| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.083 | -0.119 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.709 | -0.208 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.088 | 0.208 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.442 | -0.328 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
0.239 | 0.881 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.238 | 0.809 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | 0.288 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.139 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.853 | 0.778 |
The University of Shizuoka demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.492 that indicates a performance significantly healthier than the national average. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of retracted output, hyperprolific authorship, redundant publications, and output in discontinued or institutional journals, suggesting a deeply embedded culture of quality control and ethical dissemination. While moderate risk signals are present in institutional self-citation, hyper-authorship, and impact dependency, the university consistently outperforms the national benchmark in these areas, indicating effective internal management of systemic trends. This strong integrity framework directly supports the institution's mission to deliver "high-quality education and creative research." Furthermore, SCImago Institutions Rankings data highlights the university's thematic leadership in areas such as Environmental Science (ranked 35th in Japan), Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (71st), and Agricultural and Biological Sciences (75th), which aligns perfectly with its commitment to the "natural and cultural assets found in Shizuoka Prefecture." By continuing to fortify its governance mechanisms, the University of Shizuoka is well-positioned to leverage its high ethical standards as a cornerstone of its academic excellence and contribution to society.
The University of Shizuoka's Z-score of -0.083 for this indicator is in close alignment with the national average for Japan (-0.119), reflecting a standard and expected level of collaborative activity. This statistical normality suggests that the institution's engagement in partnerships, dual appointments, and researcher mobility follows conventional patterns within its academic ecosystem. The data does not indicate any disproportionate rates that might signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit through "affiliation shopping," but rather points to a healthy and typical degree of inter-institutional cooperation.
With a Z-score of -0.709, the University of Shizuoka demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of retracted publications, performing significantly better than the already low-risk national average (-0.208). This strong result suggests that the institution's quality control mechanisms prior to publication are highly effective. Rather than indicating systemic failures, this near-absence of retractions points to a culture of integrity and methodological rigor, where responsible supervision and sound research practices minimize the need for post-publication corrections and protect the institution's scientific reputation.
The institution presents a Z-score of 0.088, which, while in the medium-risk range, is notably lower than Japan's national average of 0.208. This indicates that the University of Shizuoka is successfully moderating a risk that appears to be more common at the national level. Although a certain level of self-citation reflects the continuity of research lines, the university's contained rate shows a differentiated management style that mitigates the risk of creating scientific 'echo chambers.' By maintaining a lower-than-average tendency to self-validate, the institution ensures its work is subject to broader external scrutiny, reinforcing the credibility of its academic influence beyond internal dynamics.
The University of Shizuoka's Z-score of -0.442 is in the very low-risk category and surpasses the national standard (-0.328). This excellent performance highlights a consistent and effective due diligence process in the selection of dissemination channels. The near-absence of publications in journals that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards demonstrates a strong commitment to reputable science. This protects the institution from severe reputational risks and indicates a high level of information literacy among its researchers, ensuring resources are not wasted on predatory or low-quality publishing practices.
With a Z-score of 0.239, the university's rate of hyper-authored output is considerably more controlled than the national average of 0.881, despite both falling within the medium-risk band. This suggests a differentiated approach to authorship, where the institution more effectively manages practices that could lead to author list inflation. By keeping this rate below the national trend, the university demonstrates a greater ability to distinguish between necessary massive collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship, thereby promoting clearer individual accountability and transparency in its research contributions.
The institution's Z-score of 0.238 is significantly lower than the national average of 0.809, indicating a much healthier and more sustainable impact profile. While it is common for institutions to rely on external partners, the university's smaller gap suggests that its scientific prestige is less dependent on collaborations where it does not exercise intellectual leadership. This points to a strong internal capacity for generating high-impact research, ensuring that its reputation for excellence is structural and endogenous, rather than primarily a result of strategic positioning in external networks.
The University of Shizuoka shows a Z-score of -1.413, a figure that signals a virtual absence of hyperprolific authors and stands in stark contrast to the medium-risk national average (0.288). This demonstrates a clear institutional isolation from national trends that might prioritize quantity over quality. By not replicating this risk dynamic, the university fosters an environment that discourages practices such as coercive authorship or assigning credit without real participation, reinforcing the integrity of its scientific record and ensuring that publication metrics reflect meaningful intellectual contributions.
With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution shows a near-total absence of publications in its own journals, performing even better than the country's very low-risk average (-0.139). This operational silence is a strong indicator of the university's commitment to independent, external peer review. By avoiding reliance on in-house journals, the institution eliminates potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy. This practice ensures its scientific production is validated through standard competitive channels, maximizing its global visibility and credibility.
The university's Z-score of -0.853 is exceptionally low, positioning it as an exemplar of integrity in a national context where this practice is a medium-risk concern (country Z-score of 0.778). This preventive isolation from a problematic national trend indicates a robust institutional culture that values significant, coherent studies over artificially inflated publication counts. The data suggests a strong rejection of 'salami slicing,' where research is fragmented into minimal units, thereby protecting the integrity of the scientific evidence base and prioritizing the generation of new knowledge over metric-driven productivity.
