Kean University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Kean University demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.233 indicating performance that is slightly better than the global average. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptional governance over authorship practices and research sustainability, reflected in very low-risk indicators for hyper-authorship, hyper-prolificacy, redundant output, and a minimal gap between its overall impact and the impact of research under its direct leadership. These strengths are complemented by strong thematic positioning in areas such as Psychology, Economics, Econometrics and Finance, and Engineering, according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. However, moderate risk signals in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations and Rate of Retracted Output present a potential misalignment with the university's mission to foster "excellence" and "intellectual growth." These specific vulnerabilities could undermine the perceived rigor and transparency of the institution's scholarly contributions. To fully align its operational practices with its strategic vision, it is recommended that the university leverage its clear strengths in research culture to develop targeted policies and training that address these specific areas of moderate risk, thereby reinforcing its commitment to excellence with equity and integrity.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.097 contrasts with the national average of -0.514, indicating a moderate deviation from its peers. This suggests the university exhibits a greater sensitivity to risk factors associated with affiliation practices than is typical in the United States. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, this elevated rate warrants a review. It serves as a signal to ensure that all affiliations are transparent and reflect substantive collaboration, rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping,” which could compromise the integrity of its academic footprint.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 0.418 compared to the national average of -0.126, the university shows a greater incidence of retractions than its national counterparts. This moderate deviation suggests a potential vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture. Retractions are complex events, but a rate significantly higher than the norm can indicate that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically. This finding alerts to a possible lack of methodological rigor or recurring malpractice that requires immediate qualitative verification by management to protect the institution's reputation and ensure the reliability of its research.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution presents a Z-score of -0.463, which, while in the low-risk category, is slightly higher than the national average of -0.566. This subtle difference points to an incipient vulnerability that warrants monitoring before it escalates. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of research lines. However, this signal suggests a need for preventative oversight to avoid the development of scientific isolation or 'echo chambers' where the institution's work is validated without sufficient external scrutiny, which could lead to an endogamous inflation of its perceived academic influence.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.243, compared to the country's very low-risk score of -0.415, reveals a slight divergence. This indicates that the university shows minor but observable signals of publishing in discontinued journals, a risk that is largely absent in the rest of the country. This finding constitutes an alert regarding the need for enhanced due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It suggests an urgent need for improved information literacy among researchers to avoid channeling scientific production through media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards, thereby preventing reputational damage and the misallocation of resources to 'predatory' practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.260, the institution demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of hyper-authored publications, positioning it in a state of preventive isolation from the medium-risk dynamics observed nationally (Z-score: 0.594). This result is a clear indicator of strong internal governance and a research culture that values transparency and accountability in authorship. By avoiding the inflation of author lists, the institution ensures that credit is assigned appropriately and individual contributions remain clear, reflecting a commitment to responsible and ethical publication practices that stands out within its national context.

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

The institution exhibits a Z-score of -1.545, a very low-risk value that signifies a state of preventive isolation from the national trend (Z-score: 0.284). This outstanding result indicates that the university's scientific prestige is structural and generated by its own internal capacity. Unlike the national context, where impact is more dependent on external collaborations, Kean University's excellence metrics appear to result from genuine intellectual leadership. This demonstrates a sustainable and robust research ecosystem where the institution is not merely a participant but a driver of high-impact science.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.003 is in the very low-risk category, demonstrating a healthier profile than the already low-risk national standard of -0.275. This absence of risk signals aligns with a national environment of control but shows an even greater commitment to research quality. This indicator suggests a well-balanced academic environment where the focus is on meaningful intellectual contribution rather than sheer publication volume. It reflects a culture that successfully avoids the pressures that can lead to coercive authorship or the prioritization of metrics over the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution's activity is in perfect integrity synchrony with its national environment (Z-score: -0.220). This total alignment in a context of maximum scientific security demonstrates a strong commitment to external validation and global visibility. By avoiding dependence on in-house journals, the university effectively mitigates the risks of academic endogamy and conflicts of interest. This practice ensures that its scientific production consistently undergoes independent external peer review, reinforcing the credibility and competitiveness of its research on an international scale.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.582 places it in a state of preventive isolation from the medium-risk trend observed at the national level (Z-score: 0.027). This very low rate of redundant output is a significant strength, indicating that the university does not replicate the risk dynamics prevalent in its environment. It points to a robust institutional culture that prioritizes the publication of coherent, significant new knowledge over the artificial inflation of productivity through data fragmentation or 'salami slicing.' This practice upholds the integrity of the scientific evidence base and demonstrates respect for the academic review system.