<p> The prospect of editing out traumatic or distressing memories from one’s mind would strike most people as science fiction. Yet in recent years, inspired by intriguing (but contested) findings in the basic science of memory, clinical interventions aspiring to do just that have started to emerge. Those interventions can be captured under the umbrella of ‘memory reconsolidation therapy’ (MRT). But do those therapies actually deliver on their promise of memory editing? Or do they spin the basic science of memory into treatments that we know neither the mechanism of action nor the effectiveness of? In this project, we will evaluate the clinical trial literature to appraise the evidence base for MRT and gauge the degree of hype involved in their clinical uptake. In doing so, the project will illustrate some of the ways in which spin and hype bias the translation of basic science to real-world applications and the tangible consequences that this has for evidence-based practice. </p>