Integral　abutment　bridges　(IABs)　have　been　widely　applied　in　bridge　engineering　because　of　their　excellent　seismic　performance,　long　service　life,　and　low　maintenance　cost.　The　superstructure　and　substructure　of　an　IAB　are　integrally　connected　to　reduce　the　possibility　of　collapse　or　girders　falling　during　an　earthquake.　The　soil　behind　the　abutment　can　provide　a　damping　effect　to　reduce　the　deformation　of　the　structure　under　a　seismic　load.　Girders　have　not　been　considered　in　some　of　the　existing　published　experimental　tests　on　integral　abutment–reinforced-concrete　(RC)　pile　(IAP)–soil　systems,　which　may　not　accurately　represent　real　conditions.　A　pseudo-static　low-cycle　test　on　a　girder–integral　abutment–RC　pile　(GIAP)–soil　system　was　conducted　for　an　IAB　in　China.　The　experiment’s　results　for　the　GIAP　specimen　were　compared　with　those　of　the　IAP　specimen,　including　the　failure　mode,　hysteretic　curve,　energy　dissipation　capacity,　skeleton　curve,　stiffness　degradation,　and　displacement　ductility.　The　test　results　indicate　that　the　failure　modes　of　both　specimens　were　different.　For　the　IAP　specimen,　the　pile　cracked　at　a　displacement　of　+2　mm,　while　the　abutment　did　not　crack　during　the　test.　For　the　GIAP　specimen,　the　pile　cracked　at　a　displacement　of　−8　mm,　and　the　abutment　cracked　at　a　displacement　of　50　mm.　The　failure　mode　of　the　specimen　changed　from　severe　damage　to　the　pile　top　under　a　small　displacement　to　damage　to　both　the　abutment　and　pile　top　under　a　large　displacement.　Compared　with　the　IAP　specimen,　the　initial　stiffness　under　positive　horizontal　displacement　(39.2%),　residual　force　accumulation　(22.6%),　residual　deformation　(12.6%),　range　of　the　elastoplastic　stage　in　the　skeleton　curve,　and　stiffness　degradation　of　the　GIAP　specimen　were　smaller;　however,　the　initial　stiffness　under　negative　horizontal　displacement　(112.6%),　displacement　ductility　coefficient　(67.2%),　average　equivalent　viscous　damping　ratio　(30.8%),　yield　load　(20.4%),　ultimate　load　(7.8%),　and　range　of　the　elastic　stage　in　the　skeleton　curve　of　the　GIAP　specimen　were　larger.　In　summary,　the　seismic　performance　of　the　GIAP–soil　system　was　better　than　that　of　the　IAP–soil　system.　Therefore,　to　accurately　reflect　the　seismic　performance　of　GIAP–soil　systems　in　IABs,　it　is　suggested　to　consider　the　influence　of　the　girder.　©　2024　by　the　authors.