The agency of digital platforms in open science: governance, metrics, and ontological implications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3145/infonomy.25.029Palabras clave:
Science platformization, Sociotechnical agency, Information metrics, Data governance, Ontology of science, Open science, Data repositories, Scientific reproducibility, Technical-computational metricsResumen
This study aims to analyze how digital science platforms are reshaping traditional evaluation criteria by broadening the scope of objects recognized as legitimate scholarly output. The research, qualitative and exploratory in nature, conducts a documentary analysis of fifteen open science platforms, selected for their diversity in document formats, functionalities, metric indicators, and geographical scope. It examines aspects such as the types of hosted resources, available metrics and altmetrics, governance structures, authorship and versioning mechanisms, and emerging ontological challenges. The results reveal a plurality of scientific artifacts, such as software, datasets, preprints, workflows, and protocols, which challenge the historical centrality of the article and citation. The platforms function as visibility infrastructures, making multiple outputs computable and integrating traditional and emerging metrics, including techno-computational indicators. A strong geopolitical and institutional concentration is observed in the Global North, with a predominance of academic, governmental, and consortium-led institutions, although commercial platforms are also present. Finally, the study highlights an ontological and political shift, marked by the expansion of legitimacy regimes and the emergence of new models of authorship and governance. Although traditional metrics remain relevant, alternative indicators are gaining ground, promoting more pluralistic and contextualized forms of evaluation.Citas
Allen, Liz; O’Connell, Alison; Kiermer, Veronique (2019). How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship. Learned Publishing, v. 32, n. 1, pp. 71–74. https://doi.org/10.3145/10.1002/leap.1210
Ávila-Barrientos, Eder (2024). Explorando el papel de los repositorios de datos de investigación en el contexto de la ciencia abierta. Métodos de Información, v. 15, n. 28. https://doi.org/10.5557/IIMEI15-N28-001029
Baglioni, Miriam; Pavone, Gina; Mannocci, Andrea; Manghi, Paolo (2025). Towards the interoperability of scholarly repository registries. International Journal on Digital Libraries, v. 26, n. 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-025-00414-y
Barker, Michelle; Chue Hong, Neil P.; Katz, Daniel S.; Lamprecht, Anna-Lena; Martínez-Ortiz, Carlos; Psomopoulos, Fotis; Harrow, Jennifer; Castro, Leyla-Jael; Gruenpeter, Morane; Martínez, Paula-Andrea; Honeyman, Tom (2022). Introducing the FAIR Principles for research software. Sci Data, v. 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01710-x
Basile, Vincenzo; Giacalone, Massimiliano; Cozzucoli, Paolo-Carmelo (2022). The impacts of bibliometrics measurement in the scientific community: A statistical analysis of multiple case studies. Review of European Studies, v. 14, n. 3, pp. 10–23. https://doi.org/10.5539/res.v14n3p10
Bezuidenhout, Louise; Chakauya, Ereck (2018). Hidden concerns of sharing research data by low/middle-income country scientists. Global bioethics, v. 29. https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2018.1441780
Borgman, Christine L.; Sands, Ashley E.; Cummings, Rebekah L.; Golshan, Milena S.; Wallis, Jillian C.; Darch, Peter T.; Randles, Bernadette M. (2016). Data management in the long tail: Science, software and service. International Journal of Digital Curation, v. 11, n. 1, p. 128-149. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v11i1.428
Bourdieu, Pierre (2004). Science of Science and Reflexivity. University of Chicago Press.
Bozada, Thomas; Borden, James; Workman, Jeffrey; Del Cid, Mardo; Malinowski, Jennifer; Luechtefeld, Thomas (2021). Sysrev: A FAIR platform for data curation and systematic evidence review. Frontiers in Artificial intelligence. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.685298
Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002). Budapest Open Access Initiative.
Burns, Jane (2018). Altmetrics: A practical guide for librarians, researchers, and academics. DBS Business Review, v. 2. https://doi.org/10.22375/Dbr.V2i0.38
Challenges and Issues of Modern Science (2025). Plaudit: How to Give More Than One Like to a Scientific Article. Challenges and Issues of Modern Science, Dnipro, v. 25.
Chan, Leslie; Okune, Angela; Hillyer, Ruth; Albornoz, Denisse (2020). Open science beyond open access: for and with communities. UNESCO: Ottawa.
Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) (2025.). Agreement on reforming research assessment. Brussels: European Commission. https://coara.eu/agreements/agreement
Cousijn, Helena; Habermann, T.; Krznarich, Elizabeth; Meadows, Alice (2022). Beyond data: Sharing related research outputs to make data reusable. Learned Publishing, v. 35. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1429
Da Silva Neto, Victo José; Chiarini, Tulio (2023). The platformization of science: towards a scientific digital platform taxonomy. Minerva, v. 61, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-022-09477-6
Data Citation Synthesis Group (2014) Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles. Martone M. (ed.) San Diego: FORCE11. https://doi.org/10.25490/a97f-egyk
De Giusti, Marisa R.; Villarreal, Gonzalo Luján (2025). Acceso abierto, Ciencia abierta e indicadores de la visibilidad y el impacto de la producción científica. https://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/156386
Derave, Thomas; Gailly, Frederik; Sales, Tiago-Prince; Poels, Geert (2024). A taxonomy and ontology for digital platforms. Information Systems, 120, 102293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2023.102293
Díaz-Faes, Adrián A.; Zahedi, Zohreh (2024). Rethinking altmetrics as process-based indicators: a conceptual framework for construct clarity. Journal of Documentation, v. 80, n. 3, pp. 696-715. https://doi.org/10.5281/Zenodo.15108789
Dooley, Rion; Brandt, Steven R.; Fonner, John (2018). The Agave Platform: An Open, Science-as-a-Service Platform for Reproducible Science. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Practical Reproducible Evaluation of Systems (P-RECS '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3219104.3219129
Fecher, Benedikt; Friesike, S. (2014). Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought. In: BARTLING, S.; FRIESIKE, S. (Eds.). Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing. Cham: Springer.
Fecher, Benedikt; Kunz, Raffaela; Sokolovska, Nataliia; Wrzesinski, Marcel (2024). Platformisation of Science: Conceptual Foundations and Critical Perspectives for the Science System. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries, v. 34, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.53377/lq.16693
Fire, Michael; Guestrin, Carlos (2019). Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action. GigaScience, v. 8, n. 6. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz053
Gawer, Annabelle (2021). Digital platforms and ecosystems: remarks on the dominant organizational formsof the digital age. Innovation: Organization & Management, v. 23, n. 1, pp. 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2021.1965888
Gillespie, Tarleton (2010). The politics of ‘’platforms”. New Media & Society, v. 12, n. 3, 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738
Gillespie, Tarleton (2014). The Relevance of Algorithms. In: Gillespie, Tarleton; Boczkowski, Pablo J.; Foot, Kirsten A. (Eds.). Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9042.003.0013
Grabus, Sam; Greenberg, Jane (2019). The landscape of rights and licensing initiatives for data sharing. Data Science Journal, v. 18. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2019-029
Guarino, Nicola (1998). Formal ontology and information systems. In: Guarino, Nicola (Ed.). Formal Ontology in Information Systems: Proceedings of the First International Conference (FOIS’98).
Guédon, J. C. (2017). Open Access: Toward the Internet of the Mind. In: Budapest Open Access Initiative: 15 years on. BOAI, pp. 87-109.
Haustein, Stefanie (2016). Grand challenges in altmetrics: heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies. Scientometrics, v. 108, pp. 413–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1910-9
Herzog, Christian; Hook, Daniel; Adie, Euan (2018). Reproducibility or Producibility? Metrics and their masters. In: Conference Proceedings. Leiden: CSTS.
Hicks, Diana; Wouters, Paul; Waltman, Ludo; De Rijcke, Sarah; Ràfols, Ismael (2015). Bibliometrics: the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, v. 520, pp. 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Holcombe, Alex O. (2019). Contributorship, not authorship: use CRediT to indicate who did what. Publications, v. 7, n. 3, p. 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7030048
International Science Council (ISC). (2025). The future of research evaluation: a synthesis of current debates and developments. Paris: International Science Council. Disponível em: https://council.science/publications/the-future-of-research-evaluation-a-synthesis-of-current-debates-and-developments
Jarić, Ivan; Pipek, Pavel; Novoa, Ana (2025). A call for broadening the altmetrics tent to democratize science outreach. PLoS Biology, v. 23, n. 2, e3003010. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003010
Jasanoff, Sheila (2010). A new climate for society. Theory, Culture & Society, v. 27, pp. 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409361497
Katz, Daniel S.; Choi, Sou-Cheng T.; Wilkins-Diehr, Nancy; Chue Hong, Neil; Venters, Colin C.; Howison, James; Seinstra, Frank; Jones, Matthew; Cranston, Karen; Clune, Thomas L.; De Val-Borro, Miguel; Littauer, Richard (2014). Report on the Second Workshop on Sustainable Software for Science: Practice and Experiences (WSSSPE2). arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1507.01715
Khorasani, Mahyar; Kozhuthala Veetil, Jithin; Ghasemi, Amirhossein; Gibson, Ian (2022). Subject-Related Research Metrics in Different Scientometrics Platforms. portal: Libraries and the Academy, v. 22, n. 3, pp. 517-546.10.1353/pla.2022.0032. https://preprint.press.jhu.edu/portal/sites/default/files/ghasemi.pdf
Kim, Jihyun; Yakel, Elizabeth; Faniel, Ixchel M. (2019). Exposing Standardization and Consistency Issues in Repository Metadata Requirements for Data Deposition. College & Research Libraries (C&RL), v. 80, n. 6. https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/23531/30840
Knorr Cetina, Karen (2009). Culturas epistêmicas: como as ciências fazem conhecimento. São Paulo: Editora Unesp.
Koltun, Vladlen; Hafner, Danijar (2021). The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation. Communications of the ACM, v. 64, n. 12, pp. 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253397
Krüger, Anne K. (2020). Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation. Politics and Governance, v. 8, n. 2, pp. 58-67. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i2.2575
Latour, Bruno (2002). Ciência em ação: como seguir cientistas e engenheiros pela sociedade. São Paulo: Editora Unesp.
