Table 5.

Findings relating to proactive aggression event-related potentials, according to year of publication.

Study	Year	n	Age	Sex	Region	PA Instrument	Wave	Correlation Coefficient/ Effect Size	Findings
Barratt et al. [95]	1997	101	26	M	North America	Offending record and semi-structured interview	P3	na	P3 amplitudes differed between impulsive and non-impulsive offender groups, but the groups did not differ in clinically-rated impulsivity.
Stanford et al. [96]	2003	28	33	M/F	North America	Offendingrecord	P3	na	P3 amplitudes for the PA group took marginally longer to peak in response to auditory stimuli.
Chen et al. [97]	2015	24	30	M	Asia	Offending record	P3	d = 1.33	P3 amplitudes in the PA group showed less interference to sad cues.
Helfritz-Sinville and Stanford [98]	2015	58	19	M	North America	LHAQ IPAS	P3	na	P3 amplitudes showed less efficient processing of threat cues for the PA group.
Chen et al. [99]	2019	38	17	M	Asia	RPQ TAP	N2	r = 0.52 r = 0.12	PA was associated with reduced N2 wave during the decision phase of the TAP.

Statistical findings shown in bold are significant according to p-values < 0.05; r, Pearson correlation coefficient; d, Cohen’s d measure of effect size; na, not applicable; LHAQ, Lifetime History of Aggression Questionnaire [100]; IPAS, Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scales [101]; TAP, Taylor Aggression Paradigm [26].