Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara presents a strong but polarized scientific integrity profile, with an overall score of 1.044. The institution demonstrates exceptional governance in multiple core areas, showing very low risk in research leadership, authorship integrity, and publication endogamy. These strengths provide a solid foundation for credible research. However, this positive outlook is critically undermined by a significant-risk score in publications within discontinued journals, an area where the university not only follows a problematic national trend but amplifies it. Thematically, the institution showcases notable strengths, particularly in Environmental Science (ranked 8th nationally) and Arts and Humanities (10th nationally), according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data. This critical vulnerability in publication strategy directly threatens the university's mission to conduct research "based on Al-Islam and Muhammadiyah," as channeling work through low-quality or predatory venues compromises the pursuit of excellence and responsible community advancement. To fully align its practices with its mission, the university must urgently implement a targeted strategy to improve researchers' information literacy and enforce stricter due diligence in the selection of publication channels, thereby safeguarding its otherwise robust integrity framework.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of -0.061 is within the low-risk range, though slightly higher than the national average of -0.674. This subtle difference suggests an incipient vulnerability that warrants monitoring. While multiple affiliations are often legitimate, this minor elevation compared to the national baseline could indicate the early stages of practices like “affiliation shopping” to strategically inflate institutional credit. Although not currently an alert, it is a signal to ensure that all affiliations are substantively justified to maintain transparency and proper credit attribution.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.184, the institution demonstrates a low risk of retractions, contrasting sharply with the medium-risk national environment (Z-score: 0.065). This performance highlights a notable institutional resilience, where internal control mechanisms appear to successfully mitigate the systemic risks prevalent in the country. The low rate suggests that the university's quality control and supervision processes prior to publication are robust and effective. This is a sign of a healthy integrity culture, where potential errors are managed proactively rather than leading to systemic failures and subsequent retractions.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution registers a Z-score of 0.598, placing it in the medium-risk category, similar to the national context (Z-score: 1.821). However, the university's score is considerably lower than the country's average, indicating a differentiated management approach that successfully moderates a common national risk. While a certain level of self-citation is normal, the national trend points towards potential 'echo chambers.' The institution's ability to keep this rate below the national average suggests it is more effective at ensuring its work receives external scrutiny, thereby mitigating the risk of endogamous impact inflation and fostering broader recognition from the global scientific community.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 7.146 represents a critical and urgent red flag, dramatically exceeding the already significant-risk national average of 3.408. This score indicates that the university is not just participating in a compromised national dynamic but is a leading outlier in this high-risk practice. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This practice exposes the institution to severe reputational damage, suggesting that a significant portion of its scientific output is being channeled through media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards, potentially including 'predatory' journals. An immediate and decisive intervention is required to enhance information literacy and establish strict vetting policies for publication venues.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution maintains a prudent profile with a Z-score of -1.076, which is more rigorous than the national standard (-0.938), with both values falling within a low-risk range. This indicates that the university manages its authorship processes with greater control than its national peers. The data suggests a healthy governance of authorship, effectively preventing practices such as author list inflation or the inclusion of 'honorary' authorships. This responsible approach ensures that credit is assigned appropriately and maintains the transparency and accountability of individual contributions.

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

The institution shows a key strength with a Z-score of -1.459, a very low-risk value that is significantly better than the country's low-risk average (-0.391). This score reflects low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals surpasses the national standard. A negative value indicates that the impact of research led by the institution's own authors is greater than the impact of its overall collaborative output. This is a powerful sign of structural scientific prestige and endogenous capacity, demonstrating that the university's excellence is driven by its internal intellectual leadership rather than being dependent on external partners.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of -1.413, the institution operates in a very low-risk zone, outperforming the national low-risk average of -0.484. This demonstrates low-profile consistency and an absence of risk signals related to extreme individual productivity. This finding suggests a healthy academic environment where a balance between quantity and quality is maintained. It indicates that the institution is effectively avoiding the risks associated with hyperprolificacy, such as coercive authorship or prioritizing metric inflation over the integrity of the scientific record and meaningful intellectual contribution.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution exhibits a Z-score of -0.268, a very low-risk value that marks a stark and positive contrast to the medium-risk national environment (Z-score: 0.189). This demonstrates a form of preventive isolation, where the university does not replicate the risk dynamics of academic endogamy observed nationally. By avoiding over-reliance on its own journals, the institution ensures its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, which is essential for global visibility and credibility. This practice signals a commitment to competitive validation and avoids the potential conflicts of interest associated with using internal channels as 'fast tracks' for publication.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of -1.186 places it in the very low-risk category, a profile significantly stronger than the national low-risk average of -0.207. This low-profile consistency indicates robust editorial standards and a research culture that values substance over volume. The absence of signals for 'salami slicing' suggests that researchers are focused on producing coherent, impactful studies rather than artificially inflating their publication counts by fragmenting their work. This practice upholds the integrity of the scientific record and contributes to a more efficient and meaningful system of knowledge dissemination.