| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-1.308 | -0.514 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.090 | -0.126 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.384 | -0.566 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
0.048 | -0.415 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.941 | 0.594 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-0.324 | 0.284 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.275 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.220 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.197 | 0.027 |
The Citadel demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in a favorable overall score of -0.409. This performance is characterized by significant strengths in managing research practices, particularly in its very low rates of hyperprolific authorship and multiple affiliations, and its notable resilience against national trends in hyper-authorship, leadership impact dependency, and redundant publication. These positive indicators are consistent with the institution's recognized academic standing in areas such as Business, Management and Accounting, Mathematics, Psychology, and Social Sciences, as per SCImago Institutions Rankings data. This strong integrity framework fundamentally supports The Citadel's mission to instill "ethical and moral values" and "honor, duty, and respect." However, a notable vulnerability in the rate of publication in discontinued journals presents a direct challenge to this mission, suggesting a need for enhanced due diligence. By addressing this specific area, The Citadel can further align its operational practices with its core values, reinforcing its commitment to leadership and excellence in a secure and responsible research environment.
With an institutional Z-score of -1.308, significantly lower than the national average of -0.514, The Citadel demonstrates an exemplary standard in affiliation management. This result indicates a state of low-profile consistency, where the complete absence of risk signals surpasses even the low-risk national benchmark. This suggests that the institution's authorship practices are transparent and free from strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through "affiliation shopping," reinforcing a culture of clear and legitimate collaboration.
The institution's Z-score for retracted output is -0.090, which is statistically aligned with the national average of -0.126. This reflects a state of normality for its context, indicating that its rate of retractions does not suggest systemic failures. Retractions are complex events, and the current level is consistent with the responsible correction of unintentional errors rather than a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture or pre-publication quality control mechanisms.
The Citadel's Z-score of -0.384 for institutional self-citation, while within a low-risk band, is slightly higher than the national average of -0.566, signaling an incipient vulnerability. A certain level of self-citation is natural, reflecting ongoing research lines. However, this minor deviation warrants review to ensure the institution is not developing scientific 'echo chambers' that could lead to endogamous impact inflation. Proactive monitoring can ensure that the institution's academic influence continues to be validated by the global community rather than primarily by internal dynamics.
A Z-score of 0.048 for output in discontinued journals, in stark contrast to the country's very low-risk average of -0.415, constitutes a monitoring alert. This unusual risk level for the national standard demands a review of its causes. A high proportion of publications in such journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This finding indicates that a portion of scientific production may be channeled through media lacking international ethical or quality standards, exposing The Citadel to severe reputational risks and signaling an urgent need for improved information literacy to avoid predatory practices.
The institution exhibits a Z-score of -0.941, positioning it in a low-risk category, while the national average stands at a medium-risk 0.594. This demonstrates strong institutional resilience, suggesting that internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating the systemic risks of authorship inflation observed nationally. By maintaining low rates of hyper-authorship, The Citadel ensures greater individual accountability and transparency, successfully distinguishing between necessary large-scale collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship practices.
With a Z-score of -0.324, compared to the national average of 0.284, The Citadel shows significant institutional resilience in its research leadership. This low gap indicates that the institution's scientific prestige is built upon strong internal capacity and is not overly dependent on external partners for impact. This performance mitigates the sustainability risk of relying on exogenous prestige, confirming that its excellence metrics are a result of genuine intellectual leadership rather than just strategic positioning in collaborations.
The Citadel's Z-score of -1.413 is in the very low-risk category, far below the national average of -0.275. This low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals is well-aligned with the national standard, is a clear strength. It indicates that the institution fosters a research environment that prioritizes quality over sheer quantity, avoiding the risks associated with extreme publication volumes, such as coercive authorship or authorship assigned without meaningful intellectual contribution, thereby protecting the integrity of its scientific record.
The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is almost identical to the national average of -0.220, with both falling into the very low-risk category. This reflects a perfect integrity synchrony, showing total alignment with a national environment of maximum scientific security in this domain. By avoiding dependence on in-house journals, The Citadel effectively sidesteps potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review and achieves global visibility.
Displaying a Z-score of -0.197 against a national average of 0.027, The Citadel demonstrates institutional resilience in preventing data fragmentation. While the country shows a medium-risk tendency towards this practice, the institution's low score indicates that its researchers are not artificially inflating productivity by dividing studies into 'minimal publishable units.' This commitment to publishing significant, coherent bodies of work upholds the integrity of the scientific evidence base and avoids overburdening the peer-review system.
