Research Productivity of Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU): a Quantitative Approach


  • Dinesh Kumari Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishwavidyalaya
  • Neelam Malik 2Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishwavidyalaya
  • Seema Parmar Nehru Library



The present research paper investigate the research productivity of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak from 2011 to 2020.The paper carried out various parameters of bibliometric such as total output and cited publications; year wise distribution of research output; most prolific author, top cited articles of the MDU authors and most preferred source  by authors. This study found that the most preferred document form is article  with 2426 (71.31%) publications followed by review with 383 (11.26%) publications and most productive year is 2020 (15.20%) followed by 2019 (15.14%) among MDU publications during the study period. The study explored that in terms of number of publications, Pundir, C.S. is most productive author of MDU with  169  publications followed by P.Shukla with 148 contributions. It is also noticed that top  fifteen authors collectively produced 37% research output of total publications of MDU . The Aip Conference Proceedings contributed highest research output (42) among top ten preferred sources of university and these  top ten sources together produced  around 8.96% of the total research output. The study found that the article titled “Nanostructured graphene/Fe3O4 incorporated polyaniline as a high performance shield against electromagnetic pollution”  authored by Singh, K. et al. published in the year 2013 received highest number of citations.


Angadi, M., Koganuramath, M., Kademani, B. S., & Ramesha, B. (2012). Scientometric dimensions of innovation communication productivity of the University of Madras: A study based on Web of Science database. In Dynamics of Librarianship in the Knowledge Society (pp. 1120-1132). BR Publishing Corporation.

Baskaran, C. (2013). Research Productivity of Alagappa University during 1999-2011: A Bibliometric Study. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 33(3), 236–242.

De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to cybermetrics. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Kaur, H. & Mahajan, P. (2012). Comparative evaluation of research output: AIIMS vs PGIMER. DESIDOC J. Lib. Inf. Technol., 2012, 32(6), 531-36.

Kumbar, B. D., & Gupta, B. M. (2013). Contribution of Karnataka university in science & technology: Research output and citation impact during 2001-10. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 33(2).114-24.

Mukherjee, B. (2008). Scholarly Literature from Selected Universities of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh: A Pilot Study. LIBRES: Library & Information Science Research Electronic Journal, 18(1).1-14.

Potter, W.G. (1981). Introduction, Library Trends, 30, 5.

Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 24, 348–349.

Siwach, Anil & Malik, Satish. (2015). Bibliometric Analysis of Research Publications of Maharshi Dayanand University (Rohtak) during 2000-2013. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology. 35. 17-24. 10.14429/djlit.35.1.7789.

MDU (2021). Available at