Purpose: This paper aims to explore how an academic researcher and a practitioner experience scepticism for their qualitative research. Design/methodology/approach: The study applies Olt and Teman's new conceptual phenomenological polyethnography (2019) methodology, a hybrid of phenomenology and duoethnography. Findings: For the researcher-participants, the essence of living with scepticism means feeling a sense of injustice; struggling with the desire for simplicity and quantification; being in a circle of uneasiness; having a survival mechanism; and embracing healthy scepticism. They experience the essence differently and similarly in varied cultural contexts. Through duoethnographic conversations, they acknowledge that while there can be scepticism of their work, it is important to remain sceptical, persistent and curious by challenging traditional concepts. Theoretical and practical advances in artificial intelligence (AI) continue to highlight the need for clarifying qualitative researcher roles in academia and practice. Originality/value: This paper contributes to the debate of qualitative versus quantitative research. Its originality is in exploring scepticism as lived experience, from an academic and practitioner perspective and applying a phenomenological polyethnography approach that blends two different traditional research paradigms.