| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-1.418 | -0.886 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.259 | -0.049 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.180 | -0.393 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.172 | -0.217 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-1.088 | -0.228 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-0.903 | -0.320 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.178 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.252 |
|
Redundant Output
|
0.426 | -0.379 |
Mokpo National University presents a robust profile in scientific integrity, as evidenced by an overall risk score of -0.491. This score reflects a solid institutional framework with the majority of indicators situated in the low or very low-risk categories. Key strengths are observed in the management of author affiliations, the low incidence of hyperprolific authors, and a healthy balance between internal and external research impact, all of which significantly outperform national averages. Areas for strategic attention are concentrated in two indicators showing moderate risk: the Rate of Institutional Self-Citation and the Rate of Redundant Output. Thematically, the institution demonstrates significant research capacity, with SCImago Institutions Rankings placing it prominently within South Korea in areas such as Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (Top 25), Earth and Planetary Sciences (Top 40), and Agricultural and Biological Sciences (Top 55). While the institution's specific mission was not available for this analysis, the identified risks could challenge universal academic values of excellence and external validation. To fully align its strong research performance with a culture of unimpeachable integrity, the university is encouraged to review its internal citation and publication practices. By proactively addressing these moderate vulnerabilities, Mokpo National University can further solidify its reputation and leverage its thematic strengths for greater global impact.
The institution demonstrates an exemplary standard in managing academic affiliations, with a Z-score of -1.418, which indicates a complete absence of risk signals and is significantly lower than the already low national average for South Korea (Z-score: -0.886). This result suggests that institutional affiliations are declared with exceptional clarity and transparency. While multiple affiliations can be a legitimate outcome of collaboration, the university's extremely low rate effectively eliminates any concern regarding strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or "affiliation shopping," reflecting a highly rigorous and ethical administrative process.
With a Z-score of -0.259, the university maintains a prudent profile regarding its Rate of Retracted Output, performing more rigorously than the national standard in South Korea (Z-score: -0.049). This low incidence of retractions suggests that the institution's pre-publication quality control and supervision mechanisms are effective. The data indicates that research is conducted with a high degree of methodological rigor, minimizing the occurrence of errors that could lead to retractions and reinforcing the integrity of its scientific record.
The Rate of Institutional Self-Citation (Z-score: 0.180) shows a moderate deviation from the national trend in South Korea (Z-score: -0.393), suggesting the institution is more sensitive to this risk factor than its national peers. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of established research lines. However, this elevated rate could signal a tendency towards scientific isolation or an "echo chamber" where work is validated internally without sufficient external scrutiny. This value warns of a potential for endogamous impact inflation, where academic influence might be oversized by internal dynamics rather than recognition from the global community, and warrants an internal review of citation practices.
The institution's activity in this area (Z-score: -0.172) is statistically normal and aligns closely with the national context of South Korea (Z-score: -0.217). This indicates that the risk level is as expected and does not represent a specific vulnerability for the university. The data suggests that researchers are generally exercising appropriate due diligence in selecting publication venues, avoiding channels that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards and thus protecting the institution from reputational harm associated with predatory or low-quality publishing practices.
The university exhibits a prudent profile in its Rate of Hyper-Authored Output, with a Z-score of -1.088 that is markedly lower than the national average for South Korea (Z-score: -0.228). This indicates that the institution's processes are managed with greater rigor than the national standard. The low rate suggests that authorship practices are well-governed, effectively distinguishing between necessary large-scale collaboration and potential author list inflation. This fosters a culture of meaningful contribution and clear accountability among researchers.
The institution demonstrates low-profile consistency in its research impact, with a Z-score of -0.903, which is well below the national average for South Korea (Z-score: -0.320). The absence of a significant positive gap indicates that the impact of research led by the institution is commensurate with the impact of its collaborative output. This is a strong signal of sustainable, endogenous research capacity, confirming that the university's scientific prestige is built on its own intellectual leadership rather than being dependent on external partners.
With a Z-score of -1.413, the institution shows a near-total absence of hyperprolific authors, a figure that aligns with the low-risk national environment in South Korea (Z-score: -0.178) but demonstrates even stricter control. This low-profile consistency suggests a healthy balance between productivity and quality. The data indicates that the institutional culture does not incentivize extreme publication volumes, thereby mitigating risks such as coercive authorship or the prioritization of metrics over the integrity of the scientific record.
The university's Rate of Output in Institutional Journals (Z-score: -0.268) demonstrates integrity synchrony, showing total alignment with South Korea's environment of maximum scientific security (Z-score: -0.252). This indicates that the institution does not rely excessively on its own journals for publication. By favoring external, independent peer-reviewed channels, the university avoids potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring its research is validated by the global scientific community and enhancing its international visibility.
The institution's Rate of Redundant Output, or "salami slicing," presents a moderate deviation from the national norm, with a Z-score of 0.426 compared to South Korea's average of -0.379. This suggests the university is more exposed to this risk factor than its peers. While citing previous work is essential, a high degree of bibliographic overlap between publications can indicate data fragmentation, where a single study is divided into minimal units to artificially inflate productivity. This practice can distort the scientific evidence base and warrants a review to ensure that publications consistently represent significant and coherent contributions to knowledge.
