In that context "rational" means "not impulsive or driven by emotion." i.e. involving some deliberation of possible consequences.
"Rationality" can be a normative or a descriptive concept. It is descriptive if it reflects the actual functioning of human cognitive capacity - which by definition involves some thought process. It is normative when it stipulates a particular mode of thought process as the norm or model, and rejects those modes that do not adhere to that norm or model.
If you say that rationality involves thought process that is consistent with the accepted rules of logic, or that it must take into account different possible outcomes, or use a particular formula to reconcile these possible outcomes, or that it is driven solely by emotion or impulse - you are using the term in its normative sense. And as we all know, one person's norms are another person's belly laugh.
If you say that people mentally divide information into discrete chunks (frames) and apply these chunks to a particular situation but not to other situations, and this has certain consequences for the outcomes of their process, such as that conclusion reached in one situation may be logically inconsistent with those reached in another situation, or that certain information's weight changes from situation to situation, or even the information may be altogether ignored in some situations, or that information that is missing is "filled" in based on the context - you are talking about rationality in a descriptive sense. You are merely describing how the human thought process operates without judging if it meets certain norms or standards.
Wojtek