Definitely a book for researchers, this is a social-science driven collection of essays from 1990 from a conference on terrorism that mostly featured political scientists and psychologists. It's pretty dry, and a lot of the essays are poorly edited and overly long. Still, there are a few useful aspects of the book: 1. It starts with paired essays the explore the rational choice and psycho-pathological approaches to the study of terrorism that hold up well and are useful as methodological contrasts (if you are into that sort of thing). 2. It covers terrorist movements reasonably well. 3. It has 2 good chapters by Martin Kramer and Albert Bandura on mechanisms of psychological/moral disengagement that allow terrorists to carry out and justify their acts.
While this book is 3 decades old, it is useful in the sense that it summarizes the field of terrorism studies pre 1990s, when the idea of a largely irrational, fanatical, mass-destruction oriented "new terrorism" challenged the more rationalist (ish) paradigm of the 1970s and 80s. I am always a doubter of the utility of rational choice perspective, and the stronger essays in this volume drift from rat choice toward more cultural, ideological, and psychological explanations. Of course, many of the essays just say: "here's why you can't generalize about terrorism," which to me always seems like an admission that historical/contextual approaches are the way to go (good illustration of why I'm a historian, not a social scientist). So this book is really for terrorism researchers of many stripes, not for the general reader.