| Indicator | University Z-score | Average country Z-score |
|---|---|---|
|
Multi-affiliation
|
2.420 | -0.062 |
|
Retracted Output
|
-0.559 | -0.050 |
|
Institutional Self-Citation
|
-0.642 | 0.045 |
|
Discontinued Journals Output
|
-0.486 | -0.024 |
|
Hyperauthored Output
|
0.377 | -0.721 |
|
Leadership Impact Gap
|
-0.904 | -0.809 |
|
Hyperprolific Authors
|
-0.064 | 0.425 |
|
Institutional Journal Output
|
-0.268 | -0.010 |
|
Redundant Output
|
-0.478 | -0.515 |
ShanghaiTech University presents a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.139 indicating performance that is slightly better than the global average. The institution demonstrates exceptional governance in several key areas, showing very low risk in retracted output, publication in discontinued journals, redundant output, and dependency on institutional journals. Furthermore, the university exhibits notable resilience by maintaining low-risk levels for institutional self-citation and hyperprolific authors, effectively counteracting trends observed at the national level. The primary areas for strategic attention are a moderate deviation in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations and the Rate of Hyper-Authored Output, which are higher than the national average. These strengths in research integrity provide a solid foundation for the university's world-class leadership in thematic areas identified by SCImago Institutions Rankings data, including Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics, and Environmental Science. While a specific mission statement was not provided, the identified vulnerabilities in authorship and affiliation practices could challenge the credibility underpinning any mission of excellence and societal impact. Overall, ShanghaiTech University’s profile is one of strong scientific stewardship; a focused effort to refine policies governing authorship and affiliations will further solidify its standing as a global leader in both research innovation and ethical practice.
The institution shows a greater sensitivity to risk factors in this area than its national peers, with a Z-score of 2.420 marking a moderate deviation from the country's low-risk average of -0.062. While multiple affiliations are often legitimate, this disproportionately high rate warrants a review to ensure transparency and substance behind collaborative claims. The indicator serves as a moderate alert to verify that these affiliations reflect genuine partnerships rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping,” thereby safeguarding the university's reputational integrity.
The university demonstrates excellent control over publication quality, with a very low-risk Z-score of -0.559 that is consistent with the secure national environment (Z-score -0.050). This absence of risk signals indicates that quality control mechanisms and responsible supervision prior to publication are functioning effectively. A rate significantly below the global average is a hallmark of a healthy integrity culture, reflecting strong methodological rigor and a commitment to producing reliable scientific work.
ShanghaiTech University displays strong institutional resilience, effectively mitigating a risk that is more prevalent at the national level. Its low-risk Z-score of -0.642 contrasts positively with the country's medium-risk average of 0.045. This performance indicates that the institution successfully avoids creating scientific 'echo chambers' where work is validated without sufficient external scrutiny. By maintaining a low rate of self-citation, the university ensures its academic influence is driven by global community recognition rather than being oversized by internal dynamics.
The institution maintains a very low-risk profile (Z-score -0.486) that aligns with the national standard (Z-score -0.024), demonstrating a strong commitment to publishing in reputable venues. This near-absence of publications in discontinued journals constitutes a positive signal regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. It confirms that the institution's research community is well-equipped to avoid predatory or low-quality media, thereby protecting its reputation and ensuring scientific resources are channeled toward impactful outlets.
The institution's practices show a moderate deviation from the national norm, with a Z-score of 0.377 indicating a higher incidence of hyper-authorship compared to the country's low-risk average of -0.721. This suggests a greater sensitivity to risk factors related to authorship attribution. Outside of "Big Science" contexts where extensive author lists are standard, this pattern serves as a signal to ensure a clear distinction is maintained between necessary massive collaboration and "honorary" authorship practices that can dilute individual accountability and transparency.
The institution exhibits an exceptionally strong profile in this area, with a Z-score of -0.904 that is even lower than the country's already very low-risk average of -0.809. This result signifies a total absence of risk signals. The minimal gap indicates that the university's scientific prestige is structural and generated from within, reflecting true internal capacity. This demonstrates that its high-impact research is overwhelmingly driven by its own intellectual leadership rather than being dependent on external partners for prestige.
The university's control mechanisms appear to effectively mitigate a systemic risk present in the country. Its low-risk Z-score of -0.064 stands in positive contrast to the medium-risk national average of 0.425. This suggests an institutional culture that successfully promotes a balance between productivity and quality. By managing this indicator well, the university discourages practices such as coercive authorship or data fragmentation that prioritize metrics over the integrity of the scientific record, ensuring authorship reflects meaningful intellectual contribution.
The institution's publication strategy aligns with a secure national environment, showing a very low Z-score of -0.268 compared to the country's low-risk score of -0.010. This absence of risk signals confirms that the university avoids over-reliance on its own journals for dissemination. This practice prevents potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review and achieves global visibility through standard competitive validation channels.
The institution is in complete alignment with a national environment of maximum scientific security regarding publication integrity. Its Z-score of -0.478 is statistically in sync with the country's very low-risk average of -0.515. This integrity synchrony points to a strong institutional culture that prioritizes the generation of significant new knowledge over the artificial inflation of productivity metrics. The near-absence of redundant output suggests that researchers are not fragmenting coherent studies into 'minimal publishable units,' thereby upholding the value of the scientific evidence base.
