Consistent with Kunda and Sherman-Williams' (1993) results, this study hypothesized that stereotypes of child sexual abuse would affect the recall and interpretation of child sexual abuse media reports pervaded by ambiguous contextual information, but not when unambiguous contextual information is provided. Participants were recruited through solicitations in the letters column of a local newspaper. A total of 189 respondents completed all parts of the survey. They were predominantly male (53 percent) and had an average age of 32 years. Abuse information was presented as a complete description taken from a newspaper. One-third of the participants were given a contextually ambiguous description in which information on the nature of the abuse, the identity of the perpetrators, and the location of the abuse were not specified. One-third were provided a contextually unambiguous description in which the contextual information was congruent with stereotypical child sexual abuse (rape involving an extrafamilial abuser in a public place); and one-third were given a contextually unambiguous description in which the information was incongruent with stereotypes of child sexual abuse, i.e., fondling by an intrafamilial abuser at home. Recall was assessed after a 2-week interval, and respondents provided written descriptions of their thoughts and feelings about abuse incidents, which were analyzed for attributional content. Findings supported the study hypothesis, suggesting that contextual ambiguity in media reporting of child sexual abuse is likely to perpetuate stereotypical perceptions, which does not serve the best interests of victimized children nor the accountability of offenders. 2 tables and 38 references