Selection Power and Selection Labor for Information Retrieval

This study examines the relation between selection power and selection labor for information retrieval (IR). It is the first part of the development of a labor theoretic approach to IR. Existing models for evaluation of IR systems are reviewed and the distinction of operational from experimental systems partly dissolved. The often covert, but powerful, influence from technology on practice and theory is rendered explicit. Selection power is understood as the human ability to make informed choices between objects or representations of objects and is adopted as the primary value for IR. Selection power is conceived as a property of human consciousness, which can be assisted or frustrated by system design. The concept of selection power is further elucidated, and its value supported, by an example of the discrimination enabled by index descriptions, the discovery of analogous concepts in partly independent scholarly and wider public discourses, and its embodiment in the design and use of systems. Selection power is regarded as produced by selection labor, with the nature of that labor changing with different historical conditions and concurrent information technologies. Selection labor can itself be decomposed into description and search labor. Selection labor and its decomposition into description and search labor will be treated in a subsequent article, in a further development of a labor theoretic approach to information retrieval.

Description and search labor for information retrieval

Selection power is taken as the fundamental value for information retrieval systems. Selection power is regarded as produced by selection labor, which itself separates historically into description and search labor. As forms of mental labor, description and search labor participate in the conditions for labor and for mental labor. Concepts and distinctions applicable to physical and mental labor are indicated, introducing the necessity of labor for survival, the idea of technology as a human construction, and the possibility of the transfer of human labor to technology. Distinctions specific to mental labor, particular between semantic and syntactic labor, are introduced. Description labor is exemplified by cataloging, classification, and database description, can be more formally understood as the labor involved in the transformation of objects for description into searchable descriptions, and is also understood to include interpretation. The costs of description labor are discussed. Search labor is conceived as the labor expended in searching systems. For both description and search labor, there has been a progressive reduction in direct human labor, with its syntactic aspects transferred to technology, effectively compelled by the high relative costs of direct human labor compared to machine processes.

A labor theoretic approach to information retrieval

This article synthesizes the labor theoretic approach to information retrieval. Selection power is taken as the fundamental value for information retrieval and is regarded as produced by selection labor. Selection power remains relatively constant while selection labor modulates across oral, written, and computational modes. A dynamic, stemming principally from the costs of direct human mental labor and effectively compelling the transfer of aspects of human labor to computational technology, is identified. The decision practices of major information system producers are shown to conform with the motivating forces identified in the dynamic. An enhancement of human capacities, from the increased scope of description processes, is revealed. Decision variation and decision considerations are identified. The value of the labor theoretic approach is considered in relation to pre-existing theories, real world practice, and future possibilities. Finally, the continuing intractability of information retrieval is suggested.

Labor and Place: The Contours of Freedpeoples' Mobilization in Reconstruction South Carolina

Important advances in scholarship on the post-emancipation South have made possible a new synthesis that moves beyond broad generalizations about African American agency to identify both the shared elements in black life across the region and the varying capacity of freedpeople to assert their interests in the face of white hostility. Building on a number of recent studies of Reconstruction this article seeks to demonstrate that the varying capacity of freedpeople in South Carolina to shape and defend the new society that would emerge after the end of slavery was rooted in their relative strength at work and in their communities. In Charleston and its lowcountry rural hinterland, demographic strength combined with deeply-rooted traditions of collective assertion to sustain a remarkably vibrant grassroots movement that persisted beyond the overthrow of Reconstruction. From very early on, by contrast, former slaves dispersed across the rural interior found their freedom severely circumscribed by a bellicose and heavily-armed white paramilitary campaign.