Parent Conflict, Accused Parent, and Sexism Beliefs Influence Credibility in Parent‐Accused Child Sexual Abuse Cases

When parent-accused child sexual abuse allegations co-occur with parent conflict, concerns arise that the allegations are fabricated by the child's non-accused parent. However, no prior research has directly examined how parent conflict influenced credibility in parent-accused child sexual abuse cases. There are also discrepant research findings on how accused parent gender and decision-makers' gender-based beliefs influenced allegation credibility in parent-accused abuse and conflict cases. We examined how parent conflict (low, high), accused parent (father, mother, mother's boyfriend), and participants' belief in sexism shift (BSS) (belief that men are now the primary targets of sexism) influenced allegation credibility. High parent conflict significantly reduced allegation credibility and did not significantly interact with the accused parent or participants' BSS. Allegations against the mother were rated least credible, followed by the father, and allegations against the mother's boyfriend were rated most credible. This, however, was moderated by participants' BSS: those with high endorsement of BSS rated allegations against the father as least credible. Legal professionals working with parent-accused child sexual abuse cases should critically consider how parent conflict, the accused parent, and their gender-based beliefs influence their decisions in ways that are not grounded in the facts of the case.