Malcolm Gladwell

Rocky could have interpreted that touch on the shoulder in any number of ways. He could have ignored it, shrugged it off, or assumed it was an invitation for affection and turned and smiled. But he didn't. He chose to focus on it and to assume that Dodge had a hostile intent. That's hostile intent attribution, the pattern of interpreting everything as a threat.

Rocky could have interpreted that touch on the shoulder in any number of ways. He could have ignored it, shrugged it off, or assumed it was an invitation for affection and turned and smiled. But he didn't. He chose to focus on it and to assume that Dodge had a hostile intent. That's hostile intent attribution, the pattern of interpreting everything as a threat.

You can look at someone like that kid Rocky and offer an organic explanation of his behavior. He's a bad seed. He's wired wrong. But Dodge wants us to look at problematic behavior as a developmental problem as well. Somewhere along the way, someone's personal experience left them unprepared to make proper sense of the world.

You can look at someone like that kid Rocky and offer an organic explanation of his behavior. He's a bad seed. He's wired wrong. But Dodge wants us to look at problematic behavior as a developmental problem as well. Somewhere along the way, someone's personal experience left them unprepared to make proper sense of the world.

A very small child, for example, does not understand the distinction between an intentional act and an accident. That's something you learn. You gradually figure out that actions can come with any number of different explanations.

A very small child, for example, does not understand the distinction between an intentional act and an accident. That's something you learn. You gradually figure out that actions can come with any number of different explanations.

After talking to Dodge, I began to observe my own kids more closely. They're both preschoolers, two years apart. The big one loves to manhandle her little sister, and most of the time, that interaction is greeted with laughter. But sometimes, if my eldest goes too far, her sister cries.

After talking to Dodge, I began to observe my own kids more closely. They're both preschoolers, two years apart. The big one loves to manhandle her little sister, and most of the time, that interaction is greeted with laughter. But sometimes, if my eldest goes too far, her sister cries.

And I realize that what they are doing is, to use Dodge's phrase, learning how to make accurate attributions of each other's behavior. When the big sister's push is too aggressive, the little one learns, that seems to have a different intention from what we were doing before. She's learning the difference between fighting and playing.

And I realize that what they are doing is, to use Dodge's phrase, learning how to make accurate attributions of each other's behavior. When the big sister's push is too aggressive, the little one learns, that seems to have a different intention from what we were doing before. She's learning the difference between fighting and playing.

And when the little one cries out instead of laughing, the big one learns, oh, if I want to keep playing, I have to make sure that my actions are accurately interpreted. She's learning how to rein in her aggression. That kind of feedback loop is a crucial part of a child's socialization.

And when the little one cries out instead of laughing, the big one learns, oh, if I want to keep playing, I have to make sure that my actions are accurately interpreted. She's learning how to rein in her aggression. That kind of feedback loop is a crucial part of a child's socialization.

But in the case of the boy Rocky, what Dodge realized was that that process of socialization, of learning how to accurately distinguish between a hostile touch and a playful touch, had been disrupted.

But in the case of the boy Rocky, what Dodge realized was that that process of socialization, of learning how to accurately distinguish between a hostile touch and a playful touch, had been disrupted.

If your father is violent 60% of the time and loving 40% of the time, and you can't tell in the moment which direction he's going to go, then it makes logical sense for your own physical safety just to assume that your father is always going to be hostile. But when you take that assumption into the real world, onto playgrounds, into classrooms, into the workplace, it doesn't work.

If your father is violent 60% of the time and loving 40% of the time, and you can't tell in the moment which direction he's going to go, then it makes logical sense for your own physical safety just to assume that your father is always going to be hostile. But when you take that assumption into the real world, onto playgrounds, into classrooms, into the workplace, it doesn't work.

It makes you a bully, a pariah. It makes even routine interactions deeply problematic. And nowhere is this dysfunction more problematic than policing, of course. Because if you are a police officer whose early life and experience has left them impaired in that way, who as a result makes hostile attributions all the time, then how can you be a police officer?

It makes you a bully, a pariah. It makes even routine interactions deeply problematic. And nowhere is this dysfunction more problematic than policing, of course. Because if you are a police officer whose early life and experience has left them impaired in that way, who as a result makes hostile attributions all the time, then how can you be a police officer?

I don't know what Chauvin's upbringing was like, but I know when I saw the tape again after talking to Dodge, I wondered if Chauvin wasn't just someone like Rocky, all grown up. And the one thing Rocky can't be is a police officer.

I don't know what Chauvin's upbringing was like, but I know when I saw the tape again after talking to Dodge, I wondered if Chauvin wasn't just someone like Rocky, all grown up. And the one thing Rocky can't be is a police officer.