| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-1.615 | -0.615 |
|
Retracted Output
|
1.197 | 0.777 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.597 | -0.262 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
0.610 | 0.094 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-1.287 | -0.952 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.348 | 0.445 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-0.509 | -0.247 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | 1.432 |
|
Redundant Output
|
0.446 | -0.390 |
Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU) presents a profile of notable thematic strengths combined with significant scientific integrity risks that require strategic attention. With an overall integrity score of 0.247, the institution demonstrates robust governance in areas such as authorship and affiliation policies, showing very low risk in multiple affiliations, hyper-authorship, and publication in institutional journals. However, these strengths are counterbalanced by critical vulnerabilities, most notably a significant rate of retracted output, alongside medium-risk indicators for institutional self-citation, publication in discontinued journals, and redundant output. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, IKIU has established itself as a national leader in key disciplines, including Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Physics and Astronomy; Business, Management and Accounting; and Mathematics. This academic excellence is directly threatened by the identified integrity risks. The high rate of retractions and use of low-quality journals contradicts the institutional mission to "pave the way for scientific and cultural development by... producing science and technology," as it undermines the credibility and long-term impact of its research. By proactively addressing these vulnerabilities in its quality assurance and publication ethics frameworks, IKIU can protect its reputation, ensure its practices fully align with its mission of excellence, and solidify its position as a leading academic institution.
The institution shows a very low Z-score (-1.615) compared to the national average (-0.615), indicating a healthy and transparent approach to academic collaboration. This absence of risk signals is consistent with, and even improves upon, the low-risk national standard. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, disproportionately high rates can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit. IKIU's data, however, suggests that its affiliations are managed with integrity, avoiding any suspicion of “affiliation shopping” and reflecting genuine collaborative efforts.
The institution presents a significant Z-score of 1.197, notably higher than the already medium-risk national average of 0.777. This suggests that the university is not only participating in a national vulnerability regarding publication quality but is amplifying it. A rate significantly higher than the global average alerts to a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture, indicating that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically. This high value suggests possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that requires immediate qualitative verification by management to protect its scientific reputation.
With a Z-score of 0.597, the institution displays a moderate risk level for self-citation, deviating from the low-risk national benchmark (-0.262). This indicates a greater sensitivity to practices that can lead to academic insularity compared to its national peers. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but disproportionately high rates can signal concerning scientific isolation or 'echo chambers'. This value warns of the risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than by broader recognition from the global scientific community.
The institution's Z-score of 0.610 is significantly higher than the national average of 0.094, even though both fall within a medium-risk category. This reveals that the university is more exposed than its peers to the risks associated with publishing in questionable venues. A high proportion of output in discontinued journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This Z-score indicates that a significant portion of its scientific production is being channeled through media that do not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational risks and suggesting an urgent need for information literacy to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.
The university demonstrates a very low Z-score of -1.287 in hyper-authored publications, well below the country's low-risk score of -0.952. This result reflects a commendable adherence to conventional authorship norms. The complete absence of risk signals in this area aligns with the national standard, indicating that the institution effectively distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and practices like 'honorary' or political authorship. This suggests that authorship at IKIU is generally transparent and reflects genuine intellectual contribution, reinforcing individual accountability.
The institution's Z-score of 0.348, while in the medium-risk range, is notably lower than the national average of 0.445. This suggests that IKIU is managing to moderate a risk that appears more common at the national level. A very wide positive gap can signal a sustainability risk where scientific prestige is dependent and exogenous, not structural. IKIU's more controlled score indicates a healthier balance; while it benefits from collaboration, it appears to be building more structural and endogenous scientific prestige, demonstrating a stronger internal capacity for intellectual leadership than many of its national counterparts.
With a Z-score of -0.509, the institution maintains a low-risk profile for hyperprolific authors, performing with more rigor than the national standard (-0.247). This prudent approach suggests that the university's research environment does not encourage publication volumes that challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. By keeping this indicator low, IKIU mitigates risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation, effectively prioritizing the integrity of the scientific record and the quality of its output over sheer quantity.
The university's Z-score of -0.268 is in the very low-risk range, standing in stark contrast to the country's medium-risk score of 1.432. This demonstrates a clear preventive isolation, where the institution avoids the risk of academic endogamy prevalent in its national environment. Excessive dependence on in-house journals raises conflicts of interest and risks bypassing independent external peer review. IKIU's commitment to publishing in external venues ensures its research undergoes competitive validation, enhances its global visibility, and confirms that it does not use internal channels as 'fast tracks' to inflate CVs.
The institution shows a medium-risk Z-score of 0.446 for redundant output, a moderate deviation from the low-risk national average of -0.390. This suggests the university is more susceptible than its peers to practices that artificially inflate publication counts. Massive and recurring bibliographic overlap between simultaneous publications usually indicates data fragmentation or 'salami slicing.' This elevated score alerts to the practice of dividing a coherent study into minimal publishable units, a dynamic that distorts available scientific evidence and prioritizes volume over significant new knowledge.
