The COVID-19 crisis has put the question of the political uses of science back at the centre of public debates. In the last few years, the focus on using scientific knowledge in parliamentary technology assessment (PTA) institutions has predominantly been to the advantage of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). In contrast, our study aims to widen the debate and explore how social studies (encompassing humanities, arts and social sciences) have been represented in the observable science and technology assessment processes and their outputs during a salient time that required a substantial corpus of scientific evidence, namely the pandemic. Against the background of Pitkin's work on the concept of representation, our article addresses this issue by utilising a qualitatively driven multi-method approach (document analysis and prosopography) on three case studies: OPECST in France, TAB in Germany and POST in the UK. We show that, between 2020 and 2022, social studies are used primarily as a complement to STEM, and that ethical issues, in particular, play a central role in opening up to multidisciplinary references. We also examine the disparate ways these disciplines are embodied in these three PTA structures. We conclude by examining the relevance of employing such a comprehensive concept and touch on the political implications of social studies' uneven representation.