The author profile states that the user has prepared at least eight peer review reports for six journals. At the same time, this user doesn't have any publications registered in Web of Science. This is highly suspicious because invitations for peer review are typically based on prior publications.
This inconsistency can be explained by the fact that this scholar does not exist in reality, the identity is fake and was created by a paper mill.
There is evidence that this fake peer reviewer provided positive reviews for several publications that were published in several journals. Fake peer reviews and fake peer reviewers are one of the methods paper mills use to facilitate the publication of papers in reputable journals.

The fake peer reviewers were discussed in several papers:

• 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
• Matusz, P. J., Abalkina, A., & Bishop, D. V. M. (2023). The threat of paper mills to social science journals: The case of the Tanu. pro paper mill in Mind, Brain & Education. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/64j8h