Part 7 — The Stages of Addiction: From First Use to Dependence

Mohamad-Ali Salloum • April 8, 2026

Share

  • Slide title

    Write your caption here
    Button
  • Slide title

    Write your caption here
    Button
  • Slide title

    Write your caption here
    Button
  • Slide title

    Write your caption here
    Button

Addiction does not appear suddenly. It develops gradually through predictable stages driven by changes in the brain’s reward circuits, motivation systems, and decision-making networks. Although not everyone progresses through all stages, scientific evidence shows consistent psychological and neurobiological patterns among people who ultimately develop substance use disorders.

Recent literature (2024–2025) highlights four major stages: experimentation, regular use, dependence, and addiction. Understanding these stages explains why some individuals quit early while others continue toward harmful patterns.

1. Experimentation: First Contact With the Substance 🔍

Experimentation is the first step in the addiction trajectory. Many individuals initiate substance use out of curiosity, peer influence, or the desire for pleasurable or stress-relieving effects. At this stage, use is voluntary and occasional.

Neuroscience research suggests that even early experimentation can influence the reward system, especially if the substance strongly activates dopamine pathways. This impact is even greater among adolescents, whose neural circuitry is still developing, leading to heightened vulnerability.

In simple terms:
People try substances out of curiosity or social influence, believing they can control their use — and often they can at first.

2. Regular Use: When Patterns Begin to Form 🔄

Regular use involves more frequent or structured consumption. Although individuals may still feel in control, the brain’s reward circuitry begins adjusting to repeated exposure, gradually reshaping motivation and behavior.

Warning signs at this stage include:

  • using substances to manage stress or emotions
  • subtle or growing cravings
  • changes in daily habits
  • using alone or outside social contexts

Late‑2024 four‑phase addiction models suggest that regular use is the “crossroads stage,” where a person may either self-correct or escalate toward problematic use.

In simple terms:
The substance becomes part of the routine, and the brain starts to expect it.

3. Dependence: Neuroadaptation and Loss of Flexibility ⚠️

Dependence occurs when neuroadaptive changes cause the brain and body to rely on the substance to function normally. This stage includes major shifts in dopamine pathways and motivation systems, resulting in intensified cravings and weakened decision-making.

Key features of dependence include:

  • tolerance (needing more for the same effect)
  • withdrawal symptoms when not using
  • emotional dependence — needing the substance to feel “normal”
  • reduced control and increasing compulsivity

These changes reflect long-term neuroplasticity that produces reward deficiency and stress hyperactivation.

In simple terms:
The body and mind start to “need” the substance, making stopping increasingly difficult.

4. Addiction: Compulsive Use Despite Harm 🔥

Addiction represents the final stage — a chronic, relapsing disorder involving compulsive drug‑seeking and drug‑taking. Brain systems responsible for reward, stress, learning, and decision-making undergo major alterations.

At this stage:

  • cravings become intense and easily triggered
  • use continues despite negative consequences
  • impulsive systems override reflective thinking
  • individuals struggle to regain control even when motivated to quit

This stage aligns with the three‑phase addiction cycle: binge/intoxication → withdrawal/negative affect → craving. As addiction strengthens, this cycle becomes more entrenched and difficult to break.

In simple terms:
At this point, the substance takes over — the person wants to stop but can’t because the brain has been rewired.

5. Why Only Some People Progress Through All Stages 🧠🌱

Although many people experiment with substances, only a smaller portion develop addiction. Vulnerability depends on a combination of biological and environmental factors.

Influences include:

  • genetic predispositions
  • trauma and early attachment patterns
  • chronic stress levels
  • social environment and peer exposure
  • existing mental health conditions
  • neurodevelopmental differences

Each stage is shaped by both internal and external influences — meaning addiction is never caused by a single factor.

In simple terms:
Risk depends on a combination of personal history, biology, and environment.

✅ Quick Quiz: Test Your Understanding

Try answering these without scrolling up!

  1. Why does experimentation during adolescence increase addiction risk?
  2. What is the difference between regular use and dependence?
  3. How do neuroadaptive changes contribute to the transition from dependence to addiction?
  4. Identify one psychological and one biological factor that increase vulnerability across stages.
  5. Describe how cravings differ between early use and full addiction.

References:

  1. Walid R. The Impact of Addiction on the Brain’s Reward Circuitry and Stages of Progression. 2025. 1 
  2. Darcq E, Kieffer BL. Neuroscience and addiction research: current advances and perspectives. J Neural Transm. 2024;131:405–408. 3 
  3. FerrerPérez C, MontagudRomero S, BlancoGandía MC. Neurobiological Theories of Addiction. Psychoactives. 2024;3(1):35–47. 5 
  4. Asana Recovery. Understanding the Four Phases of Addiction. 2024. 2 
  5. Valley Spring Recovery Center. Stages of the Addiction Cycle. 2025. 4 

List of Services

    • Slide title

      Write your caption here
      Button
    • Slide title

      Write your caption here
      Button
    • Slide title

      Write your caption here
      Button
    • Slide title

      Write your caption here
      Button

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR

    Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD

    Mohamad Ali Salloum LinkedIn Profile

    Mohamad-Ali Salloum is a Pharmacist and science writer. He loves simplifying science to the general public and healthcare students through words and illustrations. When he's not working, you can usually find him in the gym, reading a book, or learning a new skill.

