Kookmin University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Kookmin University demonstrates a strong overall scientific integrity profile, with a global risk score of -0.120 indicating performance that is generally more robust than the international average. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of redundant output, multiple affiliations, and dependency on external leadership for impact, showcasing a culture of originality and clear institutional accountability. However, this solid foundation is contrasted by two areas requiring strategic attention: a moderate rate of retracted output and a notable presence in discontinued journals. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's academic strengths are particularly prominent in fields such as Arts and Humanities, Economics, Econometrics and Finance, and Physics and Astronomy. As the university's specific mission statement was not available for this analysis, it is assessed against the universal academic goals of excellence and social responsibility. The identified risks, particularly those related to publication quality control and dissemination channels, could potentially undermine these core values by affecting research credibility and reputation. To fully align its operational practices with its evident thematic strengths, it is recommended that the university focuses on reinforcing its pre-publication review processes and enhancing researcher guidance on selecting high-quality publication venues.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

With a Z-score of -1.236, Kookmin University demonstrates a complete absence of risk signals related to multiple affiliations, performing even more conservatively than the already low national average (-0.886). This indicates total operational silence in this area, reflecting an environment where institutional representation is exceptionally clear. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, disproportionately high rates can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit. The university's extremely low score confirms that its collaborative practices are transparent and free from any indicators of “affiliation shopping,” reflecting a robust and unambiguous policy on institutional credit.

Rate of Retracted Output

Kookmin University presents a Z-score of 0.690 in this area, which shows a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.049. This suggests the institution is more exposed to this particular risk factor than its national counterparts. Retractions are complex events, and while some may result from the honest correction of errors, a rate significantly higher than the global average alerts to a vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture. This Z-score suggests that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing systemically, indicating possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that requires immediate qualitative verification by management to safeguard its scientific reputation.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university exhibits a prudent profile in institutional self-citation with a Z-score of -0.500, which is more rigorous than the national standard of -0.393. This indicates that the institution's research is validated by the broader scientific community, avoiding potential echo chambers. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of research lines; however, the university's controlled rate demonstrates a healthy balance. This low value confirms that the institution's academic influence is driven by external recognition rather than being inflated by internal dynamics, reinforcing the global relevance of its work.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

With a Z-score of 0.049, the university shows a greater sensitivity to this risk factor compared to the national average of -0.217. This moderate deviation signals a potential vulnerability in the selection of publication venues. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence, as it indicates that a portion of scientific production is being channeled through media that may not meet international ethical or quality standards. This exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy and guidance for researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

Kookmin University demonstrates a prudent approach to authorship, with a Z-score of -0.947 that is significantly lower than the national average of -0.228. This suggests that the institution manages its collaborative processes with more rigor than the national standard. While extensive author lists are legitimate in 'Big Science' contexts, a low score outside these areas indicates strong adherence to meaningful contribution as a criterion for authorship. This profile effectively mitigates the risk of author list inflation, thereby reinforcing individual accountability and transparency in its research publications.

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

The institution shows a Z-score of -0.961, indicating a very low risk in this area and aligning with the low-risk national standard (-0.320). This low-profile consistency demonstrates that the university's scientific prestige is structurally sound and not overly dependent on external partners. A wide positive gap can signal that an institution's impact is reliant on collaborations where it does not exercise intellectual leadership. Kookmin University's score, however, confirms that its excellence metrics are the result of real internal capacity, reflecting a sustainable and autonomous research ecosystem.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The university maintains a prudent profile regarding hyperprolific authors, with a Z-score of -0.269 that is more conservative than the national average of -0.178. This indicates that the institution's processes are managed with greater rigor than the national standard. While high productivity can reflect leadership, extreme publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. The university's controlled score suggests a healthy balance between quantity and quality, effectively mitigating risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, thereby prioritizing the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, Kookmin University is in total alignment with the national average (-0.252), reflecting an environment of maximum scientific security regarding this indicator. This integrity synchrony shows that the institution avoids over-reliance on its own publication channels. While in-house journals can be valuable for local dissemination, excessive dependence on them raises conflicts of interest. The university's very low score confirms that its scientific production consistently undergoes independent external peer review, ensuring its work is validated by global standards and not at risk of academic endogamy.

Rate of Redundant Output

The university's Z-score of -0.776 is exceptionally low, aligning with the low-risk national context (-0.379) but demonstrating an even more robust control over publication practices. This absence of risk signals indicates a strong institutional culture that values substantive contributions over artificially inflated publication counts. High rates of bibliographic overlap can suggest 'salami slicing,' where studies are fragmented to maximize output. Kookmin University's very low score confirms its commitment to publishing complete and significant research, thereby protecting the integrity of scientific evidence and respecting the academic review system.