Writing Technique: Using Psychology to Craft Realistic Characters
I have a bachelor's in psychology, which means I know enough to mess with your head but not enough to diagnose your problems. It also means I know a lot of random information about the human psyche, and over the years, I inadvertently created my own theory of personality. Since I use my theory to create "round" realistic characters, I thought it might help other writers.
There are thousands of worksheets for character creation on the internet. They ask for likes, dislikes, family trees, favorite foods, and spirit animals. But you know what? I don't know the eye color of the villain in That Pale Host. It's not relevant. I don't remember what hair color one of the main characters has half the time, and no one has noticed.
Want to know why?
Because not all information you can know about a character is relevant to a story. It does a writer no good to figure out the minutiae of a character's life when it doesn't make any difference to the book. My personality theory focuses on the information about a character that is critical to the story and doesn't waste time on their favorite breakfast cereal. Curious?
(One warning: if you happen to be a counselor or mental health professional, know that I've muddled and mixed multiple theories with reckless abandon. I claim no credentials other than my bachelor's degree! All these theories are for writing purposes, not research or therapy. With that disclaimer out of the way, let's begin!)
First of all, you need to know what cognitive dissonance means.
I see you yawning already, but I need you to know the technical definition before I explain how to use it.
Cognitive dissonance, a concept created by Leon Festinger in the 1950s, occurs when an individual has conflicting attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. Specifically, it can be two conflicting beliefs or attitudes ("I love cats, but I hate cat hair all over my house") or behavior that contradicts a belief ("I hate gambling, but I work for a casino").
Cognitive dissonance theory says we are all seeking a harmonious inner self and will find a way to make ourselves internally consistent when confronted with cognitive dissonance. Everyone's response to dissonance is different. The specific circumstances creating the dissonance may elicit different reactions from the same person.
There are three ways to reduce cognitive dissonance (according to most researchers):
Reduce the dissonant belief or action's importance
Add more beliefs that outweigh the dissonant belief
Change the dissonant belief
Oh dear. I sense more yawning. Grab some coffee and do some light stretches while I tell you three versions of a story.
A man watches a documentary about oil spills in the Gulf and feels guilty about his gas-guzzling SUV. He looks up some other news stories on the same oil spills that report them as less damaging, watches documentaries about how alternative energy like wind turbines and solar farms can hurt birds, and decides his car isn't that big of a problem.
A man watches a documentary about oil spills in the Gulf and feels guilty about his gas-guzzling SUV. He looks up the director of the film and decides the documentary was all lies because the director took donations from Greenpeace. He goes on a long weekend drive just to spite that stupid liar.
A man watches a documentary about oil spills in the Gulf and feels guilty about his gas-guzzling SUV. He can't afford to buy a new car, so he minimizes his driving time and starts saving up money to trade it in for a smaller car. He resolves to make the rest of his lifestyle more sustainable, like buying less plastic and petroleum products.
One scenario, but three very different responses. Can you see how the man either looks for ways to support his beliefs, dismisses the validity of the dissonant information, or changes his belief to accommodate that information? Which one resonates with you right now? Do you support, dismiss, or adapt? Or maybe all three?
When I learned this concept, it was truly mindblowing, and I saw it everywhere. I let the ideas marinate for several years with the rest of my psychology education, and gradually I formulated a theory of personality that was uniquely suited for writing fiction. After all, what is central to all stories?
Conflict.
Cognitive dissonance resolution explains how a character will react to conflict. Starting with how a character resolves inner conflict allows an author to zero in on the crucial part of the character's personality for storytelling.
“Now the million-dollar question: how does this work for creating realistic characters?”
When I write a new character, I ask myself these questions:
How does this character respond to being confronted by a friend?
By a coworker?
By a parent or pastor?How does this character react to realizing she is wrong about something she'd believed for years?
What are the most deeply held beliefs this character has about himself, and what would it take to change those beliefs?
The last one is always the hardest one, and more than once it has required months of meditation and even prayer to dig that deep into a character’s psyche. But the work is worth it. I also turn to coping mechanisms and defense mechanisms for possible responses to dissonance. They aren’t quite the same thing, but I think they often describe the same psychological function. Since not everyone is a psych nerd, I'll give you some examples of defense/coping mechanisms that a character could use to resolve dissonance. There are more, but these are the ones that I found useful and/or see most frequently in the people around me. I suggest asking google for more info if you're curious!
Avoidance- Staying out of situations or activities that cause dissonance. For example, changing the subject when your mom wants to talk about church because you haven't gone for two years.
Distancing- I focus on the emotional side of this coping mechanism. A friend tells you they don't like your new haircut, and you decide that you don't care about their opinion as much as you thought. You distance yourself emotionally from the person because they cause discomfort. This response is related to avoidance.
Compartmentalization- Keeping parts of yourself separate. For example, having a work persona that is quiet, thorough, and calm, but being wild, loud, and rude on the weekends at the bar because "you need a break." This is especially good for the villain who insists he isn’t the villain.
Denial- Ignoring or refusing to accept reality. Most examples are extreme (a smoker refusing to admit he has lung cancer), but it can occur in less drastic situations. A parent refuses to take their child for an autism evaluation and insists he's just quirky.
Conversion- This is an extreme form of a denial where a person's body manifests the conflict the person refuses to acknowledge. For example, an overly calm pastor of a turbulent church gets a stomachache every Saturday night that mysteriously vanishes on Monday morning.
Projection- Projecting your issues onto another person, which makes them the one with the problem. The classic example is a cheating husband suspecting his wife is unfaithful.
Idealization- Overemphasizing the good and downplaying the bad. For example, you vote for a politician who turns out to make a lot of decisions with which you disagree. You emphasize the choices you agree with and downplay any votes you don't like.
Intellectualization- Avoiding the emotional aspects of dissonance by focusing on facts and logic. For example, a pastor's wife spends hours reading statistics on fired pastors within their denomination to try to rationalize her husband being forced out without cause. (Yes, that's what I did when my husband was forced out of a church years ago. This coping mechanism is my go-to.)
Trivializing- saying something isn't that big of a deal when it is. For example, a man jokes that he didn't need the money he gambled away at the casino last night. I frequently use this one for villains.
Compensation- when someone compensates for weakness by bringing up or developing a strength in a different area. A guy doesn't have the best sales numbers, but he works to become the company softball team's best hitter.
Acceptance- the hardest one. You accept that you're wrong or that your behavior does not match what you believe about yourself and change your beliefs or change your behavior. One might associate this with very mature older characters, but a lot of "deconstruction" stories show the heartbreaking side of acceptance. Sometimes acceptance does not mean the right choice.
Did one or two of these coping mechanisms seem to naturally fit your character?
I usually look for several that fit together and use the defense mechanisms as jumping-off points. I also find that a character's backstory tends to flow out of their cognitive dissonance. I learn what I need to know as I put them in different situations and force them to react to dissonance. Then I use that backstory to create more plot.
For example, in That Pale Host my main character tends toward denial. She convinces herself if she just keeps pretending, it will all be okay. But that can only last so long, right? Eventually, her response changes (and no, I won't spoil the book by telling you how). Figuring out what made her change her response was the most important part of her personality, and it determined how she would talk to other characters and respond to smaller conflicts throughout the story. I thought through the same questions for all of my major characters which gave me background, side stories, and twists.
I hope you can see how the options above blend reducing the importance of dissonant beliefs, adding other beliefs to outweigh the dissonance, and changing beliefs. If not, let me know in the comments, and I’ll do my best to explain!
Go forth and use this for your own writing needs!
