We often hear that one of the hallmarks of science is that it is self-correcting. What does that look like, in practice? Psychology’s replication crisis, and subsequent credibility revolution, provide a valuable case study for understanding what it means for a discipline to be scientific and self-correcting. I review psychology’s response to its crisis, and draw lessons for other disciplines that may face similar threats to credibility. Psychology’s crisis was triggered by failures to replicate, fraud, and questionable research and publication practices. Over the last decade, we have worked to improve our field's integrity and credibility, and to earn back trust. These efforts have focused on increasing transparency, improving journals and peer review, and supporting post publication critique. I argue that these features are the foundations of science's 'self-correcting mechanisms'.