Nanjing Audit University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Nanjing Audit University demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in an overall risk score of -0.295. The institution exhibits exceptional control over the majority of integrity indicators, with particularly strong performance in preventing institutional self-citation, hyper-prolific authorship, and ensuring that its scientific impact is driven by internal leadership rather than external collaborations. These strengths are foundational to building a sustainable and autonomous research culture. However, this solid base is contrasted by two areas requiring strategic attention: a medium-risk level in both Retracted Output and publication in Discontinued Journals. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's academic strengths are most prominent in Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Business, Management and Accounting; and Psychology. While the institution's specific mission was not available for this analysis, the identified risks—particularly those related to publication quality and post-publication correction—could potentially undermine the universal academic goals of achieving excellence and upholding social responsibility through the generation of reliable knowledge. To achieve a comprehensive integrity profile, it is recommended that the university focuses on strengthening its pre-publication quality assurance processes and enhancing researcher training on selecting high-quality, reputable publication venues.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of -0.278, which is more favorable than the national average of -0.062. This prudent profile indicates that the university manages its collaborative processes with greater rigor than the national standard. While multiple affiliations often arise from legitimate partnerships, this controlled rate suggests that the institution's collaborations are well-governed and not geared towards strategically inflating institutional credit through practices like “affiliation shopping,” thereby ensuring that credit for research output is assigned appropriately.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of 0.248, the institution shows a medium-risk signal that moderately deviates from the low-risk national benchmark of -0.050. This suggests a greater institutional sensitivity to factors that can lead to retractions. A rate significantly higher than its peers alerts to a potential vulnerability in the institution's integrity culture. It suggests that quality control mechanisms prior to publication may be failing more frequently than elsewhere, indicating possible recurring malpractice or a lack of methodological rigor that warrants immediate qualitative verification by management to safeguard the reliability of its scientific record.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The university exhibits an exceptionally low Z-score of -1.242, demonstrating a preventive isolation from the medium-risk dynamics observed nationally (Z-score: 0.045). This outstanding result indicates that the institution successfully avoids the risk of creating scientific 'echo chambers.' A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the university's very low rate confirms that its academic influence is not inflated by internal dynamics. Instead, its work is validated through robust external scrutiny from the global scientific community, reflecting true integration and recognition.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 0.344 represents a medium-risk level and a moderate deviation from the low-risk national environment (Z-score: -0.024). This finding constitutes a critical alert regarding the due diligence exercised in selecting dissemination channels. A high proportion of publications in journals that do not meet international ethical or quality standards exposes the institution to severe reputational risks. This suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy and guidance for researchers to avoid channeling valuable resources and scientific output into 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -1.295, the institution shows an absence of risk signals that is even stronger than the low-risk national standard of -0.721. This low-profile consistency is particularly positive in fields outside of 'Big Science,' where extensive author lists are not the norm. It indicates that the university effectively prevents author list inflation, thereby reinforcing individual accountability and transparency. This result suggests that practices such as 'honorary' or political authorships are well-controlled, ensuring that credit is awarded based on genuine intellectual contribution.

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

The institution records a Z-score of -1.618, indicating a total operational silence on this risk indicator, performing even better than the already strong national average of -0.809. This score signifies that the impact of research led by the institution's own authors is robust and does not depend on external partners for prestige. This result points to a high degree of scientific autonomy and a strong internal capacity for generating high-impact work, confirming that its excellence metrics are the result of genuine internal capabilities rather than strategic positioning in collaborations where it does not exercise intellectual leadership.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The university's Z-score of -1.413 marks a state of preventive isolation from the medium-risk trend observed at the national level (Z-score: 0.425). This stark and positive contrast shows that the institution effectively resists pressures that can lead to an imbalance between quantity and quality. By avoiding extreme individual publication volumes, the university mitigates risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, thereby prioritizing the integrity of the scientific record over the inflation of productivity metrics.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of -0.268, the institution demonstrates a very low-risk profile, consistent with and slightly better than the low-risk national context (Z-score: -0.010). This indicates that the university is not excessively dependent on its in-house journals, thus successfully avoiding potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. By encouraging publication in external venues, the institution ensures its scientific production undergoes independent peer review, which enhances global visibility and confirms that internal channels are not used as 'fast tracks' to inflate CVs without standard competitive validation.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution shows a Z-score of -0.699, reflecting a total operational silence in this area and surpassing the already very low-risk national benchmark of -0.515. This exemplary performance indicates a strong institutional culture that values substantive contributions over volume. It confirms that researchers are not artificially inflating their productivity by fragmenting coherent studies into 'minimal publishable units.' This commitment to publishing significant new knowledge strengthens the scientific evidence base and demonstrates respect for the academic review system.