Kingdom University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

Kingdom University demonstrates a robust and commendable profile in scientific integrity, with an overall score of 0.531 reflecting strong performance across the majority of risk indicators. The institution's primary strengths lie in its exceptionally low rates of hyperprolific authorship, multiple affiliations, and its significant scientific autonomy, as shown by the minimal gap between its overall impact and the impact of its internally-led research. These results indicate a healthy research culture that is often more rigorous than the national standard in Bahrain. According to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, this foundation of integrity supports notable thematic strengths, particularly in Computer Science, Mathematics, and Social Sciences, where the university holds the #1 position in the country. However, a critical vulnerability is identified in the significant rate of publications in discontinued journals, which directly conflicts with the institutional mission to deliver "quality" and "relevant research." This practice undermines the university's commitment to making "positive contributions" and poses a reputational risk. To fully align its practices with its mission, Kingdom University is advised to leverage its solid integrity framework to implement targeted policies and training focused on responsible publication venue selection, thereby securing its leadership and commitment to excellence.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution presents a Z-score of -1.156, a figure that contrasts sharply with the national average of 0.829. This demonstrates a case of preventive isolation, where the university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its national environment. While multiple affiliations can be legitimate, the institution's very low rate suggests its internal governance effectively prevents strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or engage in “affiliation shopping,” maintaining a clear and transparent representation of its collaborative footprint and insulating itself from practices that may be more common at the national level.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.324, which is significantly lower than the country's Z-score of 0.151, the institution exhibits strong resilience against systemic integrity risks. This favorable comparison suggests that the university's quality control mechanisms prior to publication are effective in mitigating the kinds of recurring malpractice or lack of methodological rigor that may be more prevalent nationally. The low rate indicates that the institution's integrity culture is robust, successfully preventing the systemic failures that can lead to a high volume of retractions.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score of -0.545 is notably healthier than the national average of 0.104, indicating a high degree of institutional resilience. This performance suggests that the university's control mechanisms successfully mitigate the systemic risks of academic insularity present in the country. By avoiding disproportionately high rates of self-citation, the institution steers clear of scientific 'echo chambers' and the risk of endogamous impact inflation, demonstrating that its academic influence is validated by the global community rather than being oversized by internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of 5.374 is a critical alert, significantly amplifying the vulnerabilities already present in the national system, which has a Z-score of 2.518. This high proportion of publications in discontinued journals constitutes a severe warning regarding the due diligence applied in selecting dissemination channels. Such a high Z-score indicates that a substantial portion of the university's scientific production is being channeled through media that fail to meet international ethical or quality standards. This practice exposes the institution to severe reputational risks and suggests an urgent need for enhanced information literacy to prevent the waste of resources on 'predatory' or low-quality publishing.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

The institution maintains a Z-score of -0.988, a prudent profile that is even more rigorous than the national standard of -0.746. This low rate indicates a healthy and transparent approach to authorship attribution. By effectively avoiding the inflation of author lists, the university ensures that individual accountability is not diluted, reinforcing a culture where authorship credit is assigned appropriately and meaningfully, distinguishing its practices as more stringent than the national norm.

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

With a Z-score of -1.955, the institution demonstrates a state of preventive isolation from the national trend, where the country's average is 0.845. This exceptionally low score is a powerful indicator of scientific autonomy and sustainability. It signals that the institution's prestige is not dependent on external partners but is built upon strong internal capacity and intellectual leadership. Unlike the national context, where a reliance on external collaboration for impact may be common, the university's excellence metrics appear to be the direct result of its own structural capabilities.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

The institution's Z-score of -1.413 is exceptionally low, especially when compared to the national average of 1.150, indicating a clear case of preventive isolation. This result suggests the university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment. The absence of hyperprolific authors points to a culture that prioritizes quality and meaningful intellectual contribution over sheer publication volume, effectively avoiding the risks of coercive authorship or the assignment of credit without real participation, and thus protecting the integrity of its scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 is identical to the national average, reflecting perfect integrity synchrony. This complete alignment with a national environment of maximum scientific security shows that the university avoids any potential conflicts of interest or academic endogamy. By not relying on in-house journals, the institution ensures its scientific production consistently undergoes independent external peer review, which reinforces its commitment to global visibility and competitive validation rather than using internal channels as potential 'fast tracks'.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score for redundant output is 0.230, which, while indicating a medium risk level, is notably lower than the national average of 0.351. This suggests a differentiated management approach, where the university actively moderates risks that appear more common across the country. Although some signals of data fragmentation or 'salami slicing' are present, the institution demonstrates more effective control than its peers, showing a stronger inclination to prioritize the publication of significant new knowledge over practices designed to artificially inflate productivity metrics.