Scott Alexander argues that psychology is indeed in crisis, contrary to a New York Times article's claim, due to issues like publication bias and low replication rates.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander critiques a New York Times article claiming psychology is not in crisis despite low replication rates. He argues that the article ignores publication bias, experimenter effects, and low base rates of true hypotheses. Scott contends that even if failed replications are due to different conditions, this still represents a crisis as it undermines the practical utility of psychological findings. He suggests that while we can't investigate every failed replication, studying some might reveal why replication issues keep occurring in psychology.
Shorter summary