The paper has a problematic issue, or a 'red flag', that allows us to suggest that it originates from a paper mill. Later, it was proven that the paper was accepted based on a fake peer review and then retracted. Do you see this problematic issue?

The email associated with this paper is problematic. The domain of the email is linked to Belgium, although the authors are affiliated with Kazakhstan. Moreover, the domain name contains an error ('resercher.be' instead of 'researcher.be').

This email 'red flag' and the violation of peer review process by the paper mill were discussed in the paper: Abalkina, A., & Bishop, D. (2023). Paper mills: a novel form of publishing malpractice affecting psychology. Meta-Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2022.3422