Psychedelic science often relies on numerous different methods and scales to measure psychedelic experiences, contributing to noise in outcomes. The field would benefit from standardization of such approaches. Here, we focus on how different survey methods for examining past psychedelic experience may influence subsequent reporting of subjective effects. Surveys of psychedelic experiences often ask participants to recall and reflect on a particular experience. Could the type of experience prompt people receive influence their subsequent self-reporting about a particular psychedelic experience? We investigated this question in an experiment in which participants were randomly assigned to recall either their most recent, most memorable, or first psychedelic experience and then to report on memory clarity, affect, adverse events, and other acute subjective effects. Data are currently being collected and analyzed. Additionally, we will describe an invitation to a field-wide many-analysts project, in which multidisciplinary research teams will assess the psychometric structure of the most widely used subjective effects scales via different analytic approaches, (e.g., network analysis, factor analysis). Through this work, we aim to address overlap and discrepancies in the investigation of psychedelics’ acute subjective effects, with an eye toward fostering open science practices and the standardization of key methods across the field.