Researching terrorism can be tricky, as one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter, and clearly distinguishing terrorism from other sorts of protest and violence can be fraught: the lines blur the more specific you get.
Some of the best-funded and most prominent research in this space is also tied to ultra-specific trends, organizations, and outcomes that are of interest to an individual group or government, often in response to an especially traumatic or headline-grabbing event (9/11 in the US, for instance, or the Troubles-related attacks in Northern Ireland). This can limit the value of the resultant findings and narrow the scope of what’s considered “terrorism” in a given research environment.
That said, there are still broadly applicable studies related to terrorism, and one such study (which was published in 2024) asked whether terrorism is actually effective, in the sense that it achieves the policy goals of those conducting the attacks.
The researchers found that acts of terror seldom achieve the stated goals of the groups who commit them, but that—depending on how successful the attack is, in terms of violence achieved and headlines-grabbed—they can sometimes be quite successful in attracting more attention, notoriety, members, and support for their group.
So while terrorists might aim to liberate an imprisoned population or usurp a hated government, they very seldom achieve those ends. But in the pursuit of those ostensible outcomes, they do often expand their numbers, attract more money and other types of support, and polish their reputations with the sorts of people who might be attracted to the idea of committing violence and sowing fear as a means to a political or ideological end.
Prior research (which this study used as a basis for its own explorations) actually shows that the majority of terrorists end up dead or in prison, not reveling in the glory of a mission accomplished; their organizations are eventually (or suddenly) whittled down to nothing, and they are replaced by other groups with other sorts of demands.
But leading up to that (likely) collapse, they’re able to inflate their street credibility and perceived potency, which can feel very much like walking the path toward success. And this is potentially part of why the modern model of terrorism seems to be so popular, despite being so incredibly ineffective at achieving much of anything beyond violence and fear.