In this paper I describe and illustrate the Roussos-Stout (1996) multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm, with emphasis on its implication for the selection of a matching and studied subtest for DIF analyses. Standard DIF practice encourages an exploratory search for matching subtest items based on purely statistical criteria, such as a failure to display DIF. By contrast, the multidimensional DIF paradigm emphasizes a substantively-informed selection of items for both the matching and studied subtest based on the dimensions suspected of underlying the test data. Using two examples, I demonstrate that these two approaches lead to different interpretations about the occurrence of DIF in a test. It is argued that selecting a matching and studied subtest, as identified using the DIF analysis paradigm, can lead to a more informed understanding of why DIF occurs.