Universitat Rovira i Virgili

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

The Universitat Rovira i Virgili demonstrates an outstanding scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.357 that indicates robust and responsible research practices, significantly exceeding the national standard in key areas. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of Retracted Output, Redundant Output, and Output in Institutional Journals, signaling a deeply embedded culture of quality control and commitment to external validation. The only area requiring observation is a moderate, yet well-managed, rate of Hyper-Authored Output. This strong integrity framework directly supports the university's thematic excellence, particularly in high-impact fields where it ranks among Spain's elite, such as Environmental Science (5th), Energy (9th), and Chemistry (13th), according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. This performance is in perfect alignment with the institutional mission to generate knowledge for the "benefit of society" and shape a "fair and pluralistic society." By ensuring the reliability and transparency of its scientific output, the university guarantees that its contributions are trustworthy and genuinely advance social progress, reinforcing its role as a key actor in regional and global development. Maintaining this focus on ethical research practices will be crucial to consolidating its leadership and fulfilling its societal commitments.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

With a Z-score of -0.637, which is lower than the national average of -0.476, the institution exhibits a prudent and well-managed approach to author affiliations. This demonstrates more rigorous oversight than the national standard, suggesting that policies are in place to ensure transparency and prevent the strategic inflation of institutional credit. The university's controlled rate indicates that its collaborative framework is clear and less susceptible to "affiliation shopping," thereby reinforcing the credibility of its partnerships and institutional statistics.

Rate of Retracted Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.447 reflects a very low incidence of retracted publications, consistent with the low-risk national environment (Z-score -0.174) but indicating even stronger performance. This absence of significant risk signals suggests that the university's quality control mechanisms prior to publication are highly effective. This performance is a hallmark of a mature integrity culture, where methodological rigor and responsible supervision successfully prevent the systemic failures that a higher rate of retractions might otherwise reveal.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university maintains a Z-score of -0.116 for institutional self-citation, a more conservative figure than the national average of -0.045. This prudent profile indicates that the institution manages its citation practices with greater rigor than its peers. By avoiding disproportionately high rates, the university ensures it is not operating in a scientific 'echo chamber' and that its academic influence is validated by the broader global community rather than being inflated by endogamous internal dynamics, reflecting a healthy integration into international research conversations.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

With a Z-score of -0.317, lower than the national average of -0.276, the institution demonstrates a more rigorous profile in its selection of publication venues. This indicates a strong commitment to due diligence, effectively steering its researchers away from channels that do not meet international ethical or quality standards. This careful management protects the institution from the severe reputational risks associated with 'predatory' or low-quality publishing and ensures that its scientific output appears in credible and enduring outlets.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution presents a Z-score of 0.432 in a national context where the average is 0.497. This reflects a differentiated management approach, where the university successfully moderates a risk that is common throughout the country. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science' disciplines, the institution's ability to keep this rate below the national average suggests a greater awareness of the risks of author list inflation. This control helps maintain individual accountability and transparency, distinguishing necessary large-scale collaboration from potentially problematic honorary authorship practices.

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

The institution shows remarkable resilience with a Z-score of -0.260, in stark contrast to the national average of 0.185, which signals a dependency on external partners for impact. The university's low-risk score indicates that its scientific prestige is structurally sound and built upon genuine internal capacity. This demonstrates that its high-impact research is a result of its own intellectual leadership, ensuring a sustainable model of excellence that is not contingent on the strategic positioning within collaborations led by others.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of -0.326, the institution's rate of hyperprolific authors is slightly more pronounced than the national average of -0.391, signaling an area of incipient vulnerability. Although the overall risk remains low, this subtle deviation warrants review. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may point to imbalances between quantity and quality. Monitoring this trend is advisable to preemptively address any potential risks, such as coercive authorship or metric-driven behaviors that could compromise the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The university’s Z-score of -0.268 marks a state of preventive isolation from a national trend where publishing in institutional journals is a moderate risk (country Z-score 0.278). This very low rate demonstrates a firm commitment to independent, external peer review, effectively avoiding the conflicts of interest and academic endogamy that can arise from acting as both judge and party. This strategy significantly enhances the global visibility and competitive validation of its research, reinforcing its credibility on the international stage.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution exhibits an exceptionally low Z-score of -0.781 for redundant output, performing significantly better than the already low-risk national average of -0.228. This near-total absence of risk signals provides strong evidence of a culture that prioritizes substantive scientific contributions over inflated publication counts. It indicates that the practice of 'salami slicing'—dividing a single study into minimal publishable units—is not a feature of the institution's research environment, thereby protecting the integrity of the scientific evidence it produces.