As Kurzman’s analysis makes clear, revolutions are extremely multifaceted creatures. Their autopsy requires interweaving or at the very least considering information from numerous different fields and lenses. The allure of the subject academically can be derived from interest in any number of disciplines, political science, economics, social psychology etc. But I do I believe, which is what I think you want us to get at, is that revolutions have something more. Their allure is more than the sum of its multidiscipline parts.
I think sheer radical change and drama contained within a revolution makes the study of them seem to blur the line between reality and fantasy. Not in the sense that people are confused about whether these things actually happened, but that the extent that these events deviate from the normal course of behavior make learning about them in a vacuum not much different from consuming dramatic fiction.
The fact that these events did actually happen, and (in some of the success) radical change has been made, certainly makes revolutions captivating to people who feel in any way constrained by powerful societal forces. At times, revolutions seem like actualizations of the impossible, involving the removal of forces so seemingly powerful (in relative terms) that they appear to exist alongside the laws of nature. I would agree that many people are scared of radical change in practice, but if anything that fear only makes the study of revolutions more dramatic and seductive, whether they serve as examples of what could go right or what could go wrong.
I agree that the allure of revolution goes well beyond an interdisciplinary understanding of why they happen; in light of this, centering your response on fear is quite interesting. I know nothing of psychology, but its hard to imagine that part of the allure of revolutions comes from a fear of the unknown. Better stated, the things that scare us also naturally make us curious. We, as humans, want to know about what worries us–the things that invoke our sense of fear–because knowledge demystifies that which scares us. However, if fear is this motivator of curiosity, I posit that revolutions spark interest not because they “serve as examples of what could go right or what could go wrong” but because the reality of them forces people to think about how different their lives could be.