It could be said that psychology has been in a replication crisis for a long time; however, in 2011 two key occurrences, the scientific fraud case of Diederik Stapel and Daryl Bems study in extrasensory perception, marked the beginning of a broader awareness of pervasive problems regarding the way psychologists report, analyze, and selectively publish data. With estimated replication rates ranging between 25% for social psychology and 50% for cognitive psychology, it has become clear that psychology suffers from a severe replicability problem. The open science movement strives to improve the way psychologists conduct, analyze, and publish studies through the use of open data and materials, registered reports, and research transparency. This collection of articles highlights recent developments within open science, beginning with an introductory article addressing the current state of the debate in which seven major facets of methodological reforms are outlined. Two contributions explore the progress made and problems encountered in developing and refining methods for detecting publication biases, questionable research practice, and p-hacking. Two further articles exploring the development of the causal replication framework as a design tool for research replication and the results of the first long-term N-pact factor analysis as an indicator of journal quality complete this collection.