Systematic review reveals religion enhances regime legitimacy and restricts opposition in authoritarian systems.
This article examines the functions of religion in political governance within authoritarian regimes through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Situated in the broader context of comparative politics, the study aims to understand how religious discourses contribute to regime durability beyond symbolic legitimation. A systematic review identified that most research is concentrated in the Middle East and Asia, with Islam emerging as the most frequently analyzed tradition. Using quantitative meta-analysis, the study finds that religious discourses enhance regime legitimacy (pooled effect = 0.42), reinforce bureaucratic integration (0.36), and contribute to restricting opposition (0.51). Meta-regression further reveals that these effects are stronger in the Middle East and Islamic contexts, and panel designs produce more robust associations compared to cross-sectional studies. A risk-of-bias assessment indicates low measurement bias, moderate risks of reverse causality and selection bias, and a high level of publication bias; nevertheless, complementary tests such as Egger’s test, funnel plot, and trim-and-fill confirm the reliability of the findings. Overall, the results suggest that religion in authoritarian regimes functions not only as a symbolic source of legitimacy but also as an instrumental mechanism that consolidates institutional stability and strengthens political control.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perihan Gozum (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: