| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.655 | -0.119 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.371 | -0.208 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.119 | 0.208 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.392 | -0.328 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
0.542 | 0.881 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
0.675 | 0.809 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-0.360 | 0.288 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.139 |
|
Redundant Output
|
1.010 | 0.778 |
Yamaguchi University presents a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall score of -0.213 indicating performance that is well-aligned with global standards. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in maintaining low-risk levels across the majority of indicators, particularly in areas such as publication in discontinued journals, reliance on institutional journals, and management of self-citation, where it outperforms national averages. These results point to effective internal governance and a strong culture of research ethics. However, areas of medium risk, including the Rate of Redundant Output, Hyper-Authored Output, and the gap in impact between led and collaborative research, suggest opportunities for strategic refinement. The university's academic strengths are clearly reflected in the SCImago Institutions Rankings, with notable national rankings in Veterinary (19th), Psychology (34th), and Engineering (37th). While the institution's specific mission statement was not provided for this analysis, the identified medium-risk factors could challenge a universal academic mission centered on excellence and social responsibility; practices like 'salami slicing' or dependency on external leadership can dilute the pursuit of groundbreaking knowledge. To build on its solid foundation, Yamaguchi University is encouraged to focus on reinforcing authorship guidelines and fostering greater intellectual leadership in its collaborations, thereby ensuring its commendable research practices fully translate into sustainable, high-impact scientific contributions.
With a Z-score of -0.655, Yamaguchi University demonstrates a lower incidence of multiple affiliations compared to the national average of -0.119. This prudent profile suggests the institution manages its affiliation declarations with greater rigor than the national standard. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, this controlled rate indicates that the university effectively avoids practices that could be perceived as strategic attempts to artificially inflate institutional credit or "affiliation shopping," thereby ensuring clear and transparent representation of its collaborative footprint.
The institution shows a Z-score of -0.371 for retracted publications, a figure that is favorably lower than the national average of -0.208. This demonstrates a commendable and rigorous approach to quality control. Retractions can be complex events, but a rate significantly below the national benchmark suggests that the university's pre-publication review and supervision mechanisms are highly effective. This proactive stance on research integrity minimizes the occurrence of systemic errors or malpractice, reinforcing a culture where methodological rigor is prioritized before dissemination.
Yamaguchi University exhibits a Z-score of -0.119, indicating a low rate of institutional self-citation, which contrasts sharply with the medium-risk national average of 0.208. This demonstrates significant institutional resilience, as control mechanisms appear to successfully mitigate the systemic risks of endogamy present in the wider environment. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but by maintaining a low rate, the university avoids creating scientific 'echo chambers' and ensures its work is validated by the broader international community, confirming that its academic influence is driven by external recognition rather than internal dynamics.
The university's Z-score for publications in discontinued journals is -0.392, an exceptionally low value that is even better than the low-risk national average of -0.328. This near-total absence of risk signals reflects a low-profile consistency and aligns with the secure national standard. It indicates that the institution's researchers exercise excellent due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This careful practice protects the university from severe reputational risks associated with 'predatory' or low-quality publishing and demonstrates a strong commitment to channeling its scientific output through credible and enduring venues.
With a Z-score of 0.542, the institution's rate of hyper-authored output is in the medium-risk category, though it remains below the national average of 0.881. This suggests a pattern of differentiated management, where the university moderates a risk that is more pronounced across the country. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science' fields, this moderate signal warrants a closer look to distinguish necessary massive collaboration from potential author list inflation. It serves as an internal prompt to ensure that authorship practices remain transparent and that credit reflects meaningful contribution, thereby preserving individual accountability.
The institution presents a Z-score of 0.675 in this indicator, a medium-risk value that is nevertheless more favorable than the national average of 0.809. This reflects a differentiated management approach, where the university moderates a common national trend of dependency on external partners for impact. A significant positive gap can signal a sustainability risk, where prestige is more exogenous than structural. The university's slightly smaller gap suggests a healthier balance, but also highlights an opportunity to further cultivate internal research capacity and ensure that its excellence metrics are increasingly driven by projects where it exercises full intellectual leadership.
Yamaguchi University maintains a low-risk Z-score of -0.360 for hyperprolific authors, standing in positive contrast to the medium-risk national average of 0.288. This is a clear sign of institutional resilience, where internal controls appear to effectively mitigate a systemic risk prevalent in the country. By curbing extreme individual publication volumes, the university fosters a healthy balance between quantity and quality. This result suggests the institution successfully discourages practices such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, thereby protecting the integrity of its scientific record.
The university's Z-score of -0.268 for output in its own journals is firmly in the very low-risk category and even surpasses the strong national average of -0.139. This signals a state of total operational silence on this risk indicator. The data confirms a robust commitment to seeking external, independent peer review for its research. By avoiding reliance on in-house journals, the institution eliminates potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy, ensuring its scientific production is validated through standard competitive processes and achieves maximum global visibility.
The institution's Z-score for redundant output is 1.010, a medium-risk value that indicates high exposure as it is more pronounced than the national average of 0.778. This alert suggests the university is more prone than its peers to practices like 'salami slicing,' where a single study is fragmented into multiple minimal publications to artificially inflate productivity. This pattern warrants attention, as it can distort the scientific evidence base and overburden the peer-review system. A review of research and publication ethics guidelines may be beneficial to reinforce the importance of presenting new knowledge in a coherent and significant manner.
