Discursive Representation of Hybrid Regimes and Defective Democracies: A Mixed Methods Meta-Analysis of Political Science Literature (2018-2022)

Abstract

The research study analyses types of political regime-defective democracies and hybrid regimes-are represented discursively in academic literature from 2018 to 2022. Hybrid Regimes and defective democracies blur democracy-authoritarianism lines, prompting scholars to refine frameworks capturing their complexities in modern political systems. It engages a mixed-method approach-using computational sentiment analysis connected with qualitative concept analysis for examining narratives on politics and institutional dynamics. In the first phase of the study, 79 Litmaps-retrieved articles were narrowed down to 16 peer-reviewed articles from Scopus-indexed journals for in-depth analysis. In all, these were processed through Atlas. ti 24 to extract conceptual themes and to categorize sentiment toward regime type. The findings from sentiment and thematic coding convey that the scholarly discourse treats Democratic Backsliding with criticisms and strong negative sentiments, with military overreach associated with weakened civilian governance and compromised institutional independence. The study recommends the demand for institutional reforms needed to reinforce civilian supremacy and the resilience of democracies in hybrid regimes.