While it is clear that there are several conventions for Fourier transforms of intragrable functions on $\mathbb{R}$, I don't think I have ever seen anything different from the three following conventions $$ \hat{f}(\xi) = \int f(x) e^{-i 2 \pi \xi x} dx \\ \hat{f}(\omega) = \int f(x) e^{-i \omega x} dx \\ \hat{f}(\omega) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \int f(x) e^{-i \omega x} dx \\ $$
On the other hand, it seems to me (please correct me if I am wrong) that the characteristic function of a random variable / probability measure is always (or very close to always) defined as $$ \hat{\mu}(\omega) = \int e^{i \omega x} d \mu(x) $$
All this seems to be confirmed by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform#Other_conventions
So the main difference between analysis / signal processing / electrical engineering on one side and probability on the other is mostly the mius sign.
Even though I do not think there is anything deep underneath this, i.e. just another convention (please confirm), I would be interested in understanding how we ended up with this confusion from a historical perspective.
Maybe there is a reason why the characteristic function was defined without a minus and nobody ever questioned that? Weren't the people who introduced the characteristic function in probability (who was that btw?) looking at analysis books/papers?
Note that my question is admittedly similar to, e.g., https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2306738/fourier-transform-with-a-different-sign-convention but I am more insterested in the history.