Sakarya University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Sakarya University presents a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in its overall risk score of 0.018, which indicates a predominantly healthy and well-governed research environment. The institution demonstrates significant strengths in maintaining low rates of multiple affiliations, retracted publications, and hyper-authored output, suggesting effective internal controls and a culture of accountability. However, areas requiring strategic attention include a moderate risk level in institutional self-citation, output in discontinued journals, and a particularly high rate of publication in its own institutional journals. These vulnerabilities could challenge the university's mission to "produce universal knowledge," as they may foster academic endogamy and limit the global reach and external validation of its research. The university's strong academic standing, evidenced by its top national rankings in fields such as Physics and Astronomy (Top 3), Economics, Econometrics and Finance (Top 10), Mathematics (Top 11), and Computer Science (Top 12) according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, provides a solid foundation for this growth. By addressing the identified medium-risk indicators, Sakarya University can further enhance its research quality, ensure its scientific contributions achieve true universality, and fully align its practices with its ambitious mission.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

With an institutional Z-score of -0.919 compared to the national average of -0.526, Sakarya University demonstrates an exceptionally low incidence of multiple affiliations. This result indicates a clear and transparent affiliation policy that aligns with, and even exceeds, the low-risk national standard. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, disproportionately high rates can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit. The university's very low score suggests its governance effectively prevents such practices, ensuring that institutional credit is attributed accurately and ethically.

Rate of Retracted Output

The university's Z-score for retracted output is -0.362, which is lower than the national average of -0.173. This prudent profile suggests that the institution manages its research processes with more rigor than the national standard. Retractions are complex events, and a rate significantly higher than average can alert to a vulnerability in an institution's integrity culture. In this case, the university's lower-than-average rate indicates that its quality control mechanisms prior to publication are functioning effectively, safeguarding its reputation and reinforcing a culture of methodological rigor.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

Sakarya University shows a Z-score of 1.037 for institutional self-citation, a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.119. This indicates that the institution is more sensitive to this risk factor than its national peers. While a certain level of self-citation is natural, disproportionately high rates can signal concerning scientific isolation or 'echo chambers'. This value warns of the risk of endogamous impact inflation, suggesting that the institution's academic influence may be oversized by internal dynamics rather than by broader recognition from the global scientific community, warranting a review to ensure its research lines receive sufficient external scrutiny.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 0.360 for output in discontinued journals reveals a higher exposure to this risk compared to the national average of 0.179. Although this is a shared pattern within the country, the university is more prone to this behavior than its peers. A high proportion of publications in such journals constitutes a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This score indicates that a significant portion of its scientific production is being channeled through media that may not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational risks and suggesting an urgent need for enhanced information literacy to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

With a Z-score of -0.614, significantly lower than the national average of 0.074, the university demonstrates strong institutional resilience against authorship inflation. This result suggests that its internal control mechanisms are effectively mitigating the systemic risks observed at the national level. In fields outside of 'Big Science', high rates of hyper-authorship can indicate the dilution of individual accountability. Sakarya University's low score is a positive signal that it successfully distinguishes between necessary massive collaboration and questionable 'honorary' authorship practices, thereby upholding transparency and integrity.

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

The university's Z-score of -0.558 is notably lower than the national average of -0.064, indicating a prudent and sustainable impact profile. A wide positive gap can signal that an institution's prestige is dependent on external partners rather than its own capabilities. Sakarya University's healthier balance suggests that its scientific prestige is not overly reliant on collaborations where it does not exercise intellectual leadership. This reflects a strong internal capacity and indicates that its excellence metrics are largely the result of its own structural research strengths.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score for hyperprolific authors is -0.245, which, while in the low-risk category, is slightly higher than the national average of -0.430. This points to an incipient vulnerability that warrants review before it escalates. While high productivity can be legitimate, extreme individual publication volumes can challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. This signal suggests a need to monitor for potential imbalances between quantity and quality, ensuring that high output does not mask risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of authorship without real participation.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

With a Z-score of 1.913, the university shows a significantly higher rate of publication in its own journals compared to the national average of 0.119. This high exposure indicates that the institution is far more prone to this practice than its environment. This behavior raises potential conflicts of interest and warns of academic endogamy, where scientific production might bypass independent external peer review. Such a high value suggests a risk that internal channels are being used as 'fast tracks' to inflate CVs without standard competitive validation, which could limit the global visibility and impact of its research.

Rate of Redundant Output

The university's Z-score for redundant output is -0.279, which is statistically aligned with the national average of -0.245. This indicates a level of risk that is normal for its context and size. The data does not suggest a systemic practice of 'salami slicing,' where studies are fragmented into minimal units to artificially inflate productivity. The institution's performance in this area is consistent with the expected norms of its scientific environment, showing no unusual signals of distorting the scientific record through data fragmentation.