Evaluator disagreements about CSA allegations can be explained, in part, by individual differences in three attitudes related to forensic decisionmaking in CSA cases: "emphasis-on sensitivity" (a focus on minimizing false negatives or errors of undercalling CSA), which is likely to lead to a belief that CSA has occurred; "emphasis on specificity" (a focus on minimizing false positives or errors of overcalling abuse), which is likely to favor deciding that CSA has not occurred; and skepticism toward child and adolescent reports of CSA, which is likely to lead to a decision that CSA has not occurred. The aforementioned attitudes constitute predispositions or biases toward viewing CSA allegations as likely true or likely false. The authors suggest several strategies for limiting the influence of these subjective factors, such as training forensic analysts to be aware of personal biases and counter them, as well as creating a team approach to case assessment. Study participants were 1,106 professionals in the field of child maltreatment, representing a range of professional positions or job titles and years of experience. Each participant completed the Child Forensic Attitudes Scale (CFAS), a 28-item survey that assesses three forensic attitudes believed to influence professional judgments about CSA allegations. A subset of 605 professionals also participated in one of three diverse decision exercises in order to assess the influence of the three forensic attitudes on ratings of case credibility. 6 tables and 26 references