They're different arrangements, and the difference is what the agent owes you.
In dual agency the agent represents both sides, so they carry fiduciary duties to you and to the other party at once. Loyalty, care, obedience to lawful instruction. The problem is that those duties point in opposite directions on price, so in practice the agent has to go silent on the things each side would most want to know.
A transaction broker, sometimes called a facilitator or a non-agent, represents nobody. They move the paperwork, schedule the inspection, keep the deal on track, and they don't advocate for either price. Because there's no client, there's no conflict to manage. You also get no advocate. Whether that status even exists, and what it's called, is set by state law, and some states use it as the default when one brokerage ends up on both sides. So the answer for your form depends on which state the property sits in, and a real estate attorney there is the right person to read it with you.
The part that catches people is what happens to confidentiality. If you told an agent your true maximum during a period when they represented you, and the arrangement later changes, ask in writing what happens to information you already shared. Rules on that vary. The plainest protection is to not name your ceiling out loud until you know exactly who the person hearing it works for.
