The popular press as well as the psychological literature itself is abuzz with reports about the field trying to clean up its act, especially by demanding replications (though not everyone agrees ). Many reports do not fail to mention that this sudden sanitation urge was prompted by the Stapel fraude case. This is ironic, because it is logically impossible to replicate Stapel. His work was never “plicated” in the first place! Nevertheless, it is clear that the field is in a state of revolution. There are large-scale replication efforts under way, most notably the Open Science Framework . But replication starts at home. So here are some things we can do as authors, reviewers, and editors. Authors Incorporate direct replications into your workflow (I hesitate to use this buzzword but it seemed quite popular among those interested in replication during a recent Google hangout). I have reported direct replications in one published paper and I have recently s