    Share

    Recent articles:

    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD May 7, 2026
    References: McMurray JJV, Packer M, Desai AS, et al. Angiotensin–neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure. N Engl J Med . 2014;371(11):993–1004. Barter PJ, Caulfield M, Eriksson M, et al. Effects of torcetrapib in patients at high risk for coronary events. N Engl J Med . 2007;357:2109–2122. Kastelein JJP, Akdim F, Stroes ESG, et al. Simvastatin with or without ezetimibe in familial hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med . 2008;358:1431–1443. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al. Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med . 2008;358:2545–2559. Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, et al. Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. N Engl J Med . 1991;324:781–788. Packer M, Anker SD, Butler J, et al. Effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular and renal outcomes. N Engl J Med . 2020;383:1413–1424. Ioannidis JPA. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: are we being misled? BMJ . 2013;346:f314.
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD May 4, 2026
    References: Wager TD, Atlas LY. The neuroscience of placebo effects: connecting context, learning and health. Nat Rev Neurosci . 2015;16(7):403‑18. Frisaldi E, Shaibani A, Benedetti F, Pagnini F. Placebo and nocebo effects associated with pharmacological interventions: an umbrella review. BMJ Open . 2023;13:e077243. Colloca L, Finniss D. Nocebo effects, patient‑clinician communication, and therapeutic outcomes. JAMA . 2012;307(6):567‑8. Howard JP, Wood FA, Finegold JA, et al. Side effect patterns in a blinded, randomized trial of statin, placebo, and no treatment. N Engl J Med . 2021;385(23):2180‑9. Penson PE, Mancini GBJ, Toth PP, et al. Introducing the “drucebo” effect in statin therapy. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle . 2018;9(6):1023‑33. Barnes K, Faasse K, Geers AL, et al. Can positive framing reduce nocebo side effects? Front Pharmacol . 2019;10:167. Caliskan EB, Bingel U, Kunkel A. Translating knowledge on placebo and nocebo effects into clinical practice. Pain Rep . 2024;9(2):e1142. von Wernsdorff M, Loef M, Tuschen‑Caffier B, Schmidt S. Effects of open‑label placebos in clinical trials: a systematic review and meta‑analysis. Sci Rep . 2021;11:3855.
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD May 4, 2026
    References: Zaniletti I, Larson DR, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ, Maradit Kremers H. How to distinguish correlation from causation in orthopaedic research. J Arthroplasty. 2023;38(4):634–637. Rush J, Ajami M, Look KA, Margolis A. Statistics review part 10: causality and confounding. J Pharm Soc Wis. 2014;17(1):45–52. Koopmans E, Schiller C. Understanding causation in healthcare: an introduction to critical realism. Qual Health Res. 2022;32(8–9):1207–1214. Kahlert J, Gribsholt SB, Gammelager H, Dekkers OM, Luta G. Control of confounding in the analysis phase – an overview for clinicians. Clin Epidemiol. 2017;9:195–204. Shi AX, Zivich PN, Chu H. A comprehensive review and tutorial on confounding adjustment methods for estimating treatment effects using observational data. Appl Sci (Basel). 2024;14(9):3662. Gao Y, Xiang L, Yi H, Song J, Sun D, Xu B, et al. Confounder adjustment in observational studies investigating multiple risk factors: a methodological study. BMC Med. 2025;23:132. Ho FK, Brown J, Galwey NW. Regression adjustment for causal inference. BMJ Med. 2025;4:e000816. Correia LCL, Mascarenhas RF, Menezes FSC, Oliveira Junior JS, Vaccarino V, Ross JS, et al. Confounder selection in observational studies in high‑impact medical and epidemiological journals. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(7):e2524176.
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD May 1, 2026
    Explore the difference between Sensitivity and Specificity
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 29, 2026
    References: Zaniletti I, Larson DR, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ, Maradit Kremers H. How to Distinguish Correlation from Causation in Orthopaedic Research. J Arthroplasty. 2022;38(4):634‑637. [pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] Association of Health Care Journalists. Correlation vs. Causation. [healthjournalism.org] Rush J, Ajami M, Look K, Margolis A. Statistics Review Part 10: Causality and Confounding. J Pharm Soc Wis. [jpswi.org] Biostat Prime. Correlation vs Causation: Meaning, Differences & Examples. [biostatprime.com] Koopmans E, Schiller C. Understanding Causation in Healthcare: An Introduction to Critical Realism. Qual Health Res. 2022;32(8–9):1207–1214. [pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] 
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 27, 2026
    References: Very Big Brain. Somatic Memories: How Physical Sensations Trigger Past Memories and Emotions . 2023 Nov 26. [verybigbrain.com] Misattribution of arousal. Wikipedia . 2026. [en.wikipedia.org] Zimbardo P. The Misattribution of Arousal Study (Dutton & Aron) . 2026. [zimbardo.com] Higgins L. Why You Feel Anxious After Drinking Coffee . TIME. 2025 Nov 11. [time.com] Double KS. Metacognitive ability is associated with reduced emotion suppression . Scientific Reports. 2026 Jan 28. [nature.com] Merkebu J et al. What is metacognitive reflection? Front Educ. 2023 Apr 5. [researchgate.net] Meyers S et al. Cognitive Reappraisal is More Effective for Regulating Emotions than Moods . Affective Science. 2025 Jun 6. [link.springer.com] 
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 25, 2026
    Are they the same?
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 23, 2026
    A Practical Guide for the Public.
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 21, 2026
    Did you know that your emotions are just suggestions?
    By Mohamad-Ali Salloum, PharmD April 19, 2026
    Short-form videos like Reels and TikTok rapidly trigger dopamine, stress, and attention circuits—discover how they impact your brain, mood, and focus, plus practical tips to restore balance.
    More Posts