Contextual Effects on the Revision of Evaluative Judgments: An Extension of the Omission‐Detection Framework

When consumers are presented with negative information about a brand that they have evaluated positively earlier, the extent to which they change their initial evaluation may depend on the formats in which information is presented (noncomparative vs. comparative) at the two stages. In four experiments, we manipulate the format in which information is presented at an initial and at a challenge stage and investigate their effects on the degree of revision in evaluative judgments. The results of the four experiments suggest that when consumers receive initial information in a noncomparative format, a comparative challenge causes a greater degree of revision in the evaluative judgments than does a noncomparative challenge. However, when the initial information is presented in a comparative format, this pattern reverses, and a greater degree of revision occurs under a noncomparative challenge than under a comparative challenge. We demonstrate that sensitivity to missing information in either of the two stages is the process by which these effects obtain. In a fifth experiment we examine a boundary condition for these effects.