Dongguk University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Dongguk University demonstrates a robust and commendable scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.375 that indicates a performance well within the parameters of international best practices. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of Multiple Affiliations, Redundant Output, and publication in its own journals, where it outperforms even the strong national averages. While most indicators reflect a low-risk environment, minor vulnerabilities are noted in the areas of publication in discontinued journals and the impact gap in collaborative research, which warrant proactive monitoring. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, this solid ethical foundation supports notable academic excellence in key thematic areas, including top national rankings in Computer Science, Earth and Planetary Sciences, Engineering, and Arts and Humanities. Although the institution's specific mission statement was not available for this analysis, this demonstrated commitment to research integrity is fundamental to the universal mission of any leading HEI: to achieve excellence and contribute responsibly to society. The identified risks are minor and do not currently threaten this core purpose; addressing them will further solidify the university's position as a leader in both research quality and ethical conduct.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

With a Z-score of -1.067, significantly lower than the national average of -0.886, Dongguk University shows a complete absence of risk signals in this area. This exceptional result indicates that the institution's collaborative framework is remarkably clear and transparent, operating even more rigorously than the already low-risk national environment. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, the university's data shows no signs of strategic "affiliation shopping" or attempts to artificially inflate institutional credit, reflecting a culture of unambiguous and well-defined partnerships.

Rate of Retracted Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.296 is notably better than the national score of -0.049, suggesting a prudent and effective approach to quality control. This indicates that the university manages its pre-publication processes with more rigor than the national standard. A high rate of retractions can signal systemic failures in methodological oversight or integrity. In contrast, Dongguk University's lower rate points to a healthy research culture where quality control mechanisms appear to be functioning correctly, preventing recurring errors and upholding the reliability of its scientific output.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university's Z-score of -0.407 is statistically equivalent to the national average of -0.393, indicating a risk level that is normal and expected for its context. This alignment suggests a healthy balance in citation practices. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of established research lines. The data confirms that the institution is successfully building on its own work without creating scientific 'echo chambers' or engaging in endogamous impact inflation, thus ensuring its academic influence is validated by the broader scientific community.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

With a Z-score of -0.129, which is slightly higher than the national average of -0.217, the institution shows an incipient vulnerability that warrants review. Although the overall risk remains low, this subtle deviation suggests a greater tendency than its peers to publish in journals that may not meet long-term quality standards. A high proportion of such output can pose severe reputational risks. This signal, while minor, points to a need for enhanced information literacy and due diligence guidance for researchers to ensure resources are channeled exclusively to reputable and sustainable dissemination venues.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution's Z-score of -0.548 is considerably lower than the national average of -0.228, reflecting a prudent and rigorous management of authorship. This superior performance indicates that the university maintains strong standards for what constitutes a meaningful contribution, effectively distinguishing between necessary large-scale collaboration and practices like 'honorary' authorship. By fostering a culture where author lists are not inflated, the institution reinforces individual accountability and the transparency of its research contributions.

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

The university's Z-score of -0.164, while in the low-risk category, is higher than the national average of -0.320, signaling an area of incipient vulnerability. This suggests that the institution's scientific prestige may be slightly more dependent on collaborations where it does not exercise primary intellectual leadership compared to its national peers. While leveraging external partners for impact is a common strategy, this gap serves as a constructive signal to reflect on strengthening internal research capacity to ensure that its reputation for excellence is increasingly structural, sustainable, and driven by its own leadership.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of -0.286, which is lower than the national average of -0.178, the institution demonstrates a more prudent profile regarding extreme individual productivity. This indicates that its processes are managed with more rigor than the national standard in this area. Extreme publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution and may signal risks such as coercive authorship or a focus on quantity over quality. The university's controlled rate suggests a healthy balance that prioritizes the integrity of the scientific record over simple metric inflation.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is virtually identical to the national average of -0.252, reflecting a complete alignment with an environment of maximum scientific security. This synchronous, very low-risk profile shows a strong commitment to independent external peer review. By avoiding over-reliance on its own journals, the university mitigates potential conflicts of interest and the risk of academic endogamy. This practice ensures its research undergoes standard competitive validation, thereby enhancing its global visibility and credibility.

Rate of Redundant Output

Dongguk University exhibits an exceptionally low risk of redundant publications, with a Z-score of -0.851, a figure that places it in the 'very low' risk category and well below the 'low' risk national average of -0.379. This demonstrates a stronger control over publication ethics than the national standard. The absence of signals for 'salami slicing'—the practice of fragmenting a study into minimal publishable units—indicates a research culture that values the generation of significant new knowledge over the artificial inflation of productivity metrics, thereby protecting the integrity of the scientific record.