Note that the paper is concerned with run-time type checking and glosses over the fact that most/all of those code samples in the survey would be rejected at compile time by a static type checker (or at least by TypeScript).
Their conclusion that "erasure" is disliked and unexpected is effectively saying the underlying dynamic language's behavior is disliked and unexpected.
Of course it's possible to deliberately or accidentally coerce TypeScript into violating its type constraints and behaving in JavaScript's disliked and unexpected ways, but the survey questions would have to be substantially different, and likely the responses as well.
Their conclusion that "erasure" is disliked and unexpected is effectively saying the underlying dynamic language's behavior is disliked and unexpected.
Of course it's possible to deliberately or accidentally coerce TypeScript into violating its type constraints and behaving in JavaScript's disliked and unexpected ways, but the survey questions would have to be substantially different, and likely the responses as well.