Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 10

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Unlearning and consent in the UK Fire and Rescue Service

Brooks, James, Grugulis, Irena, Cook, Hugh·2022·Human Relations

Abstract

Why does so much literature on unlearning ignore the people who do the unlearning? What would we understand differently if we focused on those people? Much of the existing literature argues that unlearning can only be achieved, and new knowledge acquired, if old knowledge is discarded: the clean slate approach. This might be a reasonable way of organising stock in a warehouse, where room needs to be created for new deliveries, but it is not an accurate description of a human system. This article draws on a detailed qualitative study of learning in the UK Fire and Rescue Service to challenge the clean slate approach and demonstrate that, not only did firefighters retain their old knowledge, they used it as a benchmark to assess new routines and practices. This meant that firefighters’ trust in, and consent to, innovation was key to successful implementation. In order to understand the social aspects of unlearning, this research focuses on the people involved as active agents, rather than passive recipients or discarders of knowledge.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/00187267211031179

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. 10.1016/j.lrp.2005.03.004 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1177/0018726715586243 · DOI
  3. Braverman H, 1974, Labour and Monopoly Capital
  4. Cockburn C, 1983, Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change
  5. Cohen-Hatton SR, 2015, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 21, 395
  6. 10.1177/0018720815578266 · DOI
  7. 10.1177/1476127004047620 · DOI
  8. De Holan PM, 2011, Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge Management, 433
  9. 10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1111/j.1748-8583.2004.tb00109.x · DOI
  11. 10.1108/09534810910997032 · DOI
  12. 10.1177/0170840619830130 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Fox A, 1974, Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations
  14. 10.1111/1748-8583.12315 · DOI
  15. Hedberg B, 1981, Handbook of Organizational Design
  16. 10.1177/1350507613486423 · DOI
  17. 10.1177/1350507615624079 · DOI
  18. 10.1287/orsc.2.1.88 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1177/0018726710386512 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1989.tb00729.x · DOI · Paper page
  21. Littler C, 1982, The Development of the Labour Process in Capitalist Societies
  22. 10.1177/1350507608096040 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/0090-2616(84)90011-1 · DOI · Paper page
  24. OED, 2002, Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
  25. Orr JE, 1996, Talking About Machines: An Ethnography of a Modern Job
  26. Penn R, 1984, Skilled Workers in the Class Structure
  27. 10.1177/0001839218769252 · DOI
  28. Saldana J, 2016, The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers
  29. 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0678 · DOI
  30. 10.1177/0018726708095710 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Brooks, J., Grugulis, I., & Cook, H.
Affiliations
  • The Open University, UK,
  • The University of Leeds, UK,
Venue
Human Relations
Published
2021-07-21
Volume
75
Issue
12
Pages
2300-2317
ISSN
  • 0018-7267
  • 1741-282X
Cited by
10
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Unlearning and consent in the UK Fire and Rescue Service. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/00187267211031179
The paper
Brooks, J., Grugulis, I., & Cook, H. (2022). Unlearning and consent in the UK Fire and Rescue Service. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267211031179

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.