I received a peer-review invitation from Qeios. Is anyone familiar with Qeios? Is Qeios a genuine publisher?
Please check this publishing group journal if this journal is listed in your higher education commission (HEC) journal management system data bases or its SJR indexing etc.
Check out the answers to the recent question:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_anyone_know_about_QEIOS
I like the QEIOS platform. It is authentic, rigorous, and meaningfully engaging!
I received a request to review a Qeios article. When I looked at the submitted article, it had every appearance of being a thoroughly professional piece of work by a respected author on a topic that I found interesting. Accordingly, I see no reason whatsoever not to review it. I will gain from this by devoting time to studying and assessing a worthwhile piece of work. I disagree fundamentally with the author's position, and reviewing this paper gives me the chance to expose my own ideas and counter-arguments to peers. I don't expect to change the author's point of view, but I do expect to have a fruitful exchange of ideas.
I'm an advisor. The concept is similar to a journal I tried to start years ago (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzJ7IfoQk34&t=8s). There isn't much of a PR team, but it is legit, free to publish in, easy to publish in, and free to read.
But it is a small team. I have had an angel investor lined up for over a year and we still don't have formal materials to send to him.
I am also trying to think about this Qeios journal and I have been asked to review a manuscript and went on google scholar and saw that people do publish in it and I was a bit skeptical beause i do not find it in the list of accredited journals
I don't think so. For the first 2 times I got these invitations in spam. After that I started getting the invitations in inbox with subjects. However, I don't recommend getting involved with this kind of invitations. Please be careful with it.
I have accepted the invitation from Qeios , an online ournal, to review a paper. Dont know about the consequences.
The public review process in some platforms has raised concerns as it may be used or unintentionally function as a phishing strategy. Authors are limited to only a small number of free revisions, forcing them to decide between leaving their work unchanged or opting for monthly payments.
Harsh and relatively baseless reviews (by those who are invited through an inaccurate AI algorithm) that normally happen can potentially lead to defamation, a scenario that no author desires.
Ensuring the review process remains private is crucial to prevent such platforms' business models from taking advantage of authors and coercing them into subscribing. Otherwise, authors may feel compelled to expose their preprint articles with unresolved issues. It is advised to be super cautious when posting any preprints on such platforms or reviewing any preprint paper to avoid participating in this practice.
Personally, I find it goes against my academic integrity to make my reviews or comments public, particularly when it could potentially create an unequal relationship between the author and a company that holds authority over the data posted by the author (you cannot remove what you post). I believe in maintaining confidentiality and respecting the privacy of authors during the review process.
S A Hamed Hosseini "Authors are limited to only a small number of free revisions" is that still the case? It would be a major drawback, but I can't see anything about that in their terms on on the site now.
I also had a request for revision, the journal seems don'tn have indexed on the web of science and scopus, so I have strong doubts about its quality compared to Springer, Elsevier...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics
- Applied Statistics
- Survey Design
- Questionnaire