As a screenwriter, someone who writes fictional characters and interactions, I couldn’t help but project my story-building process to what I was learning on Communication. When I am writing a story, one of my main focuses is having complex characters with enough background story to always have something to contribute to whatever is happening. Having characters that struggle to add anything, interactions where communication only goes one way, is usually a tell-tale sign that a character lacks buildup. The Linear Model of Communication, in my opinion, models what incomplete characters look like because not only do we not have a response, but we don’t have clarity on either the sender or receiver’s experience/ personality because of the lack of back and forth. The option for characters to be verbal(speaking/writing/sign language)/nonverbal (gestures, facial expressions,paralanguage, touch) communicators in itself would provide room for interpretation of who they are but without proper character buildup this is a struggle for writers to grasp and leads to a Linear Model Communications. Well-developed characters shouldn’t be ‘forced’ into communicating, they should have a natural communication. The Transactional Model of Communications illustrates a fuller picture of what good character buildup means with characters being both senders and receivers at the same time, and having experience and insecurities that shine through and impact the way they’re able to communicate.These factors create a character with it’s own morality and reason that makes their interaction with the obstacle of a story, or noise (the interference) more inticing as stakes are higher now that the characters have a purpose and have room to grow. This is how characters become rounder and more dynamic.