However, this distinction was found to be less relevant in the present situation. There was no statistical software identified as being used in this study, nor was there any discussion of what consent procedures were used. The conclusion drawn from this study was that consumer behavior appears to be more rational as researchers are better able to predict this behavior in more situations. Perfect rationality results when either consumer behavior is sufficiently predictable or when it can be predicted from important outcomes influenced by consumer behavior. Thus consumers are becoming more rational as new models more precisely predict consumer choice in more situations. However, some interesting experimental consumer behavior research finds the opposite. This research showed that existing models fail to consider critical variables that can explain significant inconsistency in behavior.

The illusion of conflict can be resolved by understanding the difference between experimental and statistical controls....

This difference explains the obvious and dramatic deviation in the conclusions. Many articles in consumer behavior use experimental controls.
Experimental controls test rationality based on whether earlier absent variables exhibit significant explanatory power holding known explanatory variables constant. Therefore, these articles ask whether previously unexplored variables have noteworthy explanatory power on their own. Many Marketing Science articles utilize statistical controls. Statistical controls test rationality based on the incremental descriptive power of absent variables after taking into account for known explanatory variables. Statistical controls ask whether absent variables have noteworthy explanatory power beyond what is explained by known explanatory variables. In the end both perspectives are correct, but they ask different questions.

References

Shugan, S.M. (2006). Are Consumers Rational? Experimental Evidence? Marketing

Science, 25(1), 1-7.