The Sagely.Digital Journal or SDJ (ISSN 2771-5396) is published quarterly in February, May, August, and November by Spikey U, 7901 4th St N STE 4000 St. Petersburg, FL 33702.
@ 2022 by The Spikey U. All rights reserved.
As a scholarly publisher Spikey U is committed to the highest standards of publishing practices. We publish only peer-reviewed journals of original scholarship and support and encourage our authors’ own efforts to promote and disseminate their works. Our policies enable authors to use their works after publication in their scholarship, teaching, and research activities.
Editorial Responsibilities

All publication decisions are the responsibility of the journal editor or editors, who are respected scholars in good standing. The editors are tasked with maintaining editorial principles and practices that conform to the conventions in their field. Editorial decisions are made following rigorous, fair, and timely peer review. Initial feedback is usually provided within 4 weeks.​​​​​​​
Author Responsibilities

The Spikey U charges a £154/€182 /$275 submission fee. Authors submitting a manuscript for consideration must warrant that their work is original and does not infringe upon the intellectual property rights or other rights of any individual or entity. Authors are required to secure any necessary permissions to include copyrighted material in their article, and to provide the disclosures of conflicts of interest or funding sources.
To publish open access authors are required to pay an article-processing charge(APC). The APC for all published articles is as follows, subject to VAT or local taxes where applicable: £2790.00/€3325.00/$3760.00
An embargo is a period during which the author may not make the final published version of their work public in any way, such as submitting it to an institutional or governmental repository or posting to a personal website. The Embargo period is calculated from the Posted Online date found on the abstract page of your article. The Embargo period is 12 months.         
Supported by
This label may appear on an article, a topic, or a section of the site when it's content has been funded – or part-funded – by a third party that wants to align itself with a subject.
Sponsored statements
Sponsored statement is paid for by the third party and is produced without the involvement of Spikey U's editorial team – sometimes it will be written by the third party, and sometimes by a freelance journalist at the direction of the third party. 
Size: 4.5 in wide x 7.5 in tall £990.
Size: 4.5 in wide x 3.625 in tall or  2.125 in wide x 7.5 in tall £590.
Size: 310 px wide x 250 px tall £390 per month
Errors and Corrections

The rigorous peer review practices are designed to detect and resolve errors or instances of authorial misconduct prior to publication. Occasionally, however, it may be necessary to correct a published article. When notified of possible errors or corrections, the editor(s) of the journal will review and resolve them according to the best practices. In all cases, the guiding principle is to preserve the integrity of the scholarly version of record. Any post-publication corrections are clearly indicated to readers of the original work.

Access to our publications is available via personal or institutional subscription or one-time purchase. Certain published work is made freely available (Gold open access).

Transformative Journal
Spikey U is committed to sustainable Open Access (OA) publishing and working with our society partners to ensure funder compliance on behalf of our authors.  In addition to our fully OA publishing programme and transformative agreements, we are piloting transformative journal status for SDJ. SDJ is committing to increase the proportion of OA content annually and to transition to fully OA as soon as possible and in any event no later than when 75% of its research content is published Open Access.
Peer Review Policy, Process and Guidance
Peer reviewer selection is critical to the publication process. It is based on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, conflict of interest and previous performance. Speed, thoroughness, sound reasoning and collegiality are highly desirable. 

●    Editor(s) are expected to obtain a minimum of two peer reviewers for manuscripts reporting primary research or secondary analysis of primary research. Authors can suggest potential reviewers, and to request that some be excluded from consideration. Each manuscript should be reviewed by at least one reviewer who was not suggested by the author. Where it is not possible to obtain two independent peer reviewers the decision to publish is based on one peer review report. 

●    Manuscripts that do not report primary research or secondary analysis of primary research may be assessed by the Editor if the topic is in the area of his/her expertise and the Editor should sign the review to ensure transparency in the peer review process.
The following conventions should be respected:.
Reviews should be conducted objectively.
 Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate, as are defamatory/libelous remarks. 
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references. 
Reviewers should declare any potential competing interests.
 Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts with which they believe they have a competing interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of material supplied to them and not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work.
It is the policy of the SDJ to publish papers only if the data used in the analysis are clearly and precisely documented and are readily available to any researcher for purposes of replication. Authors of accepted papers that contain empirical work, simulations, or experimental work must provide to the Journal, prior to publication, the data, programs, and other details of the computations sufficient to permit replication. These will be posted on the SDJ Web site. The editors should be notified at the time of submission if the data used in a paper are proprietary or if, for some other reason, the requirements above cannot be met.
After acceptance, authors are expected to send their data, programs, and sufficient details to permit replication, in electronic form, to the SDJ office. Complete instructions will be provided to the author with the acceptance letter.
Our policies differ somewhat for econometric and simulation papers and for experimental papers.
For econometric and simulation papers, the minimum requirement should include the data set(s) and programs used to run the final models, plus a description of how previous intermediate data sets and programs were employed to create the final data set(s). Authors are invited to submit these intermediate data files and programs as an option; if they are not provided, authors must fully cooperate with investigators seeking to conduct a replication who request them. The data files and programs can be provided in any format using any statistical package or software, but a Readme PDF file documenting the purpose and format of each file provided and instructing a user on how replication can be conducted should also be provided.
If some or all of the data are proprietary and an exemption from this requirement has been approved by the editor, authors must still provide a copy of the programs used to create the final results. We require this because the criterion for exemption from the data availability policy is that other investigators can, in principle, obtain the data independently. These authors must also provide in their Readme PDF file details of how the proprietary data can be obtained by others.
For experimental papers, the SDJ has a more detailed policy, including requirements for submitted papers and for accepted papers. We normally expect authors of experimental articles to supply the following supplementary materials (any exceptions to this policy should be requested at the time of submission):
The original instructions. These should be summarized as part of the discussion of experimental design in the submitted manuscript and provided in full as an appendix at the time of submission. The instructions should be presented in a way that, together with the design summary, conveys the protocol clearly enough that the design could be replicated by a reasonably skilled experimentalist. For example, if different instructions were used for different sessions, the correspondence should be indicated.
Information about subject eligibility or selection, such as exclusions based on past participation in experiments, college major, etc. This should be summarized as part of the discussion of experimental design in the submitted manuscript.
Any computer programs, configuration files, or scripts used to run the experiment and/or to analyze the data. These should be summarized as appropriate in the submitted manuscript and provided in full as an appendix when the final version of a manuscript is sent in. (Data summaries, intermediate results, and advice about how to use the programs are welcome but not required.)
The raw data from the experiment. These should be summarized as appropriate in the submitted manuscript and provided in full as an appendix when the final version of an accepted manuscript is sent in, with sufficient explanation to make it possible to use the submitted computer programs to replicate the data analysis.
If the paper is accepted by the SDJ, the appendices containing instructions, the computer programs, configuration files, or scripts used to run the experiment and/or analyze the data, and the raw data will be archived on the SDJ Web site when the paper appears.
Back to Top