Emory vs WashU for undergraduate research: which is better?

For undergraduate research specifically, WashU usually has a slight edge if you want a very research-intensive environment across a wide range of fields, while Emory is especially strong if your interests connect to health, medicine, public health, neuroscience, or the CDC ecosystem in Atlanta. Both schools give undergrads real access to faculty research, and at both, students can get involved as early as first year. The practical difference is less about whether research exists and more about the scale, structure, and nearby institutional partnerships.

WashU stands out because it is a major research university with a strong culture of undergraduates working in labs, especially in biology, biomedical engineering, psychology, chemistry, and related STEM areas. It also has the Washington University School of Medicine on the same broader campus network, which creates a lot of opportunities for translational and clinical-adjacent work.

Emory is also excellent, but its biggest advantage is the type of research access it offers. Emory’s connections to Emory School of Medicine, Rollins School of Public Health, Yerkes National Primate Research Center, and especially the CDC are unusually valuable for students interested in infectious disease, global health, epidemiology, neuroscience, psychology, and health policy. If your idea of research includes public health or human-focused medical research, Emory can be exceptional.

On faculty access, both are good because neither has a huge undergraduate population relative to their resources. Emory may feel a bit more intimate in some departments, while WashU may offer more sheer volume of projects. For early involvement, both schools have formal summer funding and research support, but getting into a lab still depends on initiative, fit, and persistence.