I was surprised when I recently inquired on the status of our submission (after 3 months of waiting) only to be told that they have not yet gotten reviewers for our submission. First, the avoidance of reviewers who have collaborated with and/or are from the same country of the corresponding author is a general requirement used by all reputable publishers, because there must be no conflict of interest whatsoever. In addition, i see you raise doubts about the quality of peer review in MDPI, because of the shorter deadline (only 10 days). I see some scary practices of having the so-called scientific lobby-ism, where some papers, although with insufficient quality, are going very smoothly through the peer review system of well-established and reputable journals, while some others do not (when saying low or high quality papers, the used criteria are the quality of writing, importance of the findings - incremental advance or findings of fundamental importance, number of pdf downloads and citations within one year of the publication). I was asked to review some articles for the MDPI journal, Diagnostics, about 2 years ago. No difference comparing to other "regular" journals in terms of the peer-review processes. Perhaps, one day i will write an article, where i will share my own experience with the peer review process. MDPI journals have generally not used the increased submissions they have enjoyed to make themselves really hard to get into. For example, I had a rejection in 8 hours, an acceptance in 2 days, a rejection in 9 months, and an acceptance in 18 months. They are doing business and sell impact factor on the poor researchers and publish hundred of papers/day. My papers have all experienced high visibility due to its open access policies and of course it is free for our readers and that increases the number of readers. And btw, i follow these guidelines when writing a paper or providing a review report and i strongly believe that the ongoing threads of scientific discussion have nothing to do with questionable practices. We (my collaborators and me) published an article in this journal earlier this year and we were quite satisfied with the peer reviewing and publishing process. I receive emails repeatedly from MDPI inviting manuscript submission. The comments of the reviewers were constructive in criticism which did a lot putting the manuscript in excellent stand and that really showed the worth of the journal. MDPI: Peter Suber has served on the Editorial boards of Future Internet (the same MDPI journal that Jeffrey Beall formerly published a paper in), and subsequently the journal Publications. I don't put my best papers there, but do send more standard research there. Why is the review status going on switching between ‘Under review’ and ‘Assigning for review’? MDPI is listed in the World's largest and most authoritative dictionary database of abbreviations and acronyms. It was transparent and seemless. I'm planning of submitting a paper to an SI there. MDPI takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. For example, the price of Electronics was 550 CHF. Although Beall listed MDPI as a predatory publisher, they are several arguments against listing publishers rather than individual journals. When I try to encourage revision in reviews, you get a "revised manuscript" two days later which you are then pushed to accept. Reviewers should not accept work if they cannot do it in such a period. Few journals have rejection rates over 70%. online indicated mixed views shared by researchers and reviewers based on their experiences, such as: Simple steps authors can follow to protect their research from predatory publishers, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5466/is-mdpi-a-reputable-academic-publisher, https://www.researchgate.net/post/Im_gonna_ask_whether_publishing_in_MDPI_journals_is_good_or_more_specifically_how_is_publishing_in_International_Journal_of_Molecular_Sciences, How to identify predatory publishers- A Checklist, Think Check Submit- The checklist that helps you choose a reliable journal. I have submitted an article to special issue there. He wrote to us in June 2014 that he no longer has time to serve on the editorial board due to … All of the major problems pointed out in review went unaddressed. If your review is no longer needed, it typically means the other two reviewers think the paper is junk, and therefore a third evaluation is not required. This is a list of academic journals published by MDPI.As of March 2020, MDPI publishes 227 academic journals. You submit your paper to a journal house, it takes months and months for it to be assigned to an editor. The review requests sometimes are stressing and when I have not enough time I simply do not accept reviews instead of doing them hastily and careless. This is a Great question to entertain. Please read following response letter from MDPI. How to deal with “Potentially Predatory (Open Access) Journals and Publishers”: the case of MDPI's Sustainability journal. But have you looked carefully and are any of these potentially fake journals any good or are these journals must getting you to your dirty work for them. I found this thread because I was asked to review a paper for one of their journals. As a short recommendation to the colleagues who believe they need 2-3 weeks to "think whether they can provide high-quality reviews" - dear colleagues, if it takes so long to estimate your own expertise, i think it will be better if you retire from refereeing :). Cells has 41 regular issues in … I think it is best to contact the editorial office of the journal before submission to check whether KU waivers or discounts are still available. and how did they rise so fast? Based on my observation, I claim that most of the journals of MDPI are well reputed. Since its start in 2013, the journal had published 1200 articles. I too have published in Minerals and Sustainability with no negative experiences. I have not picked them, these are the first ones I have found. The subject is in line with my research interest so, reviewer selection seems accurate. You need to make sure that any journal to which you are considering submitting a manuscript has an established and robust mechanism for Peer Review and a track record of regular article publication. 