| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
2.573 | -0.220 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.371 | -0.311 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.109 | -0.125 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.545 | -0.469 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-1.125 | 0.010 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.910 | 0.186 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.715 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.268 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-1.186 | 0.719 |
Hadassah Academic College demonstrates a robust overall scientific integrity profile, reflected in a global score of -0.196. This performance indicates a solid foundation of responsible research practices, with exceptional strengths in areas that signal a commitment to quality over quantity. The institution shows very low risk in critical indicators such as publication in discontinued journals, hyper-authorship, hyperprolific authors, and redundant output, often outperforming the national standard and showcasing strong internal governance. However, areas requiring strategic attention include the rates of multiple affiliations and institutional self-citation, and particularly the gap between its total research impact and the impact of work where it holds intellectual leadership. These medium-risk signals suggest a potential dependency on external collaborations for prestige and a tendency towards internal validation. This profile is contextualized by the College's recognized academic standing in key thematic areas, including Psychology and Social Sciences, as per SCImago Institutions Rankings data. To fully realize its mission of achieving "excellence in higher education" and preparing students for "successful careers," it is crucial to address these vulnerabilities. An over-reliance on external leadership or insular citation patterns could subtly undermine the goal of fostering self-sustaining academic achievement and providing students with skills rooted in genuine, internally-driven innovation. A strategic focus on strengthening independent research capacity will ensure the College's operational integrity fully aligns with its commendable mission, transforming areas of moderate risk into pillars of institutional strength.
Hadassah Academic College presents a Z-score of 2.573 in this area, a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.220. This difference suggests the institution has a greater sensitivity to risk factors than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the College's higher rate warrants a review to ensure these practices are primarily driven by genuine scientific partnership rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or “affiliation shopping,” a dynamic less prevalent across the country.
The institution maintains a prudent profile with a Z-score of -0.371, slightly more rigorous than the national standard of -0.311. This indicates that the College's quality control mechanisms are managed with exceptional care. Retractions can be complex events, but a consistently low rate, even when compared to an already low national baseline, suggests that processes for responsible supervision and pre-publication review are not only effective but may exceed the common standard, reinforcing a culture of integrity.
With a Z-score of 0.109, the College shows a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.125, indicating a greater sensitivity to this risk factor than its peers. A certain level of self-citation is natural, reflecting the continuity of research lines. However, this elevated rate could signal a concerning tendency towards scientific isolation or an 'echo chamber' where the institution validates its own work without sufficient external scrutiny. This pattern warns of a potential risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be disproportionately shaped by internal dynamics rather than broader recognition from the global community.
The College exhibits total operational silence in this indicator, with a Z-score of -0.545 that is even lower than the national average of -0.469. This absence of risk signals, surpassing the already high national standard, points to an exceptionally rigorous due diligence process in selecting dissemination channels. This practice effectively shields the institution from the severe reputational risks associated with 'predatory' or low-quality journals and demonstrates a profound commitment to channeling its scientific production exclusively through media that meet international ethical and quality standards.
A significant strength is evident in the College's Z-score of -1.125, which reflects a state of preventive isolation from the national trend (Z-score: 0.010). While the country shows a medium level of hyper-authorship, the institution does not replicate these risk dynamics. This clear disconnection suggests that the College maintains robust and transparent authorship policies, effectively distinguishing between necessary massive collaboration and practices like 'honorary' or political authorship, thereby upholding individual accountability.
The institution shows high exposure to this risk, with a Z-score of 0.910, significantly higher than the national average of 0.186. Although both operate within a medium-risk context, the College is far more prone to this alert signal. This wide positive gap suggests that the institution's scientific prestige is heavily dependent and exogenous, not structural. It invites critical reflection on whether its high-impact metrics result from genuine internal capacity or from strategic positioning in collaborations where the College does not exercise intellectual leadership, posing a long-term risk to sustainable academic excellence.
The institution demonstrates low-profile consistency, with a Z-score of -1.413, indicating a complete absence of risk signals that aligns with and improves upon the low-risk national standard (Z-score: -0.715). This exceptionally low value is a positive indicator of a healthy balance between productivity and quality. It suggests that the institutional culture effectively discourages practices such as coercive authorship or assigning credit without real participation, prioritizing the integrity of the scientific record over the inflation of publication metrics.
There is perfect integrity synchrony between the College and the country, with both sharing an identical Z-score of -0.268. This total alignment reflects a shared environment of maximum scientific security against academic endogamy. By avoiding dependence on in-house journals, the institution ensures its scientific production consistently undergoes independent external peer review. This practice mitigates conflicts of interest and enhances the global visibility and competitive validation of its research, reinforcing its credibility on the international stage.
The College achieves a state of preventive isolation with a Z-score of -1.186, starkly contrasting with the medium-risk national environment (Z-score: 0.719). This demonstrates that the institution does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in the country. The near-total absence of this practice indicates a strong institutional commitment to publishing coherent, significant studies rather than fragmenting data into 'minimal publishable units' to artificially inflate productivity. This focus on substance over volume protects the integrity of the scientific evidence base and showcases a mature research culture.
