Hetherington's (1991) “bottleneck hypothesis”, which maintains that the process of sexual identity development can hamper the career development of sexual minority college students, has received periodic study. We revisited this hypothesis using the social cognitive model of career self-management (CSM; Lent & Brown, 2013) as a theoretical framework. An online survey of 225 sexual minority and 287 heterosexual college students did not reveal a robust between-group bottleneck effect. For example, no significant mean level differences were observed between the two groups in career decision-making process and outcome variables, such as career decision-making anxiety and level of career decidedness. In addition, a CSM-based path model of career decision-making was found to be invariant across the two student groups. However, a few noteworthy within-group patterns were observed. For example, a cluster analysis suggested the presence of two sexual minority sub-groups who differed regarding level of outness and difficulties negotiating their sexual identity. The more identity-integrated cluster reported less decisional anxiety and greater decidedness than their less identity-integrated peers. Indicators of identity conflict and level of disclosure were also linked to perceived support and goals for future career exploration. The pattern of findings suggests that sexual minority identity development in college does not represent a monolithic bottleneck to career development. However, a more nuanced bottleneck effect in career decision-making may be linked to students' intrapersonal and social comfort in negotiating their sexual minority identity. Implications for the bottleneck hypothesis and further research on sexual minority students' career exploration and decision-making are discussed.

Hetherington（1991）提出的“瓶颈假说”认为性认同发展的过程会阻碍性少数大学生的职业发展，并得到阶段性研究。我们使用职业自我管理的社会认知模型 (CSM; Lent & Brown, 2013) 作为理论框架重新审视了这一假设。一项针对 225 名性少数和 287 名异性恋大学生的在线调查并未显示出强大的群体间瓶颈效应。例如，在职业决策过程和结果变量（如职业决策焦虑和职业决策水平）方面，两组之间没有观察到显着的平均水平差异。此外，发现基于 CSM 的职业决策路径模型在两个学生群体中是不变的。然而，观察到一些值得注意的组内模式。例如，聚类分析表明存在两个性少数群体，他们在异常程度和协商其性身份的困难方面存在差异。与身份整合程度较低的同龄人相比，身份整合程度更高的集群报告的决策焦虑更少，决策能力更强。身份冲突和披露程度的指标也与未来职业探索的感知支持和目标相关联。调查结果的模式表明，大学中性少数身份的发展并不代表职业发展的单一瓶颈。然而，职业决策中更微妙的瓶颈效应可能与学生在协商其性少数身份认同时的内省和社会舒适度有关。