If the editorial team classifies a submitted article as potentially suitable for publication in the ZGMTH, then the peer review process is initiated. The quality of the submission is assessed through a double-blind-peer review with independent experts. That means the author and reviewer remain anonymous throughout the review process. The assessment usually takes two to three months. The reviewers are selected by the editorial team and are asked to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Contributions commissioned by the editorial team are also reviewed, although conference reports and book reviews are not. 

The editorial team makes their decision whether to publish an article while taking into account the opinions obtained through the review process. The reviews are made available to the author in anonymous form. If the reviewers recommend revision of the article, then the author may be asked for the appropriate revision by the editorial team. A final decision on the publication of the article can only be made once the final, revised version of the text has been received. The revised version of the text will not be resubmitted to the reviewers. The editorial team will then decide whether to publish the article or not; the editorial team’s decision is final. 


After your article has been accepted, you will be asked to make further corrections and edit your text according to the formatting rules of the ZGMTH. For the publication, you will also be asked for a circa 20-line abstract in German and English, a short biography (German or English), keywords (German and English), and more information about your contribution, which is incorporated into the metadata on our website. When published by the ZGMTH, your article receives a DOI (Digital Object identifier) and will be registered in specific indexes such as RILM, DOAJ, CrossRef, Google Scholar etc. The article will be permanently archived in PDF/A format at the Phaidra repository of the University of Vienna about six months after publication.