Not all citations are equal.
This highlights how they are an imperfect measure of scientific impact.
Broadly they might be classified as being of two types.
"There are many papers on this topic, including Jones et al."
"We use the results [method, equation, material, or concept] of Jones et al. to obtain new results".
There is a big difference. For token citations, the existence of the citing paper is really independent of the cited paper, i.e., it would not really matter whether or not the cited paper existed.
In contrast, for substantial citations, parts [or even the whole] of the citing paper would not exist if the cited paper did not exist.
Unfortunately, too many of the citations I receive are token rather than substantial. I find this discouraging and embarrassing. Even worse, a few times I have been cited as "McKenzie has shown X to be true" when my paper actually showed X to be false!
Thus, it is very satisfying when someone actually uses your results in a constructive manner.
Recently, Tony Wright and I published a paper Quantum oscillations and Berry's phase in topological insulator surface states with broken particle-hole symmetry. One of our results was to propose a method to more robustly extract a signature of the Berry's phase from experimental data.
Tony pointed out to me a recent preprint that actually uses our method (see the Figure below).
The preprint is by a Korean Rugby League team [13 players]
Spin-Chiral Bulk Fermi Surfaces of BiTeI Proven by Quantum Oscillations
Joonbum Park, E. Kampert, Kyung-Hwan Jin, Man Jin Eom, Jongmok Ok, E.S. Choi, F. Wolff-Fabris, K.D. Lee, N. Hur, J.-S Rhyee, Y.J. Jo, Seung-Hoon Jhi, and Jun Sung Kim