If it turns out that a sizable percentage (a quarter? half?) of the results published in these three top psychology journals can’t be replicated, it’s not going to reflect well on the field or on the researchers whose papers didn’t pass the test. In the long run, coming to grips with the scope of the problem is almost certainly beneficial for everyone. In the short run, it might get ugly.
Suppose it turns out that a lot of stuff in other scientific journals can't be duplicated, either. Then the way in which science is being practiced will fall into question as well. Stay tuned.