The agency of digital platforms in open science: governance, metrics, and ontological implications

Resumen

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.