Latour, Bruno (1994). Jamais fomos modernos: ensaio de antropologia simétrica. Rio de Janeiro: Editora 34.
Longino, Helen E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: New Jersey.
Merton, Robert K. (1973). The Sociology of Science: theoretical and Empirical Investigations. University of Chicago Press.
Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira (2024). Desafios para a Soberania Epistêmica no contexto de Plataformização da ciência: por métricas soberanas entre assimetrias globais e assimetrias informacionais. Liinc em Revista, v. 20, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.vv20i1.7045
Open Knowledge Foundation (2025). The Open Definition. https://opendefinition.org
Pierro, Antonio; Tonelli, Roberto (2025). Beyond Stars: Measuring the True Sustainability of Open-Source Projects. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5183460
Pinch, Trevor J.; Bijker, Wiebe E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, v. 14, n. 3. https://www.jstor.org/stable/285355
Price, Derek J. S. Little Science, Big Science. (1963). New York: Columbia University Press.
Priem, Jason; Taraborelli, Dario; Groth, Paul; Neylon, Cameron (2011). Altmetrics: a manifesto. Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. 185. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/185
Priem, Jason; Hemminger, Bradley M. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: Toward new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI), Leiden.
Ravenscroft, James; Liakata, Maria; Clare, Amanda; Duma, Daniel (2017). Measuring scientific impact beyond academia: An assessment of existing impact metrics and proposed improvements. PLoS ONE, v. 12, n. 3, e0173152. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173152
Rushforth, Alexander; Hammarfelt, Björn (2023). The rise of responsible metrics as a professional reform movement: A collective action frames account. Quantitative Science Studies, v. 4, n. 4, pp. 879–897. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00280
Sansone, Susanna A.; McQuilton, Peter; Rocca-Serra, Philippe; González-Beltrán, Alejandra; Izzo, Massimiliano; Lister, Allyson L.; Thurston, Milo; FAIRsharing Community (2019). FAIRsharing as a community approach to standards, repositories and policies. Nature Biotechnology, v. 37, n. 4, pp. 358-362. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0080-8
Schumann, Livia Rejane M. A.; Calabró, Luciana (2024). Scientific evaluation based on citation indexes: History of the development of the impact factor, its weaknesses and proposals for other solutions. Research, Society and Development, v. 13, n. 9. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v13i9.46878
Smith, Arfon M.; Katz, Daniel S.; Niemeyer, Kyle E. (2016). Software Citation Principles. PeerJ Computer Science, v. 2, e86. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.86
Stodden, Victoria (2014). Intellectual Property and Computational Science. In: S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 225-234). Springer Open.
Thelwall, Mike (2019). Online Indicators for Non-Standard Academic Outputs. In: Glänzel, Wolfgang et al. (Org.). Springer handbook of science and technology indicators. Cham: Springer, pp. 835-851.
Tsakonas, Giannis; Papatheodorou, Christos (2011). An ontological representation of the digital library evaluation domain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 62, n. 8, pp. 1577–1593. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21559
Van Raan, Anthony F. J. (2019). Measuring Science: Basic Principles and Application of Advanced Bibliometrics. In: Glänzel, Wolfgang; Moed, Henk F.; Schmoch, Ulrich; Thelwall, Mike (Eds.). Springer handbook of science and technology indicators. Cham: Springer, pp. 237-279.
Vessuri, Hebe (1987). The social study of science in Latin America. Social Studies of Science, 17(3), 519-554. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631287017003006
Wilkinson, Mark D.; Dumontier, M.; Aalbersberg, I. J.; Appleton, Gabrielle; Axton, Myles; Baak, Arie; … Mons, Barend (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, v. 3, 160018. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
Wilsdon, James; Bar-Ilan, Judit; Frodeman, Robert; Lex, Elisabeth; Peters, Isabella; Wouters, Paul (2017). Next-generation metrics: Responsible metrics and evaluation for open science. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/337729
Wilsdon, Jame; Allen, Liz; Belfiore, Eleonora; Campbell, Philip; Curry, Stephen; Hill, Steven; Jones, Richard; Kain, Roger... (2015). The Metric Tide: Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363
Wouters, Paul; Sugimoto, Cassidy R.; Larivière, Vincent; McVeigh, Marie E.; Pulverer, Bernd; De Rijcke, Sarah; Waltman, Ludo (2019). Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal. Nature, v. 569, p. 621-623. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-01643-3
Khan, Nawsher; Yaqoob, Ibrar; Abaker, Ibrahim; Hashem, Targio; Inayat, Zakira; Mahmoud Ali, Waleed Kamaleldin; Alam, Muhammad; Shiraz, Muhammad; Gani, Abdullah (2014). Big data: A survey, technologies, opportunities, and challenges. The Scientific World Journal, 12826. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/712826
Zuckerman, Harriet (1977). Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. The Free Press.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Descargas
Dimensions
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Alexandre Maroldi Masson
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
