When making comparisons, people tend to use routinized standards, rules, and knowledge structures. Compensatory rules (e.g., "if competent, then cold", "if incompetent, then warm") allow for the quick and easy evaluation of groups when they are compared. We claim that the application of these rules is especially attractive for people who are motivated to seek quick and firm answers (people high in the need for closure - NFC). However, we assume that when people are confronted with expectancy‐inconsistent information, higher levels of NFC lead to a lower reliance on these rules. This is because the inconsistency may serve as a signal that the rules no longer provide guidance on how to act. We demonstrated these effects in three studies set in different group contexts, where we manipulated expectancy‐consistent and expectancy‐inconsistent information. These findings allow for a more comprehensive view of the dynamic and diverse effects of NFC.