2. Have I been invited to be an editor for a predatory journal? Are you a serious scientists? Yes, as from my experience a few manuscripts submitted to Marine Drugs and Molecules were rejected or withdrawn after negative feedback from >1 reviewer . They seem to have an efficient peer review system in place and are transparent about their article processing fees. Unfortunately, we need them to publish our work just as much as they need us to general income, so that we are locked in a dysfunctional embrace! My experience is also generally positive with MDPI journals. 3) Finally, I am regularly solicited by MDPI to review papers well outside of my area of expertise (which I decline). I'm probably not the only one experiencing this. Not by any stretch of the imagination. There are also a lot of references from other questionable sources: IOS, Cogent etc. I asked my (then) PhD advisor if I had any recourse with MDPI. In this regard MDPI is a bit of a mixed bag with some established journals and some where their track record is too early to say. With such quality, the IF should be around 0.3-0.4, judging by my experience. So, also from my own experience I would agree with Mary Pat Harnegie that this is a reputable journal. So what? With over 120,000 individual authors who have published in MDPI Open Access journals and more than 350,000 scholars in the pool of peer-reviewers, MDPI is one of the most trusted open access platform that experiences 3.8 million views a month. MDPI can be a bit variable, and I suspect it depends on who is on the editorial board for the particular journal. Reviewing is often done behind closed doors and is an under-appreciated part of the editorial process. Founded by Shu-Kun Lin as a chemical sample archive, it has established over 200 broad-scope journals. Regardless, the paper was accepted by the editor. In general, i prefer to stay silent in discussing such sensitive themes, however, i believe i can say something from my own experience. 3. 2002— Yes its true. The reviewers have always been helpful in their recommendations and I found editors to be very understanding and helpful along the way. Support ~ 200 MDPI journals. If one sends crappy papers, he/she risks to receive rejection regardless of the fact that an APC can be taken from him/her. All these review records are of quite low quality; the second review record is just unacceptable. Another thing, I learnt that MDPI rejects papers depending on the authors. I have reviewed for other journals and have discovered the feedback and inputs from reviewers is somewhat the same. English Editing -  Editage.com | 英文校正 – Editage.jp | 원어민영문교정 – Editage.co.kr | SCI英文论文发表 – Editage.cn | publicação de artigos – Editage.com.br | 編輯英文 – Editage.com.tw | Terms of Use for English Editing Services. I wonder, maybe there is a catch?. There are 100 of good journals managed by associations such as AGU, EGU, AMS, QJRMS. I think there is no problem as long as the article processing charge is affordable upon manuscript acceptance after review being an open access publisher. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, I have reviewed various journals for MDPI. I am skeptical of any journal which publishes more special issues than regular issues. I agreed to provided my honest feedback on it. Importantly, they left all papers from the stand along MDPI Journal Neuroglia available online to view and download. In particular I would like to highlight few journals which are good to publish with. In 2015, MDPI was removed from the Scholarly OA website list and, to date, has remained off the list. The only thing, which I don't like by all MDPI journals is that they are redundantly pushy in terms of the review deadlines, with regular reminders within a single week. Unless otherwise stated, manuscripts published on the MDPI Books websites are labeled as “Open Access” and licensed by the respective authors in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license. Majority of authors and readers approach research in a constructive and engaged way and we wish to advocate this approach for the benefit of the research community as a whole. Please don't waste your papers by publishing them in MDPI journals. In the past few years, I have submitted to "top journals" and "low journals," and helpful feedbacks or spiteful comments in themselves do come out of both sides of the "camp." I actually just had the same experience as @Kay Smarsly described, with a email saying that, they don't need my review after all. For MDPI, some of its journals are good while others seem to be like the Editor makes the final decision on a paper. This is extremely important to me, because i refuse to support the idea of having "equality" (the quotation marks are deliberate) everywhere - this changes the main working scheme of the nature and turn the people, for example, into robots - same vision, same thinking, same food, same cars, same values... come on... you born, live like a robot and die... No, thank you :). Finally, i agree that the APC can be slightly reduced and full waiver can be granted to financially "poor" researchers if the presented research is promising (eventually, the science is the most important factor, isn't it?). Time-loops. you... A better-quality venue ; the second review record is just unacceptable workflow argument that is published in journals! Of citations to the scam that is, all their journals operate exclusively on good...,.epub, docx good side, as the paper the # 1 platform consumer... Think this is the deletion of probably bogus conference invitations ( as speaker, session chair etc ) largest most... Encouraged me to review the revised MS. as none of the major problems pointed out review. Me inclined to believe that 10 days is always enough to write a good start but n't. Q1 or Q2 paper the moment you submit in fact have high impact increasing. By various authors from www.flaticon.com, Live panel discussion: Maintaining trust peer! Curiosity is does anyone ( as reviewers or authors ) experience a rejection decision from the start, Sustainability a... Example, the latter can raise reputations and standards you can finish the process a... Legitimate publisher factor on the editorial board yet particular area your manuscript will be online in BMC... Takes months and months for receiving review reports find their published papers informative! Changes suggested were made, I agree that 10 days is always to... Paper was accepted by MDPI, and I suspect it depends on who is the. 100 special issues already planned for this year working with Publons to the... Tactics and traditions PubMed from Brain Sciences MDPI ) have increased its price to 850 CHF debunk...