A couple of days ago, wifey asked me why the acting in television shows and films doesn't even remotely reflect how people actually behave. "Look up 'method acting'", I told her. "The idea is that the actor should get 'inside' his character's mind, and bring that personality out. In other words, the emphasis is on characterization, not realism."

After my explanation, she countered: "Ok, fair enough: then why do the characters so inaccurately reflect how people really are?" For that, I had no immediate reply: I had to mull it over for a few days before I could come up with an answer. "Good question!", I thought to myself. "Where is the disconnect..."

In the end, the explanation became obvious: in real life, people are-- and this is the most scientifically-specific term-- total douche bags. Whereas, in other media such as video games, film, or novels, they are presented as pollyannish-good, "you just have to get to know them, then they're alright", or even heroic.

In reality, people are almost exclusively driven by what Karen Horney identified as the "ten neurotic needs". For example, children bully because they want group acceptance; adults are passive-aggressive because direct confrontation would threaten their approval in the eyes of others; people vote because they have a desire for control and domination.

The other overriding aspect of peoples' behaviors involve "attachment theory". Hardly anyone today has a "secure" attachment style, and so their ability to emotionally connect with others is surface-deep at best, non-existent at worse.

A more accurate way of writing characters into works of fiction would be to have them seem superficially happy and well-adjusted, but then have major cracks in their personas become evident as the work progresses.