Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University presents a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in an overall risk score of -0.141. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in maintaining transparent and accountable research practices, particularly with very low risk levels in multiple affiliations, retracted output, hyper-authorship, and publications in institutional journals. These positive indicators are complemented by a prudent and sustainable research impact model. However, areas requiring strategic attention have been identified, notably a high exposure to redundant output (salami slicing) and a moderate deviation in hyperprolific authorship, which are more pronounced than national trends. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's key research strengths are concentrated in Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Social Sciences; Mathematics; and Computer Science. While the institution's overall performance is strong, the identified risks around publication strategies could undermine its mission to achieve the "highest International levels of excellence." Prioritizing volume over substance contradicts the pursuit of genuine scholarship and social application. By addressing these specific vulnerabilities, the University can fully align its operational practices with its aspirational mission, reinforcing its commitment to impactful and ethically sound research.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of -1.118, compared to the national average of -0.927, indicates a complete absence of risk signals in this area. This performance surpasses even the very low-risk standard observed across the country, suggesting total operational silence regarding questionable affiliation practices. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, disproportionately high rates sometimes signal attempts to inflate institutional credit. The University's exceptionally low score points to clear, transparent, and ethically managed collaboration and affiliation policies, ensuring that institutional credit is a direct reflection of genuine partnership and scholarly contribution.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.531 in an environment where the national average is 0.279, the institution demonstrates a powerful preventive isolation from the risk dynamics prevalent in the country. This very low rate of retractions signifies that the University does not replicate the systemic vulnerabilities observed nationally. A high rate of retractions can suggest that pre-publication quality control mechanisms are failing. In contrast, this result indicates that the institution possesses robust supervision and a strong integrity culture, effectively identifying and correcting potential errors before they escalate into formal retractions, thereby safeguarding its scientific record and reputation.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score of 0.098 is considerably lower than the national average of 0.520. Although both the center and the country fall within a medium-risk context, this comparison highlights a differentiated management approach by the University. It successfully moderates a risk that appears more common nationally, suggesting a healthier balance between building on its own research lines and engaging with the broader scientific community. A high rate can signal 'echo chambers' where work is validated without sufficient external scrutiny. The University's more controlled rate mitigates the risk of endogamous impact inflation, indicating its academic influence is less reliant on internal dynamics and more integrated with global scholarly dialogue.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution registers a Z-score of 0.685, while the national average stands at 1.099. This demonstrates a case of differentiated management, where the University effectively moderates risks that are common within the country. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. By maintaining a score significantly below the national average, the institution shows a more discerning approach, reducing its exposure to the severe reputational risks associated with predatory or low-quality publishing. Nevertheless, the medium risk level suggests that continued efforts in promoting information literacy among researchers would be beneficial.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.192 against a national average of -1.024, the institution exhibits a low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals aligns perfectly with the national standard. This very low score indicates that authorship practices are well-calibrated and transparent. In fields outside of 'Big Science,' high rates of hyper-authorship can signal author list inflation, which dilutes individual accountability. The University's excellent result suggests a culture where authorship is granted based on meaningful intellectual contribution, avoiding practices of 'honorary' or political authorship and reinforcing the integrity of its research teams.

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

The institution's Z-score of -0.745, compared to the national average of -0.292, reflects a prudent profile managed with more rigor than the national standard. A large positive gap can signal that an institution's prestige is overly dependent on external partners rather than its own structural capacity. The University's score indicates a healthy and sustainable balance, where the impact of its research is strongly supported by work in which it exercises intellectual leadership. This demonstrates robust internal capabilities and a research model that is both collaborative and self-sufficient, ensuring long-term scientific sustainability.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of 0.117 marks a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.067, indicating a greater sensitivity to this risk factor than its peers. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and often signal an imbalance between quantity and quality. This medium-risk alert suggests the presence of authorship patterns that warrant review, as they may point to practices such as coercive authorship or data fragmentation. It is an area where the University's profile differs from the national norm and requires closer examination to ensure that productivity metrics do not compromise the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is in near-perfect alignment with the national average of -0.250, demonstrating integrity synchrony with an environment of maximum scientific security. Excessive dependence on in-house journals can create conflicts of interest and academic endogamy by bypassing independent external peer review. The University's very low score confirms its commitment to global standards of validation, ensuring its scientific production is vetted by the international community. This practice enhances the credibility and visibility of its research and avoids the use of internal channels as 'fast tracks' for publication.

Rate of Redundant Output (Salami Slicing)

With a Z-score of 1.996, significantly higher than the national average of 0.720, the institution shows high exposure to this risk factor. This suggests it is more prone to showing alert signals for redundant publication than its environment. This practice, often called 'salami slicing,' involves fragmenting a single study into multiple minimal publications to artificially inflate productivity metrics. Such a high value is a critical alert, as it indicates a potential trend that distorts the available scientific evidence and prioritizes volume over the generation of significant new knowledge. This tendency is more accentuated at the institution than in the broader national system and calls for a strategic review of publication incentives and author guidelines.