The replication crisis in psychology—marked by failures to reproduce many findings—has often been cast as a methodological problem tied to questionable research practices, low statistical power, and publication bias. This entry argues that the crisis runs deeper, exposing theoretical, epistemological, and sociocultural challenges. Psychology’s long-standing alignment with the natural sciences, the contextual variability of psychological phenomena, and the reflexive nature of studying human beings complicate assumptions about replicability. Research on social priming illustrates how context-sensitive effects resist simple reproduction. Moreover, economic and political pressures, including neoliberal reforms in academia, shape incentives and perpetuate biases. Rather than treating the crisis solely as a methodological breakdown, the entry sees methodological pluralism and theoretically reflective, context-sensitive frameworks as a way forward. Seen this way, the replication crisis becomes not just a failure to reproduce results but an opportunity to reconfigure psychology’s methods, concepts, and epistemic foundations.