Equivalence in reliability and validity across 4-point and 6-point scales was assessed by fitting different measurement models through confirmatory factor analysis of a multitrait-multimethod covariance matrix. Responses to nine Likert-type items designed to measure perceived quantitative ability, self-perceived usefulness of quantitative methodology, and research values of quantitative methodology were obtained from 112 graduate education students at the University of Central Florida (Orlando). Systematic method variance due to numbers of scale points was identified. Separation of this systematic variance from true score variance resulted in greater reduction of reliability and validity for the 6-point scale than that for the 4-point scale. Overall, the 4-point scale was found to have better psychometric properties than the 6-point scale given the measurement conditions of the study. Factors that are speculated to intervene in the behavior of scale options are discussed to provide directions for further research. Nine tables present study findings. (Author/SLD)