| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.910 | -0.514 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.146 | -0.126 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-1.356 | -0.566 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.545 | -0.415 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.434 | 0.594 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.799 | 0.284 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.275 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.220 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.371 | 0.027 |
Macalester College demonstrates an exceptionally strong profile in scientific integrity, with an overall risk score of -0.480 that indicates robust internal governance and a culture of responsible research. The institution exhibits very low to non-existent risk levels in critical areas such as the Rate of Institutional Self-Citation, Rate of Hyperprolific Authors, and Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals, showcasing a commitment to external validation and quality. The primary area for strategic consideration is the moderate risk associated with the gap between its total scientific impact and the impact of research where it holds leadership, a metric where the college shows higher exposure than the national average. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the college's scholarly strengths are particularly notable in Arts and Humanities, Earth and Planetary Sciences, and Social Sciences. This outstanding integrity profile directly supports the college's mission to uphold "high standards for scholarship" and "service to society," as ethical conduct is the bedrock of academic excellence and public trust. The identified impact gap does not contradict the mission's emphasis on "internationalism" but rather invites a strategic focus on deepening internal research capacity to complement its successful collaborations. By leveraging its profound integrity as a foundation, Macalester College is perfectly positioned to enhance its research leadership while continuing to serve as a model of scholarly responsibility.
The institution presents a Z-score of -0.910, significantly lower than the national average of -0.514. This result demonstrates a clear and transparent approach to academic collaboration, showing no signs of risk. While multiple affiliations can be a legitimate outcome of partnerships, the college's very low rate confirms that its institutional credit is not being strategically inflated through "affiliation shopping," reflecting a straightforward and ethical representation of its collaborative footprint.
With a Z-score of -0.146, the institution's performance is statistically aligned with the national average of -0.126. This correspondence indicates a normal and expected level of scientific correction for an institution of its context and size. The data does not suggest any systemic failure in pre-publication quality control; rather, it reflects a responsible engagement with the scientific process, where the occasional correction of unintentional errors is a sign of a healthy and functioning academic environment.
The institution's Z-score of -1.356 is exceptionally low, positioning it well below the national average of -0.566. This outstanding result signals a strong outward-looking research culture that actively avoids scientific isolation. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the college's minimal rate demonstrates that its academic influence is built on broad recognition from the global community rather than being inflated by internal "echo chambers," ensuring its work is validated through robust external scrutiny.
The institution shows a Z-score of -0.545, indicating a near-total absence of this risk and performing even better than the very low national average of -0.415. This operational silence is a critical indicator of excellent due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It confirms that the college's research output is consistently directed toward reputable venues, effectively protecting its resources and reputation from the severe risks associated with 'predatory' or low-quality publishing practices.
Macalester College maintains a low-risk Z-score of -0.434 in a national context where this indicator shows moderate risk (Z-score of 0.594). This demonstrates institutional resilience and effective control mechanisms that mitigate broader systemic trends. The college successfully distinguishes between necessary, large-scale collaboration and practices like author list inflation or 'honorary' authorships, thereby preserving individual accountability and transparency in its scholarly contributions.
The institution's Z-score of 0.799 is in the medium-risk range and notably higher than the national average of 0.284, marking this as an area for strategic review. This wide positive gap suggests that while the college's overall scientific impact is significant, its prestige may be highly dependent on external partners, with a lower impact observed in research where it exercises direct intellectual leadership. This signals a potential sustainability risk, inviting reflection on how to build more structural, endogenous capacity to ensure that its high citation metrics translate into long-term, self-sustaining academic excellence.
With an exceptionally low Z-score of -1.413, far below the national average of -0.275, the institution shows no signs of risk related to hyperprolific authors. This indicates a healthy balance between productivity and quality. The absence of authors with extreme publication volumes suggests a culture that prioritizes meaningful intellectual contribution over metric-driven outputs, effectively avoiding risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, thus safeguarding the integrity of its scientific record.
The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is in perfect synchrony with the national average of -0.220, both of which are in the very low-risk category. This alignment demonstrates a strong commitment to global standards of scholarly communication. By avoiding over-reliance on in-house journals, the college ensures its research undergoes independent external peer review, which prevents potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. This practice maximizes the global visibility and competitive validation of its scientific production.
The institution exhibits a low-risk Z-score of -0.371, contrasting favorably with the moderate-risk national average of 0.027. This suggests the presence of effective institutional resilience against the practice of 'salami slicing.' While the national environment shows some vulnerability to data fragmentation, the college's profile indicates a focus on publishing coherent, significant studies. This approach avoids artificially inflating productivity metrics and contributes more meaningfully to the scientific record, preventing an overburdening of the peer-review system.
