Disaggregating Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Data: A Methodological Imperative for Equity-Centered Social Work Science

Clicks: 3
ID: 337953
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #31 of 32 articles by views in social work education

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Persistent ethnoracial inequities continue to challenge social work’s commitments to social justice, evidence-informed practice, and policy. Within this landscape, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPIs) remain among the most systematically misrepresented and statistically obscured populations in US social and health research. This characterization is supported by evidence documenting the routine aggregation of NHPI populations into broader racial categories, particularly Asian American, across federal data systems, administrative datasets, and scholarly research (Asian Americans Advancing Justice, 2025; Office of Management and Budget, 2024). Such practices suppress variability, mask disparities, and introduce systematic bias into population estimates. Although issues of aggregation affect multiple racial and ethnic populations, the case of NHPIs warrants particular attention for three reasons. First, NHPIs are a federally recognized racial category that continues to be routinely collapsed into other groups despite explicit federal standards requiring separate identification. Second, NHPI populations experience distinct historical, political, and structural conditions—including settler colonialism, territorial governance, militarization, and migration shaped by Compact of Free Association agreements—that fundamentally differentiate their exposure to social systems. Third, the relatively small sample sizes of NHPI populations in many datasets make them especially vulnerable to statistical erasure, resulting in consistent underestimation of disparities.
Reference Key
openalex_W7224933940 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Meripa T. Godinet, James C. Hodges
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal social work education
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/sw/swag056
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swag056
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.