本文主張新古典現實主義不宜再度檢視國內層次的眾多因素與變項，而應從實然的角度來思考國家如何評估威脅、國家如何選擇外交政策的類型。本文說明新古典現實主義並非為解決異例（anomaly）誕生，而是將非體系與理念因素納入體系理論的邏輯之中，也就是將國內層次因素解讀為決策者對壓力的反應類型，亦即決策者會評估並判斷應採取何種類型之外交政策。而根據決策者對國際壓力的知覺（perception），以及對於國內政治的評估（calculation），本文整理出國家具有制衡、扈從、避險，以及適應等四種外交政策類型。基於類型而非特定內容的研究方式，可使新古典現實主義無需面對複雜無序的國內因素，並專注於介於體系與單位之間的非結構與理念因素，進而避免陷入理論發展的退化過程。

This article criticizes the inappropriateness of neoclassical realism in evaluating factors and variables at the domestic level. Instead, the manner of which states assess threats and choose types of foreign policy should be based on empirical methods. The authors explain that neoclassical realism is not a result of solving anomaly but that it combines non-structural and ideational factors into the logic of the system theory. Factors at the domestic level are supposed to be systematically categorized and simplified by types of reactions among decision makers under various pressures. Based on the perception of decision makers toward external pressure and domestic politics calculation, the article concludes that there are four categories of foreign policy among states: balancing, bandwagoning, accommodating, and hedging. Focusing on the types rather than specific content as an intervening variable, the theoretical development of neoclassical realism will continue to be a progressive research approach, while avoids becoming degenerative.