| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
-0.632 | -0.549 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.315 | -0.060 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.814 | 0.615 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
0.259 | 0.511 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.923 | -0.625 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-0.973 | -0.335 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.152 | -0.266 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
3.561 | 0.595 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.582 | -0.027 |
Kasetsart University demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in its low overall risk score of 0.052. The institution exhibits significant strengths in maintaining a very low-risk profile for hyperprolific authorship, redundant publications, and dependency on external collaborations for impact, indicating strong internal governance and a focus on sustainable, high-quality research. However, areas of concern emerge in the form of medium-risk indicators for Institutional Self-Citation and Output in Institutional Journals, which are notably higher than the national average and suggest a tendency towards academic insularity. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, the university's excellence is concentrated in key thematic areas, including world-class rankings in Agricultural and Biological Sciences and Veterinary, complemented by strong national positions in Medicine and Environmental Science. This strong performance aligns with its mission to produce "high-standard and competitive output." Nevertheless, the identified risks of academic endogamy could challenge the mission's commitment to being a "hub of... diversified knowledge" and embracing "social responsibilities" through broad, externally validated impact. To fully realize its strategic vision, it is recommended that the university leverage its solid research foundation while actively promoting international collaboration and external peer review to mitigate insularity risks, thereby ensuring its academic excellence translates into global recognition and societal value.
The institution presents a Z-score of -0.632, which is lower than the national average of -0.549. This indicates a prudent and well-managed approach to academic affiliations, demonstrating more rigor than the national standard. By maintaining this controlled rate, the university effectively mitigates the risks associated with "affiliation shopping" or strategic attempts to artificially inflate institutional credit, ensuring that collaborations are transparent and reflect genuine partnerships.
With a Z-score of -0.315, significantly lower than the country's score of -0.060, the institution showcases a commendable profile in publication reliability. This suggests that its quality control and supervision mechanisms prior to publication are more rigorous than the national norm. Such a low rate of retractions is a positive signal of a healthy integrity culture, effectively preventing the systemic failures or recurring malpractice that can damage an institution's scientific reputation.
The university's Z-score of 0.814 is notably higher than the national average of 0.615, indicating a high exposure to this risk factor. This pattern suggests that the institution is more prone than its peers to operating within an academic "echo chamber," where its work may be validated internally without sufficient external scrutiny. This disproportionately high rate warns of potential endogamous impact inflation, a dynamic where the institution's perceived influence is magnified by internal citations rather than by broader recognition from the global scientific community.
Kasetsart University demonstrates effective management in its choice of publication venues, with a Z-score of 0.259, which is considerably lower than the national average of 0.511. This shows a differentiated approach, successfully moderating a risk that appears more common across the country. This diligence in avoiding journals that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards protects the institution from severe reputational risks and indicates a strong commitment to channeling its scientific output through credible and impactful media.
The institution maintains a Z-score of -0.923, which is well below the national average of -0.625. This prudent profile indicates that the university manages its authorship practices with greater rigor than the national standard. The low score suggests a successful effort to prevent author list inflation, thereby upholding individual accountability and ensuring that authorship credit is reserved for those with genuine intellectual contributions, rather than being diluted by honorary or political practices.
The university exhibits a Z-score of -0.973, a signal of very low risk that is consistent with the low-risk national environment (Z-score of -0.335). This absence of a significant gap indicates that the institution's scientific prestige is structural and internally driven. The impact of its research is a direct result of its own intellectual leadership, demonstrating a sustainable and authentic capacity for excellence rather than a dependency on external partners for visibility and prestige.
With a Z-score of -1.152, the institution shows a complete absence of risk signals in this area, aligning with a healthy national context (Z-score of -0.266). This demonstrates a strong institutional culture that prioritizes quality over sheer volume of publications. The data suggests that the university effectively avoids potential imbalances such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, ensuring that its productivity metrics are built on a foundation of meaningful scientific contribution.
The university's Z-score of 3.561 is exceptionally high compared to the national average of 0.595, signaling a significant exposure to this integrity risk. This heavy reliance on in-house journals creates a potential conflict of interest, where the institution acts as both judge and party in the publication process. This practice heightens the risk of academic endogamy, suggesting that a substantial portion of its research may be bypassing independent external peer review. This can limit global visibility and may indicate the use of internal channels as "fast tracks" to inflate publication records without standard competitive validation.
The institution's Z-score of -0.582, compared to the country's near-zero score of -0.027, confirms a very low-risk profile and an absence of problematic practices. This low-profile consistency indicates that the university's research culture values the publication of coherent, significant studies over the artificial inflation of productivity. By avoiding the fragmentation of data into "minimal publishable units," the institution upholds the integrity of the scientific record and contributes meaningfully to cumulative knowledge.
