Ming Chuan University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Ming Chuan University demonstrates a robust overall scientific integrity profile, reflected in its low global risk score of 0.158. This performance is anchored by exceptional strengths in multiple key areas, with six of the nine indicators registering at the 'very low' risk level. These include minimal rates of institutional self-citation, hyper-authorship, and hyperprolific authors, signaling a culture of external validation and responsible authorship. However, this strong foundation is contrasted by two significant vulnerabilities: a 'significant' risk in the Rate of Retracted Output and a 'medium' risk in the Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals. These specific issues require targeted intervention as they directly challenge the university's mission to achieve "excellence in teaching and learning" and "professionalism." While the institution showcases strong national rankings in areas such as Environmental Science, Energy, and Social Sciences according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the identified integrity risks could undermine its reputation and its goal of "internationalization." To fully align its operational practices with its strategic vision, the university is advised to focus on strengthening pre-publication quality control mechanisms and implementing stricter guidelines for journal selection, thereby safeguarding its academic excellence and global standing.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of -0.016, indicating a low-risk profile that contrasts favorably with the national average of 1.166, which falls into the medium-risk category. This suggests the presence of effective institutional resilience, where internal control mechanisms appear to successfully mitigate systemic risks that are more prevalent in the national context. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, disproportionately high rates can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit. Ming Chuan University's controlled rate indicates that its affiliation practices are well-managed, avoiding the reputational risks associated with "affiliation shopping" and reflecting a stable and transparent collaborative environment.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 1.479, the institution exhibits a significant risk level, a critical finding that accentuates a vulnerability present at a medium level across the country (Z-score: 0.051). This severe discrepancy suggests that the university's pre-publication quality control mechanisms may be failing more frequently than those of its national peers. Retractions are complex, but a rate this far above the average is a systemic alert. It points to a potential weakness in the institution's integrity culture, possibly involving recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that requires immediate and thorough qualitative verification by management to protect its scientific credibility.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university's Z-score of -0.887 places it in the very low-risk category, a position that is even more secure than the country's already low-risk average of -0.204. This demonstrates a low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals aligns perfectly with the national standard for integrity. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the institution's exceptionally low rate indicates a strong commitment to external validation and a healthy integration into the global scientific conversation. This performance effectively mitigates any concern about scientific isolation or 'echo chambers,' confirming that the institution's academic influence is validated by the broader research community, not just internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution shows a medium-risk Z-score of 0.499, representing a moderate deviation from the national standard, which sits at a low-risk Z-score of -0.165. This indicates that the university has a greater sensitivity to this particular risk factor than its peers. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This score suggests that a portion of the university's research is being channeled through media that may not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational harm and signaling an urgent need to enhance information literacy among its researchers to avoid predatory or low-quality publishing practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.257, the institution demonstrates a very low risk of hyper-authorship, performing significantly better than the national low-risk average of -0.671. This result shows a consistent and low-risk profile, aligning with and exceeding the national standard. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science,' their appearance elsewhere can indicate author list inflation. The university's very low score suggests that its authorship practices are transparent and well-governed, effectively distinguishing between necessary large-scale collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship, thereby upholding individual accountability.

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

The university's Z-score of -0.985 is in the very low-risk range, indicating a minimal gap and outperforming the country's low-risk average of -0.559. This demonstrates a consistent, low-risk profile that aligns with the national environment. A wide gap can signal that an institution's prestige is dependent on external partners rather than its own intellectual leadership. Ming Chuan University's very low score is a positive indicator of sustainability, suggesting that its scientific impact is structural and results from genuine internal capacity, rather than a strategic positioning in collaborations where it does not lead.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution exhibits a Z-score of -1.413, a very low-risk value that signifies a state of preventive isolation from a risk that is present at a medium level nationally (Z-score: 0.005). This result shows that the university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment. While high productivity can be legitimate, extreme publication volumes challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. The university's complete absence of this risk signal indicates a healthy institutional culture that prioritizes quality over quantity, effectively preventing potential issues like coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution registers a very low risk, a finding consistent with the low-risk national average of -0.075. This alignment demonstrates a shared standard of integrity regarding publication channels. Excessive dependence on in-house journals can create conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. The university's low score indicates a healthy preference for independent, external peer review, which enhances the global visibility and competitive validation of its research, avoiding the use of internal channels as potential 'fast tracks' to inflate academic records.

Rate of Redundant Output

The university's Z-score of -1.186 places it in the very low-risk category, a stronger performance than the country's low-risk average of -0.176. This demonstrates a consistent and commendable adherence to best practices, in line with the national standard. A high rate of bibliographic overlap can indicate 'salami slicing,' where studies are fragmented to artificially inflate productivity. The institution's very low score suggests a research culture that values the publication of significant, coherent studies over the maximization of output volume, thereby contributing robust and meaningful knowledge to the scientific record.