| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.922 | -0.514 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.137 | -0.126 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.148 | -0.566 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.465 | -0.415 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.934 | 0.594 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-0.674 | 0.284 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-0.117 | -0.275 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.220 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.051 | 0.027 |
The University of North Texas demonstrates a robust and commendable scientific integrity profile, reflected in an overall risk score of -0.355. This positions the institution as a low-risk entity, with governance and research practices that are, in several key areas, more rigorous than the national average. Strengths are particularly evident in the institution's resilience against systemic national risks such as hyper-authorship, impact dependency, and redundant publication. While the overall picture is positive, minor vulnerabilities in institutional self-citation and the rate of hyperprolific authors warrant proactive monitoring. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, this strong integrity framework underpins areas of significant academic strength, including top-tier national rankings in Business, Management and Accounting (ranked 44th in the US), Environmental Science (79th), Psychology (83rd), and Social Sciences (83rd). This commitment to ethical research directly supports the university's mission to be a "caring and creative community" that "prepares students for careers in a rapidly changing world." A culture of high integrity ensures that the knowledge imparted is reliable and trustworthy, which is fundamental to preparing graduates for complex, real-world challenges. By maintaining and reinforcing these high standards, the University of North Texas not only protects its reputation but also fulfills its core educational and social responsibilities.
With an institutional Z-score of -0.922 compared to the national average of -0.514, the University of North Texas exhibits an exceptionally low rate of multiple affiliations. This performance indicates a clear and transparent approach to institutional credit, showing no signs of the strategic "affiliation shopping" that can sometimes be used to inflate an institution's perceived contribution. The absence of risk signals in this area is not only consistent with the low-risk national context but surpasses it, reflecting a commendable standard of operational clarity and ethical affiliation practices.
The institution's Z-score for retracted output is -0.137, which is statistically aligned with the national average of -0.126. This indicates a normal and expected level of activity for an institution of its size and context. The data suggests that the university's quality control and post-publication supervision mechanisms are functioning effectively, addressing the honest correction of errors without signaling any systemic failures in methodological rigor or integrity culture. The rate of retractions is consistent with responsible scientific practice rather than an indicator of recurring malpractice.
The university shows a Z-score of -0.148 in institutional self-citation, a figure that, while in the low-risk category, is higher than the national average of -0.566. This slight divergence points to an incipient vulnerability that warrants review. While a certain degree of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of established research lines, this elevated rate suggests a need to ensure that the institution is not fostering an insular "echo chamber." Proactive monitoring is recommended to confirm that the institution's academic influence is driven by broad community recognition rather than being disproportionately inflated by internal dynamics.
With a Z-score of -0.465, the institution is in total alignment with the national average of -0.415, both reflecting a very low-risk environment. This integrity synchrony demonstrates a strong commitment to due diligence in the selection of publication venues. By effectively avoiding discontinued journals, the university protects its research from being associated with media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards, thereby safeguarding its reputation and ensuring that institutional resources are not wasted on predatory or low-quality practices.
The University of North Texas displays significant institutional resilience in this area, with a low-risk Z-score of -0.934 in stark contrast to the medium-risk national average of 0.594. This suggests that the institution's internal control mechanisms are successfully mitigating the systemic risks of authorship inflation present in the wider environment. This performance indicates a culture that values transparency and individual accountability, effectively distinguishing between necessary large-scale collaboration and the questionable practice of awarding "honorary" or political authorships.
The institution demonstrates notable strength and resilience with a Z-score of -0.674, contrasting sharply with the national medium-risk average of 0.284. This low gap indicates that the university's scientific prestige is structurally sound and driven by its own intellectual leadership, rather than being dependent on external collaborators. This performance mitigates the sustainability risk of relying on exogenous impact and confirms that its high standing in excellence metrics is a result of genuine internal capacity and innovation.
The institution's Z-score for hyperprolific authors is -0.117. Although this is a low-risk value, it is higher than the national average of -0.275, signaling an incipient vulnerability. Extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. This signal suggests that while productivity is healthy, it warrants a review to ensure a proper balance between quantity and quality is maintained and to preemptively address potential risks such as coercive authorship or the dilution of scientific integrity in favor of metric-driven output.
With a Z-score of -0.268, the university is in lockstep with the national average of -0.220, both indicating a very low-risk profile. This integrity synchrony shows a clear preference for external, independent peer review over in-house publication channels. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own journals, the institution successfully mitigates the risk of academic endogamy and potential conflicts of interest, ensuring its scientific production is validated through competitive global standards and maximizing its international visibility.
The university exhibits strong institutional resilience, posting a low-risk Z-score of -0.051 against a national context that trends towards medium risk (0.027). This indicates that the institution's research culture effectively curbs the practice of data fragmentation or "salami slicing." By maintaining this low rate, the university demonstrates a commitment to publishing significant and coherent new knowledge, thereby protecting the integrity of the scientific record and avoiding practices that artificially inflate productivity at the expense of substantive contribution.
