Over the last six years, small- and large-scale replication efforts have raised the suspicion that a large number of psychological findings—including some of our dearest effects—are flimsy at best. “Standard Operating Procedures” of the field have been shown to result in false-positive rates close to 100%; articles are filled with reporting errors and impossible statistics; transparency of the scientific process is often abysmal. These shortcomings have resulted in an unprecedented level of scientific introspection, giving rise to the development of new meta-scientific methods, new modes of scientific publishing, and a strong push towards Open Science, which will be covered in this talk.