Ordinal response scales are commonly used in applied linguistics. To summarize the distribution of ratings or judgments provided by informants, these are usually converted into numbers and then averaged or analyzed with ordinary regression models. This approach has been criticized in the literature; one caveat (among others) is the assumption that distances between categories are known. The present paper illustrates how empirical insights into the perception of response labels may inform the design and analysis stage of a study. We start with a review of how ordinal scales are used in linguistic research. Our survey offers insights into typical scale layouts and analysis strategies, and it allows us to identify three commonly used rating dimensions (agreement, intensity, and frequency). We take stock of the experimental literature on the perception of relevant scale point labels and then demonstrate how psychometric insights may direct scale design and data analysis. This includes a careful consideration of measurement-theoretic and statistical issues surrounding the numeric-conversion approach to ordinal data. We focus on the consequences of these drawbacks for the interpretation of empirical findings, which will enable researchers to make informed decisions and avoid drawing false conclusions from their data. We present a case study on yous(e) in two varieties of English, which shows that reliance on psychometric scale values can alter statistical conclusions, while also giving due consideration to the key limitations of the numeric-conversion approach to ordinal data analysis.