Mondragon Unibertsitatea

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Mondragon Unibertsitatea presents a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.542 that indicates performance superior to the global average. The institution demonstrates significant strengths and operational excellence in a majority of the indicators analyzed, particularly in its capacity for intellectual leadership, control over authorship inflation, and responsible selection of publication venues. These strengths are reflected in its strong positioning in the SCImago Institutions Rankings, especially in key areas such as Mathematics (ranked 15th in Spain), Computer Science (21st), Engineering (31st), and Physics and Astronomy (33rd). However, two areas require strategic attention: a tendency towards institutional self-citation and patterns of redundant publication. These specific vulnerabilities could subtly undermine the institution's mission to achieve the "transformation of society through the generation and transfer of knowledge," as they suggest a potential for academic insularity that may limit the external validation and global impact essential for true societal contribution. By addressing these specific points, the University can further align its commendable research practices with its core cooperative values, ensuring its scientific output is not only prolific but also transparent, externally validated, and fully oriented towards sustainable progress.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution shows a Z-score of -0.956 (Very Low risk), which is notably lower than the national average of -0.476 (Low risk). This result demonstrates a consistent and low-risk profile, where the absence of problematic signals aligns with, and even improves upon, the national standard. While multiple affiliations can be a legitimate outcome of researcher mobility or partnerships, the university's very low rate indicates clear and transparent affiliation practices, effectively avoiding any perception of strategic "affiliation shopping" or attempts to artificially inflate institutional credit.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.437, the institution maintains a Very Low risk level, comfortably below the Spanish average of -0.174 (Low risk). This demonstrates a healthy alignment with the national context, indicating that the university's pre-publication quality control mechanisms are functioning effectively. Retractions can sometimes signify responsible supervision and the correction of honest errors, but the institution's minimal rate suggests a strong foundation of methodological rigor and an integrity culture that successfully prevents the systemic failures that can lead to a high volume of retracted work.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score of 0.083 places it in the Medium risk category, representing a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.045 (Low risk). This suggests the university shows a greater sensitivity to practices that can lead to scientific isolation compared to its national peers. While a certain degree of self-citation is natural to reflect ongoing research lines, this elevated rate warns of a potential for creating 'echo chambers' where work is validated internally without sufficient external scrutiny. This dynamic poses a risk of endogamous impact inflation, where the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal referencing rather than broader recognition from the global scientific community.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The university's Z-score in this area is -0.218 (Low risk), which is statistically similar to the national average of -0.276 (Low risk). This indicates a level of risk that is normal and expected for its context. However, the institution's score is slightly higher than the country's, pointing to an incipient vulnerability that warrants review before it escalates. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals can be a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. While the current level is low, it serves as a reminder of the importance of information literacy to avoid channeling resources into 'predatory' or low-quality media that do not meet international ethical standards.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

Mondragon Unibertsitatea shows a Z-score of -0.923 (Low risk), demonstrating significant institutional resilience when compared to the national average of 0.497 (Medium risk). This suggests that the university's internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating a systemic risk that is more prevalent across the country. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science', a high rate outside these contexts can indicate author list inflation. The institution's low score is a positive sign that it successfully distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship practices, thereby upholding individual accountability and transparency.

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

The institution exhibits an exceptionally strong performance with a Z-score of -1.829 (Very Low risk), creating a preventive isolation from the risk dynamics observed nationally, where the average is 0.185 (Medium risk). This result signals a highly sustainable and healthy research model. A wide positive gap often suggests that an institution's prestige is dependent on external partners rather than its own capabilities. In contrast, Mondragon Unibertsitatea's score indicates that its scientific prestige is structural and built upon genuine internal capacity, demonstrating that its excellence metrics are the result of its own intellectual leadership, not just strategic positioning in collaborations.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of -1.413, the institution is firmly in the Very Low risk category, far below the Spanish average of -0.391 (Low risk). This low-profile consistency reflects an environment where research productivity appears balanced and sustainable. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may signal imbalances between quantity and quality. The university's very low rate in this indicator suggests an absence of practices like coercive authorship or authorship assignment without real participation, reinforcing a culture that prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record over sheer metrics.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The university's Z-score of -0.268 (Very Low risk) indicates it has effectively isolated itself from a risk that is more common in its environment, as reflected by the national average of 0.278 (Medium risk). This demonstrates a clear commitment to external validation and global visibility. While in-house journals can be useful for local dissemination, an over-reliance on them can create conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. The institution's minimal use of such channels shows that its scientific production overwhelmingly undergoes independent external peer review, avoiding the use of internal 'fast tracks' and ensuring its research competes on a global stage.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of 0.607 corresponds to a Medium risk level, a notable deviation from the national low-risk average of -0.228. This indicates that the university is more exposed than its peers to practices associated with data fragmentation. Massive bibliographic overlap between publications often points to 'salami slicing,' where a single study is divided into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity metrics. This elevated value serves as an alert, as such practices can distort the scientific evidence and overburden the review system by prioritizing publication volume over the generation of significant new knowledge.