On the left, it demonstrates the perception - they think they're eating 1200, then they don't lose weight, so they up it to 1600 and lose, then assume they hadn't been eating enough before. On the right, the back and forth arrows align with where they were in their delusion pathway - when they were thinking they were eating 1200, they were actually eating 1200 plus snacking at night, treats on the weekend, etc and averaging 2000. So then, when they "up" their intake to 1600, the extra snacking stops because they no longer feel the need to eat outside of their allowance, so they lose. But they fail to make the connection that it's just because they're actually eating 1600 now vs the 2000 before, rather than 1600 vs 1200.  The chart's format confused me at first too but if you look at it for a minute it makes sense.