You need to go one step further. WHY did your move flip Rybka from -1.4 to +1.7 (assuming you are Black)?
Was it a tactical blunder that allowed your opponent to force a fork in 2 moves?
Was it the fact that you just placed a backwards pawn on a semi-open file that can't be defended. Maybe that backwards pawn is a d6 pawn with your Dark-Squared Bishop already traded off for a White Knight, and subsequently, your opponent traded off his light-squared Bishop for one of your Knights. Now he has 2 minor pieces that can attack your weak d6 pawn and you have only 1 minor piece to defend it. Heavy pieces are equal, and White has total domination of d5, so you can't advance it. Clearly, that pawn is going to fall. Let's say this happened because you pushed your pawn from e7 to e5. The move ...e5 was probably a very bad move, especially if the e-file is not open like the d-file was, and it's harder for White to get to the weakness at e7 than it is for him to get to your newly created weakness at d6.
Then, the next time, when you think about playing a move like ...e5, you aren't just looking at what happens with the e-pawn, but also what residual effects occur, like a fatal weakening of d6!
I generally go through my games and try to identify what moves worked well and which didn't. I also use the computer analysis to see which moves were bad and good moves that I missed. But this seems to mostly just be identifying the mistakes that I have made, I'm not entirely sure how to take this knowledge and improve my ability with it. Any suggestions on things I should do would be appreciated.