Anqing Normal University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Anqing Normal University demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, with an overall risk score of -0.308 that indicates performance superior to the global average. The institution exhibits exceptional control in critical areas, showing a very low incidence of retracted output, hyperprolific authorship, and redundant publications, suggesting a culture that prioritizes quality and methodological rigor. Furthermore, the minimal gap between its total impact and the impact of its self-led research points to a high degree of scientific autonomy and sustainable internal capacity. Key areas of vulnerability, however, emerge in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations and the Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals, which are higher than the national average and require strategic attention. These findings are particularly relevant in the context of the university's strong positioning in the SCImago Institutions Rankings, especially in disciplines such as Energy, Mathematics, Engineering, and Computer Science. While a specific institutional mission was not localized for this report, the observed integrity profile strongly supports the universal academic pursuit of excellence and social responsibility. Nevertheless, the identified risks could undermine this commitment by creating a perception of metric-driven behavior rather than a focus on genuine scientific contribution. The university is encouraged to leverage its significant strengths in research integrity to develop targeted policies that mitigate these specific vulnerabilities, thereby reinforcing its reputation as a center of academic excellence.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of 1.521, which contrasts with the national average of -0.062. This moderate deviation indicates that the university shows a greater sensitivity to risk factors in this area than its national peers. While multiple affiliations are often a legitimate result of researcher mobility or partnerships, the significantly higher rate at the institution warrants a review. This pattern can signal strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or "affiliation shopping," a practice that could dilute the university's unique brand and misrepresent its collaborative contributions. It is advisable to analyze the nature of these affiliations to ensure they reflect genuine, substantive collaborations rather than merely administrative arrangements.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.625, the institution demonstrates an exceptionally low rate of retracted publications, performing better than the already low-risk national average of -0.050. This low-profile consistency suggests that the university's internal quality control and supervision mechanisms are robust and effective. The absence of significant risk signals in this area is a positive indicator of a healthy integrity culture, where research is conducted with rigor and potential errors are managed responsibly long before they can lead to retractions, aligning the institution with the highest standards of scientific practice.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score for self-citation is -0.556, placing it in a low-risk category, which is notably better than the country's medium-risk average of 0.045. This demonstrates significant institutional resilience, as control mechanisms appear to be successfully mitigating systemic risks that may be more prevalent at the national level. A certain level of self-citation is natural, but the university's prudent profile indicates it is effectively avoiding the creation of scientific 'echo chambers.' This suggests that the institution's academic influence is validated by the broader global community rather than being inflated by endogamous internal dynamics, reinforcing the external credibility of its research.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The university's Z-score of 0.502 in this indicator represents a moderate deviation from the national average of -0.024. This suggests the institution is more sensitive than its peers to the risk of publishing in questionable outlets. A high proportion of publications in discontinued journals is a critical alert regarding due diligence in selecting dissemination channels. This pattern indicates that a portion of the university's scientific output is being channeled through media that may not meet international ethical or quality standards, exposing the institution to severe reputational risks. There is an urgent need to enhance information literacy among researchers to avoid wasting resources on 'predatory' or low-quality practices.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution shows a Z-score of -1.157, a very low value that is even more conservative than the national average of -0.721. This low-profile consistency indicates that the university's authorship practices are well-aligned with national standards and reflect a healthy research environment. The absence of risk signals suggests that the institution effectively avoids author list inflation, thereby preserving individual accountability and transparency. This responsible approach ensures that authorship is a reflection of genuine intellectual contribution rather than a result of 'honorary' or political practices.

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

With a Z-score of -1.521, the institution demonstrates an almost complete absence of risk signals, performing significantly better than the national average of -0.809. This state of total operational silence indicates that the university's scientific prestige is not dependent on external partners but is structurally generated from within. The minimal gap suggests that the excellence metrics are a direct result of strong internal capacity and intellectual leadership. This is a powerful indicator of research sustainability and autonomy, showing that the institution is a driver of high-impact science, not just a participant in it.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.413 is in the very low-risk category, which starkly contrasts with the country's medium-risk average of 0.425. This demonstrates a clear preventive isolation, where the university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its national environment. While high productivity can be legitimate, extreme volumes often challenge the limits of meaningful intellectual contribution. The university's excellent result in this area indicates a culture that prioritizes quality over quantity, effectively mitigating risks such as coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, and safeguarding the integrity of its scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The university has a Z-score of -0.268, which is well within the very low-risk range and below the national average of -0.010. This low-profile consistency demonstrates a commitment to external validation and global visibility. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own journals, the institution mitigates potential conflicts of interest where it might act as both judge and party. This practice ensures that its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review, preventing the use of internal channels as 'fast tracks' to inflate publication counts and reinforcing the competitive quality of its research.

Rate of Redundant Output

With a Z-score of -0.853, the institution shows a near-total absence of risk signals, performing even better than the low national average of -0.515. This indicates an exceptionally strong adherence to best practices in scientific communication. The data suggests that the university's researchers focus on publishing coherent, significant studies rather than engaging in 'salami slicing' to artificially inflate productivity metrics. This commitment to presenting complete research not only strengthens the scientific record but also demonstrates respect for the academic review system by not overburdening it with fragmented, low-value submissions.