an 'echo chamber' where the institution validates its own work without sufficient external scrutiny. Such a high value is a serious warning of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's perceived academic influence may be artificially oversized by internal dynamics rather than by genuine recognition from the global scientific community, demanding an urgent review of citation practices.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution demonstrates an exemplary low-risk profile with a Z-score of -0.448, performing even better than the low-risk national average of -0.312. This low-profile consistency shows that the absence of risk signals is in full alignment with the national standard. This performance indicates robust due diligence in selecting dissemination channels, effectively protecting the university from the severe reputational risks associated with publishing in media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards. It reflects a strong institutional awareness and literacy regarding the dangers of 'predatory' practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -0.950, the university maintains a low-risk profile, standing in positive contrast to the national medium-risk average of 0.914. This suggests strong institutional resilience, where control mechanisms effectively mitigate the systemic risks of authorship inflation seen across the country. The university's performance indicates a clear ability to distinguish between necessary massive collaboration in "Big Science" contexts and inappropriate 'honorary' or political authorship practices, thereby preserving individual accountability and transparency in its research output.

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

The institution presents a Z-score of 0.413, a medium-risk signal that nonetheless demonstrates relative containment when compared to the critical national average of 3.283. Although risk signals for dependency exist, the university operates with more order and control than the national average. This suggests that while there is some reliance on external partners for impact, the institution manages this dependency far more effectively than its peers. This invites a strategic reflection on how to further strengthen internal capacity and ensure that its prestige is increasingly derived from research where it exercises direct intellectual leadership, thereby securing long-term sustainability.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The university shows a very low-risk Z-score of -1.413, a figure that is well below the already low-risk national average of -0.706. This low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals aligns with and improves upon the national standard, is a clear indicator of a healthy research environment. It suggests that the institutional culture prioritizes quality and meaningful intellectual contribution over sheer publication volume, successfully avoiding the potential for imbalances that can lead to coercive authorship or other practices that compromise the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution demonstrates a state of preventive isolation from a risk that is moderately prevalent at the national level (Z-score of 1.464). The university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment, indicating a strong commitment to external validation. By avoiding excessive dependence on in-house journals, the institution effectively sidesteps potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. This ensures its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, which is essential for achieving global visibility and competitive validation.

Rate of Redundant Output

This indicator represents a critical vulnerability, with the institution's Z-score of 6.297 reaching a significant-risk level that drastically amplifies the medium-risk trend seen nationally (Z-score of 1.973). This extremely high value is a major red flag, alerting to the probable systemic practice of dividing coherent studies into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity metrics. This dynamic of 'salami slicing' not only distorts the available scientific evidence and overburdens the peer-review system but also signals a culture that may prioritize volume over the generation of significant new knowledge, requiring urgent and decisive intervention.