The Conclusion provides a brief overview of important findings of this book. It then suggests three areas for future research: First, to improve our understanding of reputational mechanisms, scholars could further study why states sometimes refrain from publicly criticizing opponents whose norm interpretations were clearly shown to be inapplicable. Second, scholars could study the interplay of domestic audience and in-group reactions to norm interpretations in greater detail. Third, further research could explore how the explicitness of (dis)agreement over norm frames and claims affects norm strength, in particular how silence should be interpreted and differs from clear endorsement or criticism of specific norm interpretations. The Conclusion also gives guidance on how my alternate endings typology could be applied to non-state actors such as transnational advocacy networks, for example to study whether they prioritize gaining support for their preferred norm frame, behavioral claim, or both, when trying to establish new norm understandings.