all we verified the assumption about the validation of manipulation. The analysis of variance for repeated measures counted for the first goal: the Improvement of one’s silhouette revealed significant effect of factor 1 (the difference between the first measurement–before manipulation and the last measurement–after the manipulation): F = 7.235, p = 0.009; and what’s of special importance: interaction effect: factor 1 group F = 10.105, p = 0.002. Means for obese–slimming participants was: Mbefore priming = 5.700 vs. Mafter priming = 6.440 vs. non-slimming obese participants: The priming worked according to the hypothesis of counteractive control [34] for slimming individuals whereas the same priming provoked non-slimming participants to lower the importance of goal “loosing excess weight”. Manipulation check is in concordance with our hypothesis: the priming Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 244 5 of 13 of fattening food should result in the diminished importance of the goals of losing weight and attaining a good silhouette, or loosing kilograms in non-slimming obese individuals in comparison to the importance of these same goals among slimming obese individuals. Moreover, we expect that slimming individuals assign higher importance to two goals then non-slimming participants. It appeared to be the truth (see Figure 1). In other words, we expected that the importance of the two goals would differ significantly Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, x 5 of 13 between the last measure of goals (after priming) two groups of individuals. In the case of the Improvement of one’s silhouette goal we found: In other words, we expected that the importance of the two goals would differ significantly - between the last measure of goals (after priming) two groups of individuals. M = 6.37 vs. M = 4.42,A significant effect of the group: F(1.56) = 28.22, p < 0.001; eta2 = 0.34, In the case of the Improvement of one’s silhouette goal we found: t(58) = 5.38, p < 0.001. This means, as shown in Figure 1, that as a result of priming fattening - A significant effect of the group: F(1.56) = 28.22, p < 0.001; eta 2 = 0.34, M = 6.37 vs. M = 4.42, food, slimming obese individuals paid more attention to the realization of the Improvement of one’s t(58) = 5.38, p < 0.001. This means, as shown in Figure 1, that as a result of priming fattening food,silhouette goal than did non-slimming obese individuals. slimming obese individuals paid more attention to the realization of the Improvement of one’s silhouette goal than did non-slimming obese individuals. In the case of the Losing excess weight we observed: - In the case of the Losing excess weight we observed: M = 6.44 vs. M = 3.85, A significant effect of the group: F(1.56) = 48.41, p < 0.001, eta2 = 0.462, - t(58)Asignificant=6.76,p effect<0.001of. the group: F(1.56) = 48.41, p < 0.001, eta2 = 0.462, M = 6.44 vs. M = 3.85, t(58) = 6.76, p < 0.001.As with the previously analysed goal, losing excess weight proved more important in the case of As with the previously analysed goal, losing excess weight proved more important in the case slimming obese individuals than in that of non-slimming individuals (Figure 1).of slimming obese individuals than in that of non-slimming individuals (Figure 1).The aim of the study was to verify if priming fattening food in slimming and non-slimming obese individualsTheaimwouldofthebestudyreflectedwasintoanverifyactivationifprimingofthemenfatteningalrepresentationfoodinslimmingofthegoaland(i.e.,nonslimming),-slimming obese turn activating preventive control, and influencing the motivational aspect of self-regulation. Our individuals would be reflected in an activation of the mental representation of the goal (i.e., slimming), hypothesis assumed that priming fattening food resulted in higher importance being attached to in turn activating preventive control, and influencing the motivational aspect of self-regulation. Our losing weight for slimming obese individuals than for non-slimming individuals. This hypothesis hypothesis assumed that priming fattening food resulted in higher importance being attached to was confirmed with regards to both dependent variables. We found that individuals who were losing weight for slimming obese individuals than for non-slimming individuals. This hypothesis actively slimming attached more importance to the two goals (improvement of one’s silhouette and losing was confirmed with regards to both dependent variables. We found that individuals who were excess weight) in comparison to obese persons who were not attempting to lose weight. The literature actively slimming attached more importance However,of adiposeahigh tissuenumberwithofmusclekilogramstissue withoutlostisnotasignificantalways anreductionobjectiveinbodymeasure of weight [39,40]. Therefore, due to different physiological conditions, obese individuals participating successful slimming as, not infrequently, physical exercise included in the obesity treatment program in the program may pay greater attention to other aspects of the slimming process. Consequently, the aforementioned indices should be considered equally important. According to previously published theories, individuals who are motivated and involved in achieving a given goal utilize anti-temptation strategies [33,37,41]. The situation is different in Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 244 6 of 13 results in the replacement of adipose tissue with muscle tissue without a significant reduction in body weight [39,40]. Therefore, due to different physiological conditions, obese individuals participating in the program may pay greater attention to other aspects of the