Zhejiang Gongshang University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Zhejiang Gongshang University presents a robust and well-balanced scientific integrity profile, reflected in its overall score of -0.066. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in fostering sustainable, internally-led research, as evidenced by its exceptional performance in minimizing the gap between its total impact and the impact of its leadership-driven output. Further strengths include a very low risk of academic endogamy through institutional journals and well-managed authorship practices. However, this solid foundation is contrasted by areas requiring strategic attention, specifically a moderate deviation from national norms in the rates of retracted output, publications in discontinued journals, and multiple affiliations. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's academic excellence is most pronounced in fields such as Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Business, Management and Accounting, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics, and Psychology. While the institution's specific mission was not available for this analysis, the identified risks, particularly concerning retractions and questionable publication venues, could challenge universal academic goals of excellence and social responsibility by potentially undermining the credibility and long-term value of its research. We recommend a targeted review of the identified medium-risk areas to ensure that operational integrity fully aligns with the university's demonstrated academic strengths and strategic ambitions.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.005 places it in a medium-risk category, showing a moderate deviation from the low-risk national average of -0.062. This suggests the university is more sensitive to this risk factor than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of partnerships or researcher mobility, the higher rate at the institution compared to the national standard warrants a review. It is important to verify that these affiliations are substantive and not indicative of strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through practices like “affiliation shopping,” thereby ensuring that all credited collaborations reflect genuine scientific contribution.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 0.690, the institution exhibits a moderate deviation from the national benchmark, which sits in a low-risk zone at -0.050. This discrepancy suggests that the university's pre-publication quality control mechanisms may be facing systemic challenges compared to the rest of the country. A rate significantly higher than the average alerts to a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture. This may indicate recurring methodological weaknesses or a lack of rigorous supervision, and calls for immediate qualitative verification by management to strengthen the processes that safeguard the scientific record.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university demonstrates strong institutional resilience in this area, with a low-risk Z-score of -0.298 that contrasts sharply with the medium-risk national average of 0.045. This indicates that the institution's control mechanisms are effectively mitigating a systemic risk present in its environment. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the national trend points toward a risk of 'echo chambers.' Zhejiang Gongshang University, however, successfully avoids this, suggesting its academic influence is validated by the broader global community rather than being inflated by endogamous internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 0.056 represents a moderate deviation from the national low-risk average of -0.024, indicating a greater sensitivity to this risk factor than its peers. This finding constitutes a critical alert regarding the due diligence applied in selecting dissemination channels. A high Z-score indicates that a significant portion of scientific production may be channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards. This exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy to prevent the waste of resources on 'predatory' or low-quality publication practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a very low Z-score of -1.282, the institution's performance aligns perfectly with the low-risk national standard (-0.721), demonstrating low-profile consistency. This absence of risk signals indicates that authorship practices are well-managed and transparent. This is a positive sign that the university effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and 'honorary' or political authorship, thereby preserving individual accountability and the integrity of its research contributions.

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

The university shows an exceptional performance in this indicator, with a Z-score of -1.800, signifying a total absence of risk signals and outperforming the already strong national average of -0.809. This result indicates that the institution's scientific prestige is not dependent on external partners but is driven by its own structural capacity and intellectual leadership. This reflects a highly sustainable research model where excellence is generated internally, ensuring long-term stability and autonomy in its scientific impact.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution exhibits notable institutional resilience, maintaining a low-risk Z-score of -0.676 while the national context shows a medium-risk trend (0.425). This suggests that the university's internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating a systemic risk. By keeping hyperprolificacy in check, the institution fosters a healthy balance between quantity and quality, successfully avoiding potential 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

The university's very low Z-score of -0.268 demonstrates low-profile consistency with the national low-risk environment (-0.010). This indicates a healthy and appropriate use of its in-house journals. By avoiding excessive dependence on these channels, the institution mitigates potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy. This commitment to external, independent peer review ensures its scientific production achieves greater global visibility and is validated through standard competitive processes.

Rate of Redundant Output

With a Z-score of -0.416, the institution shows a slight divergence from the national context, which is in a very low-risk zone (-0.515). Although the university's risk level is low, it is the first to show signals of this activity in an otherwise inert environment. This serves as an early warning to monitor for practices of data fragmentation or 'salami slicing,' where a single study might be divided into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity. Proactive attention to this indicator can prevent the distortion of scientific evidence and ensure research contributions remain significant.