## 6 Holistic Research Based on Sensory and Consumer Studies  
Human sensory analysis is often labeled as \"subjective,\" leading to attempts to replace it with instrumental methods. However, no instrumental substitute can fully capture human perception as sensory experiences are inherently complex and influenced by numerous factors beyond what instruments can measure [138]. The subjective nature of sensory perception involves personal and cultural factors that are difficult to quantify instrumentally [139]. Efforts to relate sensory perception to instrumental measurements face several challenges. While instrumental methods can measure physical properties like texture or chemical composition, they often fail to capture the nuanced sensory attributes humans perceive, such as taste and aroma [140]. For instance, food texture is highly complex. It requires understanding both the physical transformations during consumption and the subjective sensory experience, which cannot be fully replicated by instrumentation alone [141]. Although instrumental methods are valued for their consistency and objectivity, they have limitations in predicting sensory experience. For example, texture profile analysis (TPA) can measure specific textural properties. Still, its results do not always align with human sensory evaluations, as demonstrated in studies of apple texture and cooked rice [142; 143]. Instruments can quantify material properties, but these do not necessarily correspond to sensory properties, highlighting the need to distinguish between the two [139]. Bridging the gap between instrumental measurements and sensory experience requires a multidisciplinary approach. This involves integrating insights from sensory science, materials science, and even fields like dentistry and psychology to better understand \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt}} \hline \multicolumn{2}{p{142.3 pt}}{**Technology**} & \multicolumn{1}{p{142.3 pt}}{**Advantages**} & \multicolumn{1}{p{142.3 pt}}{**Challenges**} & \multicolumn{1}{p{142.3 pt}}{**Reference**} \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{**Category**} & Provides precise insights into visual attention and gaze patterns & High-cost and specialized equipment and software & \multirow{8}{*}{[121; 135; 136; 137; 138; 139; 140; 141; 142; 143; 144; 145; 146; 147; 148; 149; 150; 151; 152; 153; 154; 155; 156; 157; 158; 159; 160; 161; 162; 163; 164; 165; 166; 167; 168; 169; 170; 171; 172; 173; 174; 175; 176; 177; 178; 179; 180; 181; 182; 183; 184; 185; 186; 187; 188; 189; 190; 191; 192; 193; 194; 195; 196; 197; 198; 199; 199; 199; 200; 201; 202; 203; 204; 205; 206; 207; 208; 209; 210; 211; 212; 213; 214; 215; 216; 217; 218; 219; 223; 224; 225; 226; 227; 228; 229; 230; 231; 232; 233; 234; 235; 236; 237; 238; 239; 240; 241; 242; 243; 244; 245; 246; 247; 248; 249; 250; 251; 252; 253; 254; 255; 256; 257; 258; 259; 260; 252; 254; 255; 257; 258; 259; 261; 259; 270; 271; 272; 273; 274; 275; 276; 277; 278; 279; 283; 284; 285; 286; 287; 288; 289; 290; 281; 282; 289; 283; 285; 286; 287; 288; 289; 287; 288; 289; 291; 289; 281; 282; 283; 286; 287; 289; 292; 293; 294; 295; 296; 297; 298; 299; 300; 301; 302; 303; 304; 305; 306; 307; 308; 309; 310; 311; 311; 312; 313] expressions can impact the reliability of results & [6, 129; 133; 134] \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{p{142.3 pt}}{} & Reduces the need for manual emotion coding, saving time and effort & High initial investment in software and support equipment & [6, 129; 133; 134] \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Eye tracking and FaceReader advantages and challenges. and predict sensory experiences [141]. Recent advances in the human-machine interface in sensory science show promise for enhancing the accuracy of sensory evaluations by combining dynamic sensory methods with instrumental analysis [144]. The fundamental limitations in bridging the gap between instrumental measurements and human sensory experience lie in human perception's inherent complexity and subjectivity.