The study was based on an interview system and it was developed after the 9/11 attacks. The eventual results pointed out that deterrence means were to be used, under the form of diplomatic responses. Thus, one of the first means to respond to terrorism was through diplomatic channels with states that supported terrorism. In this sense, the message sent across was that terrorism cannot be tolerated. Also associated with diplomatic means was the revenge response; finally, the least diplomatic message was that of actually eliminating terrorism.
Another result found through the study was related to the issue of negotiation. Still a diplomatic means, it pointed out a deterrence aim. It showed again that terrorism must not be tolerated.
The application of economic sanctions, as yet another action envisaged, bared the same message of lack of tolerance for terrorism and revenge. The military action against terrorism point out to the same principle of lack of tolerance for terrorism and punishment, still it does not point out to deterrence or elimination of terrorism.
An important result of the tests performed was related to weapons of mass destruction.
More precisely, it is mentioned in the results that actions against WMDs conveys the message of revenge, rather than anything else.
Overall, the findings of the study point out to the main message sent across which is related to the belief that no terrorist act can be tolerated. All sanctions and reprisal means are used to convey this important message. Diplomacy is seen to be an important means of conveying this message, whether is through negotiation, through economic sanctions. Given the nature of the findings, it can be said that the utilitarian philosophy is applicable for the common conscience. Better said, the average person, regardless of the age, or nationality, given however a consistent academic background, views the response to the terrorist attacks as a much wider issue and one which needs to be addressed beyond the actual practical implications of attacks. Thus, the solution is proactive, rather than element based. Even if these findings cannot be generalized, the exercise.