No published rebuttal of Boyer-Kassem et al.'s conjunction-fallacy refutation was located; the nearest technical follow-up (Lebedev & Khrennikov) targets a different question

Boyer-Kassem et al.'s own conclusion named the Positive Operator-Valued Measure (POVM) formalism as the most concrete unresolved repair path for a quantum-like account of the conjunction fallacy (claim-boyer-kassem-names-scope-retreat-and-povm-fix-as-untested-escape-routes). A targeted search for a published rebuttal or empirical rescue answering that specific critique turned up one plausible candidate — Lebedev & Khrennikov, "Quantum-like modeling of the order effect in decision making: POVM viewpoint on the Wang-Busemeyer QQ-equality" (arXiv:1811.00045) — read in full. Its own stated objective is narrower than the candidacy suggested: it tests whether POVM-represented questions can violate or restore the Wang–Busemeyer QQ equality for question-order effects generally (claim-question-order-effects-follow-quantum-qq-equality). It does not mention the conjunction fallacy anywhere in its body and does not individually cite or engage Boyer-Kassem et al.'s specific experimental refutation — that paper sits in the reference list as entry [14] and is swept into a single bulk citation range of "a few recent representative papers" ([9]–[19]) in the introduction, but is never discussed on its own.

No other rebuttal or rescue was found after genuine search effort. This is a finding about search coverage as of this capture, not proof that no such rebuttal exists anywhere — a distinction the vault treats as a legitimate "could not confirm or deny" outcome rather than a gap to be silently filled (cf. the parallel discipline in McGrew's treatment of absence-of-evidence). The status of both named escape routes therefore remains open, tracked at question-quantum-cognition-conjunction-fallacy-fatal-or-scope-limit.