React vs Respond

Question

I think questions are better if they're asking about how to respond to situations than how to react.

Since it's better to quote peer-reviewed articles than myself speak about this, let's see one from Psychology Today:

A reaction is instant. It’s driven by the beliefs, biases, and prejudices of the unconscious mind. When you say or do something “without thinking,” that’s the unconscious mind running the show. A reaction is based in the moment and doesn’t take into consideration long term effects of what you do or say. A reaction is survival-oriented and on some level a defense mechanism. It might turn out okay but often a reaction is something you regret later.

A response on the other hand usually comes more slowly. It’s based on information from both the conscious mind and unconscious mind. A response will be more “ecological,” meaning that it takes into consideration the well-being of not only you but those around you. It weighs the long term effects and stays in line with your core values.

A reaction and a response may look exactly alike. But they feel different.

What does the community say? Agree with my theory? Should we rephrase future questions this way?

To see the current status of questions:

1. https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22respond%22
2. https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/search?q=%22react%22

Answer 1

Those definitions of "reaction" and "response" sound purely made up to me. I've never heard anyone use them that way in normal conversational English. If those are conventional definitions in the specific field of psychology, then cool, but only the Cog Sci site should adopt those definitions, not us.

If I were to give definitions, I would say that a response is part of an exchange, in that it normally implies the response is directed to the person or group of people who first initiated the exchange. Someone says something to me, or writes a letter to me, or does some action to me, and I respond back to them.

A reaction makes no implication about who you are reacting to - a reaction is just as likely to be directed to an uninvolved third party as it is to the person who initiated the situation with you.

If people use these words with these meanings then we should leave the words alone - they are clear and function perfectly fine as is.

Answer 2

With respect, I'll suggest that this not be done.

First, I like to believe that any question's OP knows what he wants to say, and that his words are connoting precisely what he wants.

Second, the language is defined by its usage, not how it was used in the past, and not Psychology Today. The fact that it was necessary to include the PT definitions at all suggests strongly that in the actual language as spoken the distinction is a little threadbare.

TL/DR -- There is no equivalent of the Académie française for English.