| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
1.075 | -0.526 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.409 | -0.173 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
0.165 | -0.119 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
0.174 | 0.179 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
-0.858 | 0.074 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-1.597 | -0.064 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-1.413 | -0.430 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | 0.119 |
|
Redundant Output
|
2.356 | -0.245 |
Dogus University demonstrates a solid overall scientific integrity profile, with a global risk score of -0.145 that indicates performance slightly better than the international average. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of retracted output, hyperprolific authorship, and dependence on institutional journals, signaling robust quality control and a culture that avoids academic endogamy. However, this strong foundation is contrasted by medium-risk alerts in the rates of multiple affiliations, institutional self-citation, and particularly redundant output. These vulnerabilities, if unaddressed, could challenge the university's mission to foster "innovative ideas" and "critical minds" by potentially prioritizing publication volume over substantive contribution. The university's recognized excellence in key thematic areas, such as Engineering and Energy, where it holds a strong position according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, provides a strategic platform for growth. By proactively addressing the identified integrity risks, Dogus University can ensure its operational practices fully align with its commitment to societal benefit and scientific leadership, solidifying its reputation for genuine academic excellence.
Dogus University presents a Z-score of 1.075, while the national average for Turkey is -0.526. This represents a moderate deviation from the national norm, indicating that the institution shows a greater sensitivity to risk factors in this area than its peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the university's disproportionately high rate could signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or “affiliation shopping.” This pattern warrants a review of collaboration and affiliation policies to ensure they promote genuine scientific partnership rather than metric optimization.
The institution shows a Z-score of -0.409, which is well below the national average of -0.173. This demonstrates a low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals for retracted publications is in line with, and even improves upon, the national standard. This very low rate suggests that the university's quality control and supervision mechanisms prior to publication are effective and responsible. It reflects a healthy integrity culture where potential errors are managed before they escalate, reinforcing the institution's commitment to methodological rigor.
With a Z-score of 0.165 compared to the country's -0.119, the university displays a moderate deviation from the national trend. This suggests a greater tendency towards internal citation practices than is typical for Turkish institutions. A certain level of self-citation is natural and reflects the continuity of established research lines; however, this elevated rate can signal concerning scientific isolation or 'echo chambers.' It warns of a potential risk of endogamous impact inflation, where the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than validated by broader global community recognition.
Dogus University's Z-score of 0.174 is nearly identical to Turkey's national average of 0.179. This alignment points to a systemic pattern, suggesting the institution's engagement with these journals reflects a shared challenge or practice at the national level. A high proportion of publications in such journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This shared Z-score indicates that a portion of scientific production, both at the institutional and national level, is being channeled through media that may not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing researchers to reputational risks and highlighting a need for improved information literacy.
The university's Z-score of -0.858 stands in stark contrast to the national medium-risk average of 0.074. This demonstrates significant institutional resilience, as internal control mechanisms appear to be successfully mitigating a systemic risk prevalent in the country. The university's low score indicates it effectively avoids the risk of author list inflation outside of 'Big Science' contexts. This suggests a culture that values individual accountability and transparency over the pursuit of 'honorary' or political authorship practices.
The institution's Z-score of -1.597 is exceptionally low, especially when compared to the national average of -0.064. This result shows a low-profile consistency, where the absence of risk signals aligns with a healthy national standard. A very low score in this indicator is a sign of strong intellectual leadership and sustainability. It confirms that the university's scientific prestige is structural and generated from within, as the impact of its research is driven by projects where its own researchers exercise leadership, rather than being dependent on external partners.
With a Z-score of -1.413, significantly lower than the national average of -0.430, the university demonstrates an excellent and consistent profile in this area. The complete absence of risk signals, even when compared to a low-risk national environment, points to a culture that prioritizes quality over sheer volume. This very low rate indicates that the institution is not exposed to risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation, effectively balancing productivity with the integrity of the scientific record.
Dogus University has a Z-score of -0.268, while the national context shows a medium-risk average of 0.119. This marked difference signals a preventive isolation, where the institution consciously avoids the risk dynamics observed elsewhere in its environment. By not relying on in-house journals, the university mitigates potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy. This practice ensures its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, enhancing its global visibility and validating its research through standard competitive channels rather than internal 'fast tracks'.
The institution's Z-score of 2.356 is a significant outlier compared to the national average of -0.245. This moderate deviation indicates a much greater sensitivity to this particular risk factor than its national peers. While citing previous work is necessary, the university's high score alerts to the potential practice of dividing coherent studies into minimal publishable units to artificially inflate productivity, a practice known as 'salami slicing.' This behavior can distort the available scientific evidence and suggests an urgent need to reinforce policies that prioritize the publication of significant, new knowledge over simple volume.
