Catholic University of Croatia

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND STRATEGIC VISION

The Catholic University of Croatia demonstrates a robust scientific integrity profile, reflected in an overall risk score of -0.234. This performance indicates a general alignment with best practices and effective internal governance. The institution's primary strengths lie in its capacity to generate high-impact research under its own leadership, its prudent selection of publication venues, and its minimal engagement in practices like redundant publication or academic endogamy. These strengths are particularly noteworthy as the university successfully insulates itself from several risk trends prevalent at the national level. Key areas of excellence, according to SCImago Institutions Rankings data, include top-tier national positions in Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (5th), Medicine (6th), Psychology (6th), and Arts and Humanities (7th). However, moderate risk signals in the Rate of Multiple Affiliations and the Rate of Hyperprolific Authors warrant strategic attention. These practices, if unmonitored, could subtly undermine the institutional mission of a "continuous search for the truth" by creating incentives that prioritize metric accumulation over the genuine "welfare of society." By proactively addressing these vulnerabilities, the University can further solidify its position as a leader in responsible and high-integrity research, ensuring its operational practices fully embody its foundational values.

ANALYSIS BY INDICATOR

Rate of Multiple Affiliations

The institution's Z-score of 0.175 contrasts with the national average of -0.821. This moderate deviation suggests the university exhibits a greater sensitivity to risk factors associated with multiple affiliations than its national peers. While such affiliations are often a legitimate outcome of collaboration, the notable difference from the country's baseline warrants a review. It is crucial to ensure that this pattern reflects genuine researcher mobility and partnerships rather than strategic attempts to inflate institutional credit or "affiliation shopping," which could compromise the transparency of institutional contributions.

Rate of Retracted Output

With a Z-score of -0.193, the institution presents a more prudent profile compared to the national average of -0.095. This indicates that the university manages its pre-publication processes with greater rigor than the national standard. A lower rate of retractions suggests that its quality control and supervision mechanisms are effective in identifying and correcting potential errors before they enter the scientific record. This performance signifies a culture of responsible research conduct and a commitment to upholding the reliability of its scholarly output.

Rate of Institutional Self-Citation

The institution's Z-score of -0.155 demonstrates significant resilience when compared to the national average of 0.288. This result suggests that the university's internal control mechanisms are successfully mitigating a systemic risk that is more pronounced across the country. By maintaining a low rate of self-citation, the institution avoids the creation of scientific 'echo chambers' and ensures its academic influence is validated by the broader international community, rather than being inflated by endogamous internal dynamics.

Rate of Output in Discontinued Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.376 aligns with the low-risk national standard, which stands at -0.284. This low-profile consistency demonstrates a commendable absence of risk signals in this area. The data indicates that the university's researchers exercise strong due diligence in selecting reputable dissemination channels. This careful practice protects the institution from the severe reputational risks associated with 'predatory' or low-quality journals and ensures that its scientific contributions are placed in stable, recognized forums.

Rate of Hyper-Authored Output

Displaying a Z-score of -0.506, the institution effectively counteracts the national trend, where the average is 0.472. This demonstrates strong institutional resilience, as control mechanisms appear to mitigate a risk that is more common systemically. By maintaining a low rate of publications with extensive author lists outside of 'Big Science' contexts, the university upholds a high standard of transparency and accountability, successfully distinguishing between necessary massive collaboration and practices like 'honorary' authorship that can dilute individual responsibility.

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

The institution's Z-score of -0.961 marks a preventive isolation from the national dynamic, which shows a risk-prone average of 0.807. This result is a strong indicator of scientific autonomy and sustainability. The university does not replicate the risk observed in its environment, where institutional prestige may be overly dependent on external partners. Instead, the minimal gap shows that its scientific excellence is structural and driven by genuine internal capacity, with its researchers exercising intellectual leadership in their collaborative work.

Rate of Hyperprolific Authors

With a Z-score of 0.492, the institution shows a moderate deviation from the national standard of -0.608. This indicates a greater sensitivity to risk factors related to extreme individual productivity compared to its peers. This concentration of output warrants a review, as hyperprolificacy can challenge the perceived limits of meaningful intellectual contribution per author. It serves as an alert to potential imbalances between quantity and quality, and to verify that authorship is assigned based on real participation, thus protecting the integrity of the scientific record.

Rate of Output in Institutional Journals

The institution's Z-score of -0.268 reveals a preventive isolation from the national trend, which has a medium-risk average of 1.531. The university does not replicate the risk dynamics observed in its environment, where reliance on in-house journals is more common. By avoiding excessive dependence on its own publication channels, the institution effectively sidesteps potential conflicts of interest and academic endogamy, ensuring its scientific production undergoes independent external peer review and competes for global visibility on its own merits.

Rate of Redundant Output

The institution's Z-score of -1.186 demonstrates an exceptionally low-risk profile, consistent with the national average of -0.247. This near-total operational silence indicates the absence of risk signals related to data fragmentation. This performance suggests a strong institutional culture that prioritizes the publication of coherent, significant studies over the artificial inflation of productivity through 'salami slicing.' This commitment to substance over volume reinforces the integrity of the scientific evidence it produces and respects the resources of the peer-review system.