[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 135(3) of Journal of Comparative Psychology (see record 2021-87304-004). In the article "How Comparative Was (Is) the Journal of Comparative Psychology? A Reptilian Perspective" by Gordon M. Burghardt (Journal of Comparative Psychology. Advance online publication. August 5, 2021. http://doi.org/10.1037/com0000290), the phrase in the introduction that includes the Dewbury (1998) citation also includes an extra word. The phrase should appear as Dewbury (1998) noted that the focus. The year of publication for the Journal of Animal Behavior that appears in the third line of the Method section should appear as (1911-1917). The last sentence in the first paragraph of the Method section should appear as The 8,911 entries over this 110-year period constituted the data analyzed here in detail. The first sentence of the Results section should appear as The Journal of Animal Behavior published 238 articles in its 7-year run. The last phrase of the first paragraph of the Results section should appear as and 8,635 published items of the JCP and JCPP....] Comparative psychology, and particularly the Journal of Comparative Psychology, has been criticized for a lack of taxon diversity. The nature and consequences of the critiques are discussed and assessed by analyzing the representation of nonavian reptiles in the journal over its 100-year existence. Although reptiles are indeed rare in the journal, their representation has greatly increased in recent decades, and especially since about 1980. More interestingly, the mix among the major reptilian groups: turtles, lizards, snakes, and crocodylians, has shifted. First turtles predominated in studies, but in recent decades, snakes were far more prominent. In the last 50 years of the journal, there were 10 times the number of articles on snakes than in the first 50 years, turtles declined, and lizards increased greatly, although their totals remained less than half the number of snake articles. Crocodylians only appeared in the first several volumes in the 1920s and never again. The predominance of snakes, not known for their cognitive prowess, in a journal viewed increasingly as an outlet for work on comparative cognition, is discussed. Finally, it appears that the low representation of reptile behavioral research is not peculiar to the Journal of Comparative Psychology, but animal behavior journals more generally